Well, speaking for myself - I may "rent" them but I also immediately decrypt them and store a local copy elsewhere.

I don't buy media I can't decrypt, one way or another.

I likely would still be using my Kindle 3 Keyboard, except my dog got hold of it at one point.

I still think that was the best form factor they've ever offered.

Obligatory.

At Walmart, extremely low quality everything is available year-round.

I remember a documentary from decades ago (1970s or 1980s) where they made the point that, at that time anyway, middle-class people had an equivalent standard of living in many ways to what turn-of-the-20th-century rich people accomplished only with a fleet of servants, simply because of technological advancement - we now had microwaves, toasters, instant TV dinners, dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, automobiles, etc. etc.

This is mainly intended as a tangent, and is not intended to be relevant to the current discussion.

Especially since January 2025...

I've got the keys to their Rivian!

Well, it is definitely a politically-loaded question... but it doesn't seem totally unreasonable, at least based on population percentages. They said "middle class" not "rich"; this is for a family of three, which nowadays means two incomes in the majority of cases; and $133K was chosen as the very bottom of the "upper middle class" window.

Pew is considered rather less politically biased than the Wall Street Journal; but in 2022 they gave the following broad-brush definitions for a family of three:

Lower-income (28% of US population): Under $56,600 per year
Middle-income (52% of US population): Between $56,600 and $169,800 per year
Upper-income (19% of US population): Above $169,800 per year

There are certainly a lot of political side questions one could ask, like - should we really consider it to be "middle-class" if a person can't afford to buy a house?

Another YouTube "epic reaction" video! I can't wait to see how this three-plus-hours-long one differs from the 37 billion other epic reaction videos!

Yeah, I was gonna say... it's probably not Gnome itself that's the memory hog, it's almost certainly the demands from the web browser and / or email client. *

We have a computing lab which runs Linux + Gnome. Students are in the GUI almost all the time, but they're mostly running various engineering applications - they're not checking their personal email, and typically they're not randomly browsing the web. If there's only one or two students on there (remote access does get used a lot), htop typically shows < 2GB of memory usage - and almost no load.

* Not that I particularly want to defend Gnome; I think, design-wise, it's become a rather user-hostile window manager.

I think I understand why he never got anywhere with these. And no, it wasn't because of the web...

Apparently Waze exists for the sole purpose of avoiding speed traps.

I never knew that... guess I've been using it wrong all these years. I use it to minimize the time I spend on my daily commute.

I mean, that's what people said about Michelle Obama when she proposed a lot of this stuff a decade or more ago...

"Skyrocketed" above 5%, you say?

"As this shocking graph indicates..." (sorry, I couldn't find a larger image)

Their toilet isn't working.