“Linux won” and “the microkernel lost” are two different sentences that the internet insists on treating as one. Thirty years of containers and VMs patching walls onto a kernel with none, and they still call it a win for pragmatism.

How long would it take for me to achieve financial stability after starting one of these businesses, and how can I use my bank to obtain financing?

:D :D

[deleted]

That Boss still haunts me to this day…

Good piece, but there's a technical detail in the robots.txt section worth correcting, because readers might come away with the wrong idea. "Disallow: /" blocks crawling, it doesn't remove anything from the index. During those eleven days the pages stayed indexed, Google just couldn't read the content, which is why you lose snippets and rankings, not the URLs themselves. I saw this on a client's site back in 2022, and the drop in impressions came slower than expected. Recovery doesn't depend only on fixing the file either: you request a recrawl through the robots.txt report in Search Console and wait for Google to come back, which on a small site can take well over a week. Otherwise, the check-before-deploy rule is gold.

I think what MTV missed is that once the doors multiply, the filter is what's worth something. With everything on YouTube and Vevo nobody needed a channel for access, but everybody was still lost deciding what to play. The VJs, posing and all, were exactly that: a person with taste saying "listen to this". They could have stayed in that role, a trusted curator with a face and a voice, instead of betting everything on reality shows. Today the closest thing is a playlist with a strong identity or a creator people follow just because they nail their taste. I don't know if it paid enough, honestly, but it would have made more sense of the name.

Man, I was looking at this whole Swap Arcade thing and honestly, the idea is neat, but it falls apart under scrutiny. On paper it looks great: a 100-lb arcade cabinet that 'disappears' into the living room so the place doesn't look like a 90s dive bar and saves you from that classic decor argument. But if you dig a little deeper, the concept kind of contradicts itself: * **The cabinet that isn't a cabinet:** The front doors when closed are purely cosmetic. You don't actually gain any real storage space for your home; the inside is just there to stash the machine's own cables and accessories when it's folded up. * **The law of inertia:** Like someone pointed out in the comments, either this thing is going to stay unfolded forever, or it's going to become an untouched piece of furniture. Nobody is going to bother 'assembling and disassembling' a 100-pound beast every time they get the urge to play five minutes of Street Fighter. * **The math doesn't add up:** Dropping over a grand on a Kickstarter product (hitting nearly $1,700 retail, plus shipping) just to get an arcade machine that basically apologizes for existing and tries to hide its geeky soul doesn't make much sense. At the end of the day, if you want an arcade cabinet at home, you want that retro, imposing aesthetic out in the open—not an expensive disguise that half the household is going to think looks weird anyway.

Good piece, and I mostly agree with where it lands, but there's one thing bugging me. That Brinson stat gets flagged with the right caveat here (variance explained isn't the same as absolute return), and then two paragraphs later it's still doing the heavy lifting rhetorically, like it settles the whole stock-picking debate on its own. It doesn't, not really. Ibbotson and Kaplan ran a follow-up in 2000 and landed closer to 40% of the variation across funds being explained by allocation, which is a genuinely different claim than "90% of your return comes from here." I get why the bigger number gets reused, it's punchier, but the argument's strong enough without inflating it. Also — and this is the part I kept waiting for and never got — the piece rips into Markowitz mean-variance optimization for being wildly sensitive to input error (fair, that's real), but never mentions what the industry actually did about it. Black-Litterman exists precisely to fix this, blending market equilibrium with your own views instead of feeding garbage expected-returns into a black box. Shrinkage estimators too. Doesn't mean the average retiree needs any of that, honestly they don't, but framing it like the field just shrugged at its own known flaw for seventy years isn't quite honest either. One more thing, smaller but it nagged at me while reading the home bias section. Telling Portuguese investors to go global is the right call, no argument there, but nobody mentions the currency exposure that comes bundled with it. Unhedged international equities from a EUR base carry real FX volatility on top of the equity risk, and that changes the actual risk profile of the "diversified" portfolio people think they're buying. Would've liked even one line on hedged vs unhedged ETFs, because that's exactly the detail that bites people later when the euro moves against them and they can't figure out why their "safe" allocation is behaving weird. Anyway — still one of the better breakdowns of this I've read. The risk capacity vs tolerance split alone is worth more than most of what gets written on this topic.

The worst part of all this is that these people don't give a damn about future generations; they care only about profits and wealth. It's more than clear that the likelihood of this happening is much greater than many people realize.

It amazes me how this person contracted the virus. And things become even more complicated when the body can no longer cope with even small amounts of the virus.

I use Revolut for a lot of my payments, and now I'm a little hesitant to start using it again.

This kind of breaks your brain a bit: we're taught that physics explains 'why the sky is blue,' but honestly half the answer is biology — it's your eye deciding what to do with whatever light is left. If a bird sees a sky that's noticeably more violet than any human ever will, does it even make sense to talk about the 'real color' of the sky? Or is color always relative to whoever's looking?

Reviewing decisions by process alone sounds great in theory, but I think it underestimates something: sometimes the outcome IS the missing information. Like, you could've done the whole analysis right and still missed a signal that only became obvious afterward — and that's not hindsight bias, that's real learning that only showed up because things went wrong. Splitting process from outcome that cleanly feels less like an honest analytical tool and more like a way to protect the ego of whoever made the call. And the quarterly review thing, honestly, works fine for investing or career decisions, but does it hold up for every kind of choice? Relationship decisions, for instance — reviewing those with that same "process vs outcome" coldness feels kind of sociopathic in practice, no? Curious if anyone here has tried applying this outside a financial context and hit a similar wall.

nah I get why people are still salty about it tho. the entire point of a 4k or 64k intro was fighting the hardware itself, not just making something pretty with whatever's available. if the GPU is doing half the creative work for you the challenge kind of evaporates, no?

honestly the whole "GPUs ruined demoscene" take is kind of tired at this point. farbrausch was already pushing procedural tricks hard back in the day, using more power today isn't cheating, it's just... the tools got better? nobody complains that painters use better brushes now

I really enjoyed this article. It’s fascinating to see how the Hylian language hides so many details and references that you might easily miss while playing the games. One of those articles that makes you look at Zelda in a whole new way.

Sinclair BASIC did more for how people actually learn to think in code than Z80 assembly ever will — assembly just gates who gets to feel "real" about it.

It is deeply reprehensible that **Mark Zuckerberg and Meta are repeatedly associated with scandals involving users’ privacy**. This is not merely a technical mistake, but a serious act of irresponsibility when a company with billions of people on its platforms treats personal data as if it were just another commodity. When a company accumulates so much power and makes so much money, **its responsibility should be even greater, not less**.

By comparing the practice to using a calculator, he showed how they manage to deceive many readers with their knowledge of mathematics and economics

I'm absolutely certain that Africa will be one of the safest places to be when all this happens

Apple’s latest move clearly highlights a shift in priorities: the company has realized it can't afford to burn energy and capital on niche bets while the AI race demands absolute focus. Adjusting course on the Vision Pro makes complete sense right now. The hardware is impressive, but adoption is slow, and producing in-house immersive content is simply too expensive for the return it generates today. Trimming down there to lean on external partnerships frees up breathing room for what truly matters. Meanwhile, the shake-up in the Siri team is the most critical piece. The assistant desperately needed a ground-up overhaul. Replacing the old architecture with teams focused on advanced large language models (LLMs) is the only way for *Apple Intelligence* to deliver on its promises and avoid falling behind rivals like OpenAI and Google. At the end of the day, this isn't about a financial crisis—it's about strategic survival. Apple is pulling chips off long-term projects to go all-in on AI right now.

The part about celebration duration is the real diagnostic tool here — most people try to self-assess by asking "am I a hard worker?" which is useless since both healthy drive and fear-driven drive look identical from the outside. Timing the gap between relief and the next wave of anxiety is a much sharper test, and it's something you can actually notice in real time instead of only in hindsight.

You can’t know that. A construction worker who is charged, released on bond, and has a scheduled job may also be allowed to return to work. The real issue is whether the law was applied equally, not simply that he was able to perform after being released.

I personally understand you. I know that some features here may not be well received by everyone, but I also believe that every site has its own rules, and we have ours. Unfortunately, I also know that because of some of these rules, many people may stop using the site. It is a shame, but we cannot force anyone to stay somewhere they do not feel comfortable.

Hey, Thanks for the support on my post. I reached out to mozzapp again to make a case for changing his 3 posts in 4 hour rule. Ultimately, It's up to him... I have to imagine that he would want to grow this place, but, I doubt anyone else that stumbles into here will stick around under his current framework. Just being honest...

I totally agree with iSnark—so does that mean if I see five posts that fit the criteria here, I can't post them all? That's annoying, because these are the kinds of things that only make sense to post at a specific time.

Hi iSnark, Thank you for your contribution. We truly value the contributions of our users, especially from members who are already active on the platform. This website was created with an educational and informative focus. Our goal is to share content that helps readers learn something new, discover useful information, feel inspired to create or do something, or simply leave the site with an interesting topic to discuss with friends and family. For this reason, the homepage is designed to give visibility to different types of content. It includes posts that have already received votes and comments, as well as newly published posts that have not yet had the opportunity to receive engagement. The limit of three posts every four hours was introduced to prevent the homepage from being flooded with many consecutive posts from a single user. This gives other contributors a fair opportunity to have their content appear on the homepage and encourages a more diverse range of voices and topics. Our goal is not simply to build a platform with a large number of registered users. We would rather have an active community of participants who consistently contribute relevant, useful, and valuable content for everyone who visits the site. Thank you again for being part of the community.

The CEO's statement offering "sincere apologies" and claiming they "enhanced protocols" is downright offensive to the family. A woman walked into the hospital for a simple knee surgery and now has no feeling from her chest down because of an absurd inventory and administration blunder. This isn't bad luck or a fluke; it's pure, unadulterated negligence. Everyone in that chain of errors—along with the management that allowed such sloppy procedures—needs to be held accountable in court, because an apology won't give anyone their mobility back.

It's impressive how the team at Indie Gamer Chick managed to capture Eternal Darkness's weird essence without falling into the trap of blind nostalgia. Everyone remembers it as that cult GameCube masterpiece that redefined the horror genre, but when you actually sit down to play it today, reality hits a bit differently. The review really nails it by pointing out that the plot feels like a pretty shallow Lovecraft fanfic, but dividing the story into twelve chapters across different eras with completely distinct characters is still a brilliant concept that few games have dared to copy since. The color system and the sanity meter show the exact paradox of the game. While it has genuinely clever ideas that were legit terrifying back in the day, having to replay almost the exact same game three times just to see all the variations turns into a massive test of patience. It’s the kind of classic that deserves respect for being a pioneer and for having the guts to take risks, but it aged with so many baggage items from the N64-to-GameCube transition that it's hard to defend as a perfect experience today.