I vaguely recall what was effectively a delay-line implemented using terrahertz-modulated lasers aimed at the retro reflector on the moon from Earth’s surface. The data storage capacity was something in either the hundreds of GBs or low TBs. But I can’t find the reference.

I wish to advocate in the name of DIY minimalism. That is to say, it’s true that none of us – Linus Torvalds is not in the room, right? – can hope to churn out anything approaching a full-blown filesystem on the order of ext4 or NTFS if we worked our entire lives. But if those filesystems were the end-all-be-all of innovation in those spaces, the richness and intrigue of computer science would have died out long ago, relegated to only the pinnacle of engineers and no one else.

But I feel like that can’t quite be the case, because all engineering is about achieving careful balances. And as fine as ext4 is, it must be said that it’s anything but minimal. It’s full-featured, which also implies that it might have more than what any one person requires. If OP wants to write a very compact filesystem designed for 8-bit microprocessors, I can’t badger them with ext4’s existence, because that’s not going to be usable on an 8 bit machine.

Much like how Python includes a really tiny HTTP server, and we can all agree that it’s orders of magnitude less sophisticated than nginx, such implementations can have their time in the sun. And I think a tiny, absurdly minimal, almost code-golf of a filesystem, might have a place in this world, if OP really wants to undertake that effort.

Computer science, I wish to believe, still has doors awaiting exploration.

You’ll have to excuse me if I’m somewhat skeptical, as I’ve noticed that your account is only 7 hours old, mentions a URL that I’ve never heard of, and you’ve posted to three different communities with the same question in quick succession.

But giving the benefit of the doubt, what do you believe that a self-directed IRA (SDIRA) will achieve for you that you cannot presently do through a conventional IRA custodian? From this reference, a SDIRA must still be held through an IRA custodian and are still subject to the blanket rule against holding certain assets in an IRA, like collectibles and early equity in a start-up.

More so, where are you seeing a requirement to set up an LLC for an SDIRA? Last I recall, the I in IRA stood for “individual” and thus an IRA cannot be created for an incorporated entity. Or are these lawyers planning to incorporate an LLC which will be your dedicated IRA custodian? Because that sounds like a legal nightmare to manage, as the IRS requires custodian to meet certain ongoing obligations, even if they only hold assets for a single client. That alone will require lawyers and other staff to manage, and so I’m not sure what you’re trying to do.

In engineering, we have what is called the XY Problem, where the question posed doesn’t quite match up with what’s actually desired. What financial objectives are you seeking to achieve here?

Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) in the USA are made to track both potential tax evasion and money laundering. This is where the $10k cash “limit” comes from, but SARs can/should be filed for higher amount that create suspicion.

Someone depositing a check for multiple times their lifetime transactions total would absolutely create suspicion on themselves, especially if it was a personal check. But if it were a business check from “ABC Mortgage Escrow”, that’s probably legit but a bank clerk is well within their rights to flag it. Flagging just means the money laundering team would investigate the source, determine that it doesn’t have other red flags, and quietly move on.

Lots of good answers, especially using FUSE for experimentation. One thing I’ll add is that if you just didn’t want to use any filesystem at all … you don’t have to!

At least in the Unix realm, a disk drive is just a bunch of contiguous blocks, and you can put whatever you want in them. Of course, Unix itself famously needs a filesystem for itself, but if you want to just store all your giant binary blobs – cryptocurrency block chain? – directly onto a drive without the pesky overhead or conveniences of a filesystem, that’s doable.

It’s not generally a useful idea to treat a disk drive as though it’s a tape drive, but it does work. And going further into that analogy, you can use “tar” to collect multiple files and fit them onto the drive, since a tarball preserves file metadata and the borders between files, but not much else. This is the original use of tar – “tape archive” – for storing Unix files onto tape, because the thought of using tape as working storage with a filesystem was – and still is – a terrible idea. And that’s basically the original impetus for a filesystem: it’s better than linear access media.

Banks can and do get into hot water if they’re found to have handled – inadvertently or not – funds which ends up with banned entities, like DPRK or terrorist groups, or are the product of fraud AND that they ignored reasonable suspicions.

The classic example is the so-called “703 account” of fraudster Bernie Madoff, held at JP Morgan Chase bank. Although a humble checking account, it saw huge money inflows and outflows, with one reference showing a single withdrawal of $1.3 billion. For their wilful disregard of the obvious red flags, the bank was fined $461 million of their own money, separate from the seizure of the account to pay the victims.

And perfectly normal people have had their accounts “closed due to fraud”, meaning the bank got suspicious and decided to unilaterally close the account, just in case. They do give the balance back to the owners, since it’s to avoid an ongoing fraud. It’s still annoying though, but banks won’t carry more liability than they’re comfortable with, at least when the regulators still bared their teeth from time to time.

IANAL either, but I’m vaguely familiar that this realm of USA law is known as “choice of law” provisions and the applicability of “click wrap” contracts, and it’s a thorny issue in the digital age. Essentially, the problem is whether Meta can be made reasonably aware that a ToS exists for a given web server. Unlike a “NO TRESPASSING” sign posted on a gate, or a sticker on the packaging of a physical copy of Microsoft Word 97 that says “opening this package constitutes agreement to the EULA, at this URL…”, it can be argued that unless the ToS is made so blitheringly obvious to a web scraper, it might not pass muster.

To be clear, this isn’t a problem for normal web users, because the ToS link will very easily appear at the bottom of the page, when rendered in a standard web browser. The issue is whether scrapers – including AI scrapers but also bot-crawlers and even plain ol Curl – would see the notice of the ToS. There is no convention – either de facto or in law – about where or what format a ToS has to be. And it would be problematic to say that all scrapers need to thoroughly search a website for a “legal.txt”, because such a file might be somewhere non-obvious and because it exacerbates the whole “scrap servers until they collapse” issue.

So already, getting a ToS to bind Meta – or any other high-volume scraper – is an upward battle. Hence why I suggested a remedy rooted in common law, premised on the idea that actively causing expenses for the server owner is actionable, even without a ToS.

That said, I do want to point out one other detail about choice-of-law: normally if a contract specifies the venue for disputes, that will be honored. Example: the courts of Santa Clara County in California. But supposing the instance owner lives in Montreal and specifies the venue as the Court of Quebec, and if the issue with binding Meta to the ToS was solved, then there’s the challenge of actually targeting Meta. As a USA domiciled corporation, they’re not automatically within the jurisdiction that the Quebec courts can reach. If there’s a Canadian subsidiary, that might be a valid target. But if not, the Quebec courts wouldn’t be able to compel Meta’s lawyers to even show up, let alone rule in favor of the instance owner. And then there’s the whole aspect of getting an American court to ratify a judgement issued by an overseas court. It’s doable, but it’s so much harder than specifying a venue within the USA.

But again, that’s problematic if the instance isn’t located within the USA, because then the owner must travel to the USA for their court dates. And I can’t really recommend that anyone travel to the USA except for only the most critical or dire of situations.

From my limited experience with PoE switches, how much power being drawn in relation to how much the switch can supply has a notable impact on efficiency. Specifically, when only one or two ports on a 48-port switch are delivering PoE, the increased AC power drawn from the wall is disproportionately high. Hence, any setup where you’re using more of the PoE switch’s potential power tends to increase overall efficiency.

My guess is that it has to do with efficiency curves that are only reasonable when heavily loaded for enterprise customers. In any case, if either of those two candidate switches meet your needs today and with some breathing room, both should be fine. I would tend to lean towards Netgear before TP-Link though, out of personal preference.

The larger town next to mine has monthly tours of their wastewater and water processing plants. Although they’re scheduled to be amenable for K-12 student field trips, they also see adults who wish to understand how their tax dollars are being expensed for the public good.

For other municipal services, you might also reach out to the director of that department, since as public servants, they can also schedule special tours of the facilities for members of the public. It can’t hurt to ask.

I’ve never had a need to use a Yubikey, but is that the button which spews gibberish into DMs? I’ve seen that a lot at work on Teams lol

It looks a lot like a Yubikey, which is used to securely authenticate to company resources like a VPN. Fortunately, unlike losing a hard drive, a Yubikey can be deauthorized by the company and thus the device becomes useless for malicious use.

So if you want to use that USB port for something else, it shouldn’t be a problem to remove a Yubikey for the prior user’s employer.

The cynicism surrounding the USA court system is not without cause, but the suggestion to not even bother trying has always rubbed me the wrong way. Firstly, on philosophical grounds, it’s defeatism and on-par with appeasement. But secondly, average Americans can and have prevailed when up against a multinational company.

The one which often comes to mind is the case of a Philadelphia man winning a default judgement against Wells Fargo and was on the cusp of having the local sheriff auction off a branch’s furniture, until they all settled the matter. The man in question wrote about his experience here: https://lawsintexas.com/this-is-how-my-qwr-foreclosed-wells-fargo/

As for how to use Meta, the average Joe need not hire a major law firm, but can choose to pursue a limited suit in small claims court. For Meta, which is headquartered in Silicon Valley in California, the Superior Court in Santa Clara County would be the venue. Drawbacks include: having to get to Silicon Valley for court dates, and a total claims limit of $12.5k.

But on the flip side, the small claims court does not allow lawyers to argue the case before the judge, meaning it’s basically you and Meta’s representative. That representative might still have legal training, but it won’t be a situation like in the 1997 film The Rainmaker where it’s one solo lawyer versus a whole team of lawyers.

There’s also fewer avenues for Meta to inflate costs, such as attempting to pull the case into federal court: diversity jurisdiction isn’t available unless a claim is over $75k. But they can create difficulties through the discovery process, and other pre-trial activities.

Do I think this is viable? Possibly, but it’ll still take a fair amount of effort to have a lawyer work the case prior to trial, even if that lawyer can’t actually do the talking in front of the judge. Easily 5 digit territory to pay your lawyer. But again, this is balanced by Meta having to deal with the nuisance of having someone on their side also put in a similar amount of effort. And when the max cap for small claims is $12.5k, Meta also has enough money to just pay up and then steer their AI scrapers away from your server, saving everyone the bother. See “nuisance value lawsuits”. Also, spiteful lawsuits are a thing.

After all, it’s not like everyone is going to sue Meta in small claims court, right? Right?

In the somewhat-distant past, “trespass to chattels” is a type of lawsuit in Anglo-American law that could be raised in response to the abuse of a publicly-accessible computer system, originally meant as a remedy for the diminishment of someone’s else’s property (eg milking their cow). How the modern case law is understood, it allows the owner of a system (eg a Fediverse instance) to recover money due to a tortfeasor’s (eg Meta) conduct that interferes with the normal function of the system. The bar had been raised since the 80s, requiring direct impact to the system, not just that someone accessed the system without explicit authorization. Even outright malice does not suffice, since the test is whether the system was degraded in some way.

A run-of-the-mill scraper querying once daily wouldn’t meet the test, and something as minimal as an ICMP ping every second wouldn’t meet the test. But AI scraping to the tune of hundreds of queries per day, adding up to double digit percentage points of server bandwidth for a small Fediverse instance, that might.

That some instance operators have to consider adding more vCPUs or RAM, or operators that successfully applied blockers like Anubis, in response to AI scraping underscores how harmful – and thus potentially legally actionable – those actions are, suggesting a decent chance such a lawsuit could be successful.

Can I expose webserver, SSH, WireGuard to the internet with reasonable safety?

Yes, yes, and yes. Though in all three cases, you would want to have some sort of filtering and IPS in place, like fail2ban or similar, at an absolute minimum. There are port scanners of all kinds scanning for vulnerable software that can be exploited. Some people suggest changing the port numbers away from the default, and while security through obscurity can be a valid tactic, it alone is not a layer of your security onion.

A reverse proxy plus tunnel is a reasonable default recommendation because it is easy and prevents a large class of low-effort attacks and exploits, but tunneling has its drawbacks such as adding a component that exists outside of your direct control. It is also not a panacea. Reverse proxying alone is also workable, as it means just one point of entry to reinforce with logging and blocking.

But I feel like if I cant open a port to the internet to host a webserver then the internet is no longer a free place and we’re cooked.

The Internet is still (for now) a free place, but just like with free speech, effort must be expended to keep it free. The threats have increased and while other simpler options have arisen to fill demand for self hosting, this endeavor is about investing sufficient time and effort to keep it going.

In my estimation, it is no different then tending to a garden in the face of rising environmental calamities. You can and should do it, so long as you’re fully informed about the effort required.

The thought of layaway for tech has never crossed my mind before, and for an era where even a few months would change everything, I’m just flabbergasted. Just wow.

aren’t these kind of laws; telling a maker to make the product in a specific way, eliminating creative freedom?

In the realms of monopoly regulation, product liability, energy efficiency, or pollution emissions, to name a few examples, the objective of the law is to define a floor (read: minimum requirements) that balance competing interests. In a democratic society, the government holds the public interest in high regard, but solely focusing on just that would lead to some very strange results, some of which are too philosophical to distill into practice.

Laws on anti-competitive or unfair business practices serve to level the playing field, so that businesses cannot assert an undue advantage over competitors, often to the hindrance of a competitive market for consumers. So there are two harms: other businesses have no hope of breaking into the market, and consumers don’t get as many choices as they could have had. The fundamental idea is one of fairness.

The word “undue” is carrying a lot of weight, because some practices definitely assert an advantage to the disadvantage of everyone else: retaining all the good engineers is one such example, because good engineers can churn out good products, meaning other competitors have a harder time producing similarly-capable products. But that’s not an unnatural advantage, unless somehow the deck is being stacked to produce that result (eg bribing universities to only send the good engineers to them).

As a practical matter, flouting the law is an excellent way to get one’s products banned from the marketplace, either by mechanism of law or by alienating consumers. Take VW’s emissions scandal as an example: US State DMVs were prepared to invalidate the vehicle registrations for noncompliant automobiles already on the road, and consumers fled for other automakers, causing both the used and new prices for VW cars to drop. Many (all?) US States prohibit the sale of automobiles currently subject to a recall, with penalties for the seller. So why would anyone want to continue owning such a car, nor could they even get rid of it except by getting/suing VW to buy it back.

When a government really wants to turn the screws on a nonconforming business, they absolutely have the means to do it. And it doesn’t even require a top-down regime like what’s often said about the Chinese government.

I got my hands on a cold oxygen plasma generator

My dude, very unique opportunities seem to be a common occurrence for you. I remember when I answered your question about 240v residential power. And now a plasma generator??

Sadly, I don’t have an answer to your present inquiry, but I hope the other commenters are of aid.

Is there anything legally stopping you from making your town think you’re a gangster who robbed a bank and somehow got away with it?

If the goal is to convince other people to think you’re a bank robber, but without actually having to rob a bank, I think it could be done with much less effort and likely more effective. But this then gets into the ethical line between little white lies and outright deception or misinformation.

Because one way to achieve that goal is to doctor a bunch of evidence that would “incriminate” yourself, such as AI-generated video, then disseminate that to local reporter s, while also plastering it on social media using astroturf accounts, and might as well stuff a copy into a manila envelope and mail to the local District Attorney.

And all of that is probably legal in most jurisdictions in the USA, with the probable sole exception of intentionally wasting the prosecutor’s office’s effort, since they had not solicited such evidence. Compare this to “tip lines”, which expressly seek info and they are fully cognizant that not all the tips will be good.

I read only your comment and the first paragraph of the plot on Wikipedia, and I’m sold. It sounds like a more modern version of The Count of Monte Cristo – which I absolutely love as a novel – which then involves vampires somehow.

And I’m here for it. Added to my library reading list.

I think – but do correct me if I have this wrong – what you’re describing is a resort, which all the big casinos do have, hence “casino resort”. Resorts are truly astounding, how they basically operate their own in-house logistics. That some casinos expand to become a resort is not a coincidence, since it’s the lure that draws people, and then they stay for the food, the hotel, the shows, etc…

But there are also non-casino resorts, often located in otherwise undeveloped places that don’t have a nearby town to support all the visitors. And then at sea, there are floating resorts in the form of cruise ships, whose logistics are simply unfathomable to me.