Makes sense. I honestly don’t know the difference in sizes between groups 1 and 2 are, I’m just assuming 2 is a massive majority vs the other two. But maybe 1a is bigger than I thought.

I’m unreasonably excited about a fund swap at my company’s 401k. Basically, they’re swapping some S&P 500 fund w/o a ticker for FXAIX, which will drop my ER from 0.04% -> 0.015%, but more importantly will give me a ticker to put into my spreadsheet so I can get a real-time update on my invested assets. The actual impact is minimal ($25 per $100k invested), but I’m excited all the same.

It’s a small thing, but I’m glad there’s at least something positive happening with our 401k getting bought out by Empower a couple years ago. Maybe I’ll eventually get a mega-backdoor option eventually, but for now I’ll take my $25 and a ticker all the way to the bank.

Sure, but you can use someone’s likeness to fraudulently tie them to some product you’re pushing. The burden here is if the average person familiar with the voice would mistake it for support, and if the creator likely intended for that to happen, and I think that standard has been met here given the response by the CEO and the allegations by Jeff Geerling’s audience.

If you just happen to look or sound like a celebrity/politician, that’s a different story because fraud requires intent. Now, if you used your likeness to imply support by that celebrity/politician for some cause or product, and you don’t disclose that you’re not them, then we’re back in fraud territory.

In this case, there seems to be clear evidence that there was intent to mislead viewers to improve views. That’s fraud.

The voice isn’t his to own in the first place. “They” have a right to use it as much as he does.

No, it’s fraud. The CEO of the other company admitted that they consider this to be infringement, and it was done to make the video more popular, which to me means the staff did it so people would assume Jeff Geerling supported the video (and there’s evidence that viewers did initially make that assumption).

So it seems clear to me that Jeff Geerling, Jeff’s viewers, and the CEO of the company producing the videos with the voice imitation consider it to be infringement, and I believe it amounts to fraud.

Same with most brick and mortar retailers. When in doubt, ask, and they’ll probably say yes, they just need to confirm the price on their own device (so you’re not manipulating images or whatever on your phone).

Don’t worry, I’m old too, and I got you fam.

Burning is creating disks by etching the data onto the metal disc below the plastic layer, and ripping is extracting the data into a digital format, like an ISO, or in the case of music or video discs, usable media files (often includes a transcode because who uses CD/DVD format anyway?).

I’ve burned dozens if not hundreds of disks in my day, but haven’t burned anything for years. I most recently ripped my entire DVD and Bluray collection onto my Jellyfin server so I don’t have to deal with those ancient discs that keep getting scratched anymore.

light scribe

I remember having one, but I never actually etched a picture onto the CD, it never seemed worth doing.

Exactly. I even still have a bunch of blank DVDs and maybe a few blank CDs sitting in storage somewhere. I used to use them to burn Linux ISOs every couple years, but ISOs are now bigger than a DVD, so I now have to hunt down the USB drive each time (I’m always losing those).

Yes, yes we are.

Holy crap, a space?!

Defender is fine.

My SO is still on Windows, so I just have Malwarebytes installed to run a periodic (free) scan, and run Defender for active protection. We’ve been doing that pretty much ever since Defender became a thing and haven’t had any issues.

As others said, if there’s an issue Defender didn’t detect, investigate, and if it’s actual malware, reinstall. That’ll cover you 99% of the time, and the other 1% (rootkits) of the time isn’t worth protecting against for the average person.

Exactly:

1. sign up w/ phone number
2. disable phone number for discovery and create a username
3. change username as often as you want, while keeping your contacts

Cool, can manufacturers put a badge on these TVs so I know which ones to avoid?

I’d prefer some kind of limited amount of viewing. I don’t watch a ton of YT, so give me some kind of reasonable ad-free cap. I’m willing to pay to not see ads, but I don’t watch enough to be worth their asking price.

Look at the other comments in this thread, where people seem to be claiming this is unconscionable and that these boys are irredeemable racists, or something like that.

I’m explaining that I doubt these boys have the actual life experience needed to appreciate the impact of their actions. That’s all.

your average Joe isn’t going to search that out

Sure, and your average Joe isn’t throwing around slurs by accident, or at least they’re not doing it intentionally.

But intolerant groups will create new terms, or co-opt existing terms. Look at “black pill” (from “red pill” from The Matrix), the “ok” hand signal (co-opted by white nationalists), or “woke” (pretty old, but “anti-woke” became a rallying call for the right). It can and does happen, and that’s not including all of the terms used behind the scenes that are likely going to come out to the public over the next 10 years or whatever.

The way I see it, there are a few types of people here:

1. use it intentionally to hurt others for whatever reason - this group will come up with new terms
2. people who use it on accident - this is your average joe, the quiet majority, who probably doesn’t know what the term means/implies
3. people who actively avoid it/are hurt by it

Taking offense to terms benefits group 1, normalizing them benefits group 3, and in either case, group 2 is left largely confused. IMO, that doesn’t particularly help anyone, and the goal should instead be to get groups 2 and 3 to interact so it’s clear that group 2 isn’t intending to cause harm. That way it doesn’t particularly matter what group 1 does, group 3 will hopefully be able to distinguish honest mistakes from actual intended harm (i.e. distinguish between someone in groups 1 and 2).

In the case of this article, it would help for those in group 3 to understand that these kids have likely never met a black person. It would also help for those in group 2 to actually meet black people and understand the struggles they go through so they can appreciate why these terms are so hurtful. Unfortunately, a lot of people online and in person seem to jump to the conclusion that a given slur was used intentionally as hate speech, and that’s a failing IMO on both sides of that equation. Groups 2 and 3 both agree that group 1 sucks, yet groups 2 and 3 are frequently at odds with each other. That’s not particularly helpful.

Ew, that’s awful.

I honestly don’t know these boys, but I can honestly see this as not involving any form of hatred. I’ve been to a fair amount of small towns, and they really don’t have any kind of conception of what these words actually mean to people. They certainly understand that it’s hurtful, but I think it is closer to curse words (i.e. “taboo” and “edgy”) than an actual intent to cause harm to someone.

If you see it from that perspective, I think it’s unfair to hold these boys accountable for it for the rest of their lives. It’s a dumb move, but they’ll hopefully get some exposure to POC and change their ways. I would honestly be pretty surprised if these kids actually hate black people, I think they’re just doing it for attention, and this kind of “shock” is an effective way to get attention.

Yeah!!

I recently moved half my e-fund to a 13-week t-bill ladder, and it feels good having at least that small portion in bonds. The rest of my e-fund is in money market funds, and other than that I’m 100% stocks.

I plan to get bonds when I get closer to FI, but I’m not quite there. So if you’re looking at bonds already, that tells me you’re feeling closer to FI, which is awesome. Make sure to post back when you hit your number. :)

Or, uh, pay your debts and avoid getting into more debt.

I’m worried this kind of messaging is going to encourage people to get into more debt, and instead of getting the “power” you think you’ll get, the bank will call your bluff and you’ll be even more screwed.

If you have debt, you agreed to repay it, so you should. That’s the responsible thing to do.