inserting themselves into this and grading the used PC's in the market is only going to end up driving up prices for those of us who don't buy new PC's.

I seriously doubt they will have success in doing that. They're still old PCs being sold off for a reason; usually because they are outdated.

What this has a potential to do is provide reasons a used device should sell at even Less value than it currently sells for on the used market. Consumers can get their PCFax report and send it back as "Item not described" due to having obvious defects which the seller failed to disclose, etc. Used units that are truly lightly used would have a higher value.

People will have a harder time getting their Old equipment to sell unless provide the relevant disclosures and set a lower price taking them into account.

More detailed disclosures to buyers are good; and I would suggest that the auction platforms such as eBay make a disclosure of that data mandatory unless it's a "Unit may be not functional, No warranty and no returns of dead-on-arrival units. As-IS For Parts only" listing.

should be a small dedicated chip that is able to monitor usage of at least the screen, the battery, the read/writes to the SSD

Actually I would say each of those components, and the main board should have an IC added that counts and reports its own cumulative usages. It's perfectly fine to replace the SSD with a brand new one that can upgrade the storage capacity, performance, and remaining lifetime on that storage module and increase the value of the unit. In fact storage devices generally already have/had all these counters built in as part of the SMART protocol.

Just create an additional SMART protocol for each component believed to be worth monitoring that counts the power-on hours, number of operations, numbers of different kinds of errors reported by either the device or error reported by the core system firmware back to that chip, and log for each component. The big ones IMO would be the main board itself and its PCI buses (Bus error counters), each PCI device, each power supply, and especially each DDR SDRAM module.

You would ideally have a hardware test suite which performs a designated "burn-in test" for 24 hours that includes a RAM test and reports any failures on a component back to the chip on that component to be logged.

It's perfectly fine to replace the screen with a new one; and shouldn't count for or against its value on a used market. For goodness sakes it's some $50 LCD module - not the engine of an automobile, and most of your errors could have been repaired by replacing something such as a $5 capacitor on the board. Not something requiring a detailed history report.

why every space-venturing company on the planet should be subject to a $50 billion dollar deposit immediately.

I don't think the space-venturing companies will ever agree to that one. Most likely they'll just find a third-world country to reach an agreement with about launching their equipment from who is willing to do so without an obscenely high deposit.

Do they make so much money from shady sites that they do not care about their reputation?

Try B. It does not meaningfully affect Amazon's reputation, because people don't even notice most of the time.

And C. The 3rd party merchants undercutting Nintendo pricing are not selling counterfeit products anyway.

This is a type of arbitrage, and not counterfeit items: Enterprising sellers were buying Nintendo products in bulk in Southeast Asia and exporting them to the US

If we can land on an asteroid, I think we can certainly figure out a way to land on a dead satellite
The asteroids landed on are much larger than manmade satellites like this one.

Besides where are you getting the money for this project? Because i'm pretty sure the US or NASA can't pay for or is not willing to allocate their limited funds towards such a thing; considering this satellite is 1 out of 3000. It's at best an uneconomical feat to even try to land on more than a few; not to mention the environmental impact of consuming massive fuel quantities in effort to push structures out of orbit.

And how exactly do you propose we do that?

Of course we can likely track the position of large dead satellites, but attempting to recapture it is an entirely different matter, and certainly easier said than done.

Apple should be entitled to control their platform and take whatever percentage in the store they like

ONLY if Apple follows the law. They are not above the law, including antitrust laws, and new digital markets laws that need to be written to close loopholes. The Apple app store is a marketplace in which Apple enjoys a monopoly. You can't use your monopoly in a marketplace to ban competing payment processors and force YOUR processing fee on all transactions.

Tor has existed since 2002, and on Android since 2018.

Well aware of Tor. It's not ideal for common usage scenarios. One is that it is often slow due to the Tor network and performance can be inconsistent, but apart from Tor's performance considerations, and resource requirements:

Using Tor in itself also makes you stand out. The Tor exit nodes' IP addresses are well-known, and not only will you still be tracked by websites. You are adding a datapoint about you on them for websites you do log in to. Getting marked as a Tor user adds many hassles - at a minimum you are getting bombarded with CAPTCHAs, and most likely getting banned from some websites due to being detected as a Tor user. The other thing is you are under constant Adversary In the Middle attacks. Most of the actual content of your connections is HTTPS, but you better believe every bit of your traffic that you don't encrypt is being analyzed by both criminals, nosy node operators, and government agencies all around the world.

Anyways; it's great that Tor exists, but it's not the ideal solution on its own for casual browsing separating websites to prevent tracking while browsing and still logging in to some websites without creating major risks.

It is a neat idea. How come this is on iOS only, however? You would think the desktop would be the first target.

My thinking is on mobile devices people use mostly apps and do a minimal amount of surfing. If you do a lot of web activities - the Desktop is a far more efficient place to work.

Will we be able to enable backup to get the extension, then turn backup back off and uninstall it but keep the time extension?

Microsoft keeps showing me nag screens asking me to turn that on. I click the closest thing to No every time,
but even if I click "Opt out of backup" they don't have an option to stop nagging you; only a "Remind me later"

Why are they trying to sell this Backup bullshit so hard?

I asked Gemini, Claude and Copilot, and each had no problem implementing FizzBuzz in CSS.

I'm sure those bots can do a generic FizzBuzz, but there is no way they can write a program that follows the specifications above which require collecting user Input and providing customizability.

I probably wouldn't hire anyone who listed CSS (or HTML) as one of their programming languages.

I would send them a programming exercise.

"This task is to be completed using only the following programming language which we have chosen from your profile:
CSS. Your solution must use only CSS; no Java, no Javascript, etc."

Assignment:
Write the program fizzbuz.

Program Specifications:
When started the program asks the user to input a Starting number and then an Ending number. Both inputs should be integers.

After the user completes input: Display on the screen the difference between the Starting number and the Ending number as the Difference number.

If the difference number is greater than zero, then the program loops using an iterator beginning at the Starting number and incrementing up to the Ending number inclusive by 1 each time printing the number followed by a message on the line by itself for each iteration within the loop.

The following rules shall be used to determine the message printed at each iteration of the loop described above:

For whole numbers divisible by 8 the message shall be Fizz.

For whole numbers the message shall be Buzz.

For all other positive integers the message shall be Nop

For any other number the message shall be Err

Upon loop completion the program shall display on a line by itself the name of each Message that appeared with numbers, and a count of the total number of appearances.

The messages to be displayed shall not be hardcoded for any specific counter value to a specific message option. The user should be given the option but not requirement to specify or change the messages used before the loop starts.

No VSphere Essentials very specifically said that it was *not* for production workloads in the licensing terms. I would not be surprised if people abused that but that is different from it being allowed.

This is not quite how it was. Essentials has no license restriction against production use. You would not be included VMware production-ready technical support, but that is not a restriction on the usage of Essentials. In fact VMware specifically encouraged the product for internal business operations with small businesses just starting out with virtualization. Essentials kits were paid, and they were always allowed for the same business purposes that Standard or Enterprise editions were allowed.

For non-production usage environments specifically testing virtualization software VMware would actually issue out NFR licenses for Enterprise+ and vCenter all day every day which they did not even charge a fee for. So long as you wiped all your servers and reinstalled them every week or so; you wouldn't have needed any Essentials kit for a non-production server

There was an Essentials Pro version that *WAS* designed for production use

I know.. All of the VMware products were marketed for production use when they were available for sale, and they were awesome about being a hypervisor. The problem with the later thinking by VMware was they were going to sell you on management, but massively overprovisioned hardware does not need complicated management. 99% of the Investment should be in the Hardware; and all the complexity is the development of the hardware itself. The software is simple. Hypervisor function is built into the CPU, and the hypervisor is just an OS to drive it.

VMware started offering Essentials Plus back in 2009 with vMotion in VSphere 4.x; for approximately $3500 you got 1 vCenter usable with ESXi for Essentials only. 3 ESXi hosts per kit. 2 CPU Sockets per host Unlimited CPU cores Maximum 32 Gigabytes of RAM per CPU socket so 64 GB per host. The per-host and per-cluster RAM limits were later dropped from the Essentials plus kit in vSphere 5.5 giving you a pretty cool solution. Think about this for a second: in 2025 we have servers that can be equipped with 8 Terabytes of RAM per ESXi host and 144 CPU Cores per socket for a total of approximately 288 cores. You could easily run several thousands of VMs on a host that back in 5.5 days when these kits came out could run a dozen VMs. You would run into limitations with your hypervisor not having been properly programmed to handle the massive amount of cores and RAM before your hardware was ever under strain.

And, no, they shouldn't still be supporting 32-bit computers.

I agree with that.. But as for hardware drivers: There are components which people can have purchased brand new a few years ago which are now "Unsupported" by the manufacturer, because the model was arbitrarily retired and a newer upgrade model was introduced with no actual improvements.