Back when HDDs were all there was ramdisks were interesting, but SSDs pretty much killed most of that as they have massively increased IOPS over disks.
Hard drives that huge scare me as it would take days to backup all the data off them.
Having 128 GB in my desktop, I can never, ever go back. It truly unlocks a whole different computing experience. I've only had one OOM in the last 5 years and it was in my own code where I had a bad memory leak. It's the only way to live
I don't think HN is libertarian at all. In fact, I can barely tell the difference between reddit and HN now. Anti-capitalism is the dominant sentiment here now.
There is a small group of people who are quite openly attempting to make you, me, and everyone else obsolete. They’re doing it while blatantly lying that they’re not. Surprisingly, people aren’t receiving it well. Anti-capitalism is the dominant sentiment everywhere.
>I guess Fidelity doesn't want to help fund hate groups
Your "guess" is not the stated reason. FTA:
>“Consistent with our grant-making standards and practices, the organization is not an eligible grant recipient during the ongoing investigation.”
In fact, WRT Fidelity's actual disposition on funding hate groups, the SPLC reported in 2023 that their donor advised fund had been consistently used to that effect, including anti-LGBTQ, anti-government, anti-Muslim, and hard right groups.[0]
They were paying confidential informants for tips they would use in investigations and pass to law enforcement. Not QUITE the same as being a hate group.
The comment I was replying to was specifically about undercover cops.
That said - in the US, confidential informants are also paid directly by the agency or police department. While they sometimes (often?) paid in cash, the purpose and disbursement of those funds is closely tracked internally and auditable.
They're _not_ using shell companies to hide the fact that they're paying people for information. SPLC is. Why?
If paying in cash is sufficient for law enforcement, why would it be a problem for the SPLC? It seem clear to me that the intent is to hide the fact that they're doing it at all, not to protect the identities of their informants.
reply