If you’ve ever connected a laptop or PC to a television as a monitor, the benefit of 4K for text readability is incredibly apparent.

If this isn’t your use case, and you’re not right up against your screen, 1080p is more than good enough; not like most content is coming down on 4K unless you’re paying extra, anyways.

They haven’t updated their wikis for Operating Costs or Hosting since late 2022, somewhat aligned with their blog post on handling the mass influx of users from “E-day”.

Back then this was 6 AMD 5950 16/32 with 128GB of RAM and 2x3.84TB SSDs, with one “storage provider” with an AMD epyc 32/64 with 400GB of RAM and 10TB of storage.

Their hosting provider doesn’t offer these same SKUs, but roughly equivalent could be about €200/mo for each of the former, and the beefiest high RAM option is like €800/mo, totalling €2K/mo?

Curious how much the infrastructure has grown, but I haven’t seen anything else. Even so, these costs are extremely high.

deleted by creator

The FBI and prosecution should do their fucking job and build a case, instead of relying on illegal search and seizure.

It itself is not FOSS, but Network Chuck just had a decent video on setting up ThinLinc for his editing team. I believe it is free for ten or fewer users. There is an admin function that allows you to observe what another user is doing (session shadowing).

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qdo5lMR1lX4

In general, for native FOSS, I’m pretty sure you can specify the screen port in VNC, and connect multiple users to the same port, but you’d have to double check the configuration file. Can likely also be done with XRDP.

Legally, those aren’t mini fridges.

Sure would be nice if they had a source, otherwise, this is just bs.

It’s not like the malicious actors have stopped looking… If they are finding fewer vulnerabilities, it sounds to me they should be paying more.

That’s a penis dot gif

Yeah, no shit, you’re the fucking CEO

It’s not reasoning, or an argument for or against, it is just a statement. I’d admit that it’s probably a tautology.

What the post described is a taxation and societal problem, not a problem with investing or compound interest in general.

I’d easily agree that society is unfair, and that our taxation policies are directly antagonistic to the middle class, but again, this is simply math (and though it is theoretical, microeconomics).

The best description I have seen for single store franchisees is, you’ve paid a lot to give yourself a job. They are not lucrative, and in fact, are capital intensive, and often predatory.

There is a very high up front cost, and you generally do not own the real estate. This means you are locked into 30 year leases, often with complicated terms that are solely beneficial to the land owner.

Next, with regards to liquidity, if you don’t own the real estate, you often can’t get multiple business loans with a single franchise, so you must secure the loan with your personal assets, which means you will go personally bankrupt if you hit a rough patch.

Then, after dealing with the complicated business to business transactions and legal work, you still have to deal with the corporate bullshit, taxes, and supervisory duties, particularly if you do not already have a strong business partner to do this for you.

Pretty much, unless you are independently wealthy, own the real estate in a high traffic location, or already have multiple other franchises, it’s a losing venture that will kill your soul and eat every dollar you have.

Tens of thousands of children, killed or injured. And people wonder how the Palestinians become radicalized against Israel, the West, and the United States, or why there can’t be peace in the Middle East?

Forgiveness is probably the furthest thing from being on their minds.

What does fairness have to do with it? Compound interest is just math.

One could trivially make an argument that we should redistribute the wealth among the population, but there is not a clear way how to do this effectively, or it would have been done already.

The hard part is taking on the appropriate amount of risk in order to actualize those gains; a bank won’t just give you a 10% interest rate, you have to work your ass of for it. An entrepreneur needs to assess the landscape and invest in what the market will want tomorrow, and most people guess suboptimally (3-6%), or end up losing money, whether in fact (negative returns) or relative to inflation (0-3%).

Even pointing to the S&P 500, as most people do, you still need to make the conscious decision to sell and take profits, FOMO be damned. Or alternatively, taking a perceived loss but actual profit (e.g., you didn’t sell right at the peak, but that’s usually okay). It’s not easy, and most people don’t have the time or stomach for it; these people are best served by long term, government-backed bonds, after which you will come out only slightly ahead of inflation.

Using the rule of 72, and a 3% bond rate, it would actually take you 24 years to double your money, not seven. And that, my friend, is why you and I are not billionaires.

And guess what those business have? Valuations. Stock price is just an aggregate indicator of the valuation for a company, for the given percentage of shares that are publicly traded. But private companies have valuations, too, and even if they’re not tied to a public stock offering, those valuations are used to form these Billionaire lists.

Same thing with real estate. The value of any asset is based on what someone is willing to pay. Sometimes, you’ll find some crazy billionaire or investment firm who grossly overvalues an asset relative to their peers, and that insane overvaluation does get rolled into those lists.

But such is the nature of economics. You’ve neither gained nor lost value until someone pays you. Until then, it’s anyone’s guess.

It’s not like these billionaires are spending this money, so it’s just been invested for 7 years. What’s the old adage, Rule of 72? Given a 10% rate of return, they would be expected to double their money in…

…seven years.

While the tax policies certainly aren’t helping the majority of the population, let’s not pretend compound interest isn’t a thing.

This is nothing new, other than that Chase has brought this capability in-house. Credit card companies have shared purchase information with second parties forever.

Chase Media Solutions follows from the integration of card-linked marketing platform Figg, which JPMorgan Chase & Co. acquired in 2022

MMORPGs are an easy example, where people form recognizable identities and communities in game. An extension of this would be Second Life, and somewhat more recently, VRChat.

From my understanding, the impetus was that F5 submitted a CVE for a vulnerability, for an optional, “beta” feature that can be enabled. Dounin did not think a CVE should be submitted, since he did not considered it to be “production” feature.

That said, the vulnerability is in shipping code, regardless of whether it is optional or not, so per industry coding practices, it should either be patched or removed entirely in order to resolve the issue.

Authentication is, explicitly, the process of validating that you are who you say you are. Like biometrics, your username is part of your digital identity. So you are correct in arguing that biometrics alone is little stronger than a username, but by definition, both are part of authentication.

That said, to securely authenticate your identity, you need to use multiple factors.