1,241 karma · joined November 30, 2012
import base64 base64.b64decode('c3RlcGhlbnMuanNAZ21haWwuY29t')
What exactly you have to do to comply with state law varies dramatically. In some states buying and selling bitcoin is basically unregulated, and in others there are onerous registration/licensing and financial requirements that are basically impossible to fulfill as an individual. Off the top of my head I'm not sure where California falls on the spectrum.
It's really not that different. All of the advice out there concerning how to prudently manage a portfolio of $100K applies pretty well to $100M. Going up to the $100M opens up some additional options (private equity, hedge funds, venture capital, real estate) and involves some additional taxes (estate/gift taxes), but you could do a lot worse with your $100M than sticking 60% in low cost equity index funds and 40% in low cost bond index funds and ignoring alternatives and tax optimization.
> Aggressive means easy to lose it all due to ignorance or fraud.
More aggressive than ultra-conservative does not mean aggressive in an absolute sense.
As far as what happens with a full sync: it's not really doable outside of the LAN for several reasons. One is I have a data cap from Comcast of 1 TB/month. Another is the upload speed is only 10 Mbps. That's actually one of the reasons I went to self hosting.
* I really had to dig to find descriptions of the dishes.
* The emphasis on pre-built combo packs turned me off somewhat. You've only got ~10 dishes, I'd rather explicitly pick the 3 or 4 dishes that intrigued me than sift through all the combo packs to find the one that most closely matches what I want.
User space vs kernel space is the biggest decision and has a huge impact on nearly every aspect of the software. Wireguard has both user space and kernel space implementations. I'll link you to the Wireguard author's explanation as to why he chose to do a kernel space implementation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11994544
Base kernel vs kernel module is usually an easy one: almost everything that CAN go in a kernel module SHOULD go in a kernel module. Since modules can be loaded only when needed, it avoids using everyone's computing resources on features that not everyone might want. Wireguard is a kernel module.
In tree vs out of tree means whether you commit your code into the main linux source tree, or whether you distribute it outside of the linux project. Linux software development practices make it pretty annoying to distribute kernel software out of tree, even if it's a module. Basically, linux doesn't maintain stable APIs or ABIs in kernel space, so if you distribute in binary form you'll need to distribute different versions for every kernel version, and if you distribute in source form, your users will need to recompile whenever they update their kernel, which is pretty often if they're keeping up with security updates. DKMS helps with the recompilation process, but it's still pretty annoying for users. This announcement is about the proposed transition of the wireguard kernel module from out of tree to in tree.
Are you someplace you can drive for Uber or Lyft? It's not great money, but you can probably earn enough in the month you have left to buy a cheap laptop and pay for food, a cell phone, and a gym membership after you get evicted, which should improve your ability to keep applying for jobs.
"Much easier to manage platform dependencies in project files and with self-contained application publishing."
Anybody know anything about this? I frequently deal with applications that have platform specific components, and it's a real pain. Sometimes the platform specific code is a platform-specific native dll that gets called from the same P/Invoke wrapper, sometimes it's two different managed implementations of the same interface, sometimes it's both. It'd be great if this sort of thing got easier to do.
To be clear, I think the overall result here is an despicable perversion of justice, and I think US copyright law desperately needs to be reformed to include a more expansive version of fair use. I'm just explaining the way it works under current law.
The illegal act was a copyright violation: he made and distributed copies of copyrighted material without the consent of the copyright owner. I would be inclined to argue that his use was fair use, but based on what I know about copyright law, that argument is probably a stretch, and he didn't raise it in his defense. He plead guilty to the charges.
As to sentencing, the sentencing guidelines make the value of the illegally distributed goods the primary factor in determining the sentence. There is no objectively correct answer to this question, because no one sells license-less restore disks for any price. The three closest comparisons are
(1) The free restore disk image download offered by Microsoft. This is the same intellectual property, but doesn't come with a physical disk.
(2) OEM Windows disks that Microsoft sells for $25. These come with a license (unlike the defendant's disks) but do come with a physical disk.
(3) The original restore disks that come with a new computer. These match perfectly the intellectual property and the physical form, but they only come bundled as a small part of an expensive package, so it's hard to get a fair price from looking at this.
The defendant argued the free download was the better comparison, the prosecution argued the OEM disks were better. The judge sided with the prosecution, and assigned a value of $25/disk, which resulted in a stiff sentence.