Well, it is working pretty well for you so…

The way we truly save the world from everything is exactly your philosophy. Continuously improve. Don’t refuse to do good things that are not perfect ( unless your true goal is to do nothing ).

As everybody else has said, Debian is working as intended. To respond to the actual post though, Debian is working exactly as it always has.

If you think Debian used to be good, you must really love it now. It is better than ever.

Unlike in the past, the primary drawback of Debian Stable ( old package versions ) has multiple viable solutions. Other have rightly pointed out things like the Mozilla APT package and Flatpaks. Great solutions.

My favourite solution is to install Arch via Distrobox. You can then get all the stability of Debian everywhere you need it and, anytime you need additional packages or newer packages, you can install them in the Arch distrobox. Firefox is a prime candidate. You are not going to get newer packages or a greater section than via he Arch repos / AUR ( queue Nix rebuttals ).

It is not about security at all. They do not want to test or support old browsers. So, they set a minimum version and tell you that you need to upgrade to that.

If they only support one browser, it is going to be Chrome. Chrome has more zero-day vulnerabilities than any other project I can think of. It is not about security.

I would say that you make a decent argument that the ALU has the strongest claim to the “bitness” of a CPU. In that way, we are already beyond 64 bit.

For me though, what really defines a CPU is the software that runs natively. The Zen4 runs software written for the AMD64 family of processors. That is, it runs 64 bit software. This software will not run on the “32 bit” x86 processors that came before it ( like the K5, K6, and original Athlon ). If AMD released the AMD128 instruction set, it would not run on the Zen4 even though it may technically be enough hardware to do so.

The Motorola 68000 only had a 16 but ALU but was able to run the same 32 bit software that ran in later Motorola processors that were truly 32 bit. Software written for the 68000 was essentially still native on processors sold as late as 2014 ( 35 years after the 68000 was released ). This was not some kid of compatibility mode, these processors were still using the same 32 bit ISA.

The Linux kernel that runs on the Zen4 will also run on 64 bit machines made 20 years ago as they also support the amd64 / x86-64 ISA.

Where the article is correct is that there does not seem to be much push to move on from 64 bit software. The Zen4 supports instructions to perform higher-bit operations but they are optional. Most applications do not rely on them, including the operating system. For the most part, the Zen4 runs the same software as the Opteron ( released in 2003 ). The same pre-compiled Linux distro will run on both.

It is a good point. But given the importance of the decisions that get driven off these numbers, I think it is more important that they be meaningful.

In some ways, it makes it a more useful historical measure as well as you can have a greater confidence that the number reflects the pressure inflation was placing on people at the time.

The other differences are leverage, tax sheltering, and the low cost of borrowing. How many people can borrow $1,500,000 at 5% to buy an index fund in a tax shielded account?

Also, don’t forget that you get to “invest” your rent money when you buy a home.

Real estate returns are higher.

This comment is bizarre to me. Is 35 mph fast or slow? Because it is the same as 55 kph ( km/h ).

55 km/h is an odd speed though it is true. Most towns in Canada for example, the default speed limit is 50 km/h. Highway speeds are more like 100 km/h.

Speeds in mph seem more intuitive to you?

We are not the US in 2008. At that point, half the market was new buyers that could only afford the ARM rates they were given ( maybe even interest only ). When home values became less than the mortgage, they just walked away. The system often allowed them to walk away without losing other assets.

In Canada, the majority of mortgage holders have mortgages far smaller than their home value. They are not going to causally walk away from these assets. Look what you are saying about lower prices being “good” for you. It does not sound like you are going to panic and sell your home in a down market. Mortgage holders also had to qualify at rates higher than they borrowed. Not as high as they are now but the new rates will not be so wildly beyond their means as happened in the US. Mortgages that are close to home value are likely insured.

Finally, rates are coming down. While higher rates will certainly apply downward pressure, the rate reductions help close the gap and also send a signal that rates will be lower in the near future ( not as low as they were ). We will probably see a lot of variable rates with expectations of sticking it out for a year or two while rates drop. If prices do come down, some people will value hunt, making bets that declining rates will drive prices up again in the future.

Once more, I think some downward pressure is likely. I do not expect anything even close to 2008.

To be fair, that is clearly his goal.

You are aware that Trump was indicted for Jan 6 right? The trial is on hold while the Supreme Court decides if he is totally immune to legal consequences.

They would go bankrupt.

No matter how anti-capitalism you are, I hope you can see how broken the argument being made here is. The absolute reality is that, without protections, things like pharmaceuticals would never exist at the scale that we enjoy them.

Of course examples of things that require years of research would exist. However, there would be far fewer of them than there is today.

Patents and copyrights have become corrupted. They need reform. We have to remember though that when they were created, it was to improve the world that existed ( the world that this commenter thinks would be better ).

Patents and copyrights were not invented because making companies richer was a goal. They were invented to better society. They were created with the recognition that, if we wanted companies to invest in innovation, and if we wanted individuals to commit to a long, intensive creative process, that they needed protection. The downside of capitalism at the time was that evil corporations and unscrupulous entrepreneurs could steal your hard work. Patents and copyrights were created to right that wrong and to promote a culture of creativity, invention, and innovation. And it worked wonderfully. We all benefit.

Now, things have of course been corrupted. The idea of “intellectual property” has emerged and we get nonsense like calling copyright violations “piracy”. The protections have been extended far. The penalties have become too great. The idea of public benefit has taken a backseat to profit protection. All this is bad. Throwing out the baby with the bath water is not the answer.

Do you discuss things or attack people? Serious question.

It is hard to tell from this post. It started off well but went a bit off the rails by the end.

I have been using Linux since 1993. Maybe it is time to move on.

“never tells you how”. Regardless of right or left politics, this is damn good advice.

Well, “death tax” at least ( unless I understand what you mean ) is just a portion of the deceased estate. So, they can at least afford it.

I would actually be ok if a basic level of funeral expenses were covered by the state. Like health care, the idea that we, as a society, can take care of everybody to a minimum level appeals to me.

It does not have to be extravagant but people should not be afraid to collect loved ones because of the financial burden.

Thank you for replying. If I understand correctly, you are saying that principal appreciation ( unlike income ) is not taxable like income is.

There is some truth to that. Property sold for a profit is taxed as capital gains but at a lower level than income. On your primary residence, there is an exemption. And your point that you can essentially “spend” appreciation without selling by borrowing against the equity is a good point ( without attracting taxation ).

I am not sure I agree that this withholds tax revenue from the government though. After all, asset appreciation is kind of money from nothing. It does not represent money that came from somewhere without getting taxed. And, as above, this newly created money results in new tax revenue. Even borrowing creates new money in the economy, including consumption taxes.

What all this new money does is devalue money as well, which devalues cash savings but also devalues debt.

I will have to think about your perspective a little more. At the moment, your other points feel stronger.

There is no doubt at all though that “ownership” accelerates wealth inequality as assets tend to appreciate faster than wage growth.

How grown are these grown kids? Are they in school or dependent for some other reason?

That is how I could see this happening. Courts believe that your kids are entitled to your income. The ex should not have that same right. Of course, who do the child support payments go to? That’s right…the ex.

Both ways. He should live it up for a couple of years. Make sure to use her line of credit and credit cards. His wife’s ex-husband will have to pay half when they finally divorce. Buy a car in her name, sell it, and use the proceeds to buy a car in your name. The possibilities are endless.

[I am not advocating this obviously. Mostly I am agreeing how super dangerous this is.]

The answer is no doubt long, complicated, and not nearly as easy to avoid as you are imagining. Let’s not compound his problems.