Shorting the stock and making money on your own when Musk fails

(This is not financial advice. In fact it’s very dangerous as Musks companies often perform irrationally)
Shorting the stock and making money on your own when Musk fails

(This is not financial advice. In fact it’s very dangerous as Musks companies often perform irrationally)
It was NASDAQ100 that let SpaceX in. S&P 500 stayed true to their rules which includes waiting at least 1 year after IPO to include it in the portfolio
I think the question is if any of the commercial displays actually have good image quality? As you say it’s often used for advertisements and in retail areas, and I’d expect that mean image quality doesn’t matter that much, just that it’s cheap.
If budget isn’t an issue I would strongly recommend going for something with an OLED display (but not QLED). I have owned 3 generations of LG OLEDs now, and I have to say that picture quality is absolutely amazing. Though I have to admit that the software just have gotten worse with each generation. Mostly you can avoid it if you’re not using the built in apps but unfortunately there are quite a lot of issues with HDMI-CEC as well. It works well with my Apple TV, but sometimes there’s some weird behaviour with other devices, like a Switch or PS5. I’d live with that if the alternative is some cheap LCD variant though.
Ubisoft stock has lost 90% of its value the past 5 years though, so I don’t think the shareholders are fans.
Which makes it even more insane that they haven’t realized that it’s time to take a step back and evaluate their strategy, but I guess there’s a point that they are extremely out of touch with reality.
I would guess that the key difference is that vibe coded apps can get to a more or less working state a lot quicker, while other apps are likely to be abandoned before it’s done.
Though in either case I’d always be careful with new projects. If it’s just a single guy that’s been working on something for less than a year and only have a handful of GitHub stars, I probably wouldn’t install it.
At least it sounds like a full escape is not trivial still
Turning this vulnerability into a full escape is difficult work, because the primitive is tricky. The page that gets reoccupied is the spt of a shadow page that was zapped, returned to buddy, and then refilled. After it is freed, KVM installs no more leaf SPTEs on this page, so the only remaining write is the single fixed constant (on x86-64, 0x8000000000000000) that clears the orphaned parent pointer, and the guest only decides which slot (offset) to write to. Because of this, one must carefully choose a guest-side cross-cache object where that fixed write aligns to a meaningful field, and depending on how the object is allocated it can be dependent on the guest VM's RAM quota.
Because of this tricky primitive, each architecture must be exploited in a different way, and empirically, the AMD-specific exploit is a little easier.
That would be a reasonable expectation, but I want to remember this being talked about as a revolution for internet in the US; how much better it would be compared to shitty cable providers and how you would get Gigabit speeds without having to run fibre.
Sure, it looked impressive early on, but a wireless system like this will always degrade the more customers they get.
To be fair, the network being crushed by high demand is extremely unsurprising. Cellular networks have always had this problem in dense areas, where it’s no way you're reaching the advertised speed. This is mainly due to the available channels being shared by everyone in a relatively large area, connected to the same cell. Which is mitigated somewhat by setting up more cells with shorter range for a higher cell density in cities.
How could a satellite based network ever scale? Where you have what, a handful available cells to cover an entire state?
That doesn’t make much sense, how is a completely different infrastructure going to help their capacity issues? Unless the plan is to pivot from satellite to 5G or something
Nobody really argues about that here though. The context of Linus statement is whether or not experienced kernel developers should be forbidden from using AI tools or not.