Rich people don't liquidate assets when they want to buy something.

They get a loan against their assets. At extremely good rates. And no, they never pay them back. The strategy is called "buy, borrow, die".

First, you need to understand that if the stock price goes up more than their (low) interest rate, they're still making money.

Second, the whole thing is rolled up only when the ultra-rich person dies. The assets are revalued to their current market price at the time of death, wiping out decades of built-in capital gains tax liability. The estate can then sell a portion of the tax-free assets to pay off the outstanding loans.

tl;dr: They don't liquidate assets, if they did they'd have to pay taxes.

The reason for that isn't socialism, though. It's incompetence and corruption. Politics attracts the most incompetent and the most corrupt of people, always has and always will. Basically: If you're shit at everything else, you can always try making a career of telling other people what to do.

In theory. In reality, that has always been bullshit. The various bubbles, crashes and other events prove that. Valuations on the stock market are based on expectations, and expectations always include an element that is not rational.

True, though both of these companies do have an actual business and actual assets. There's plenty of companies on the stock market whose entire business can just pack up and leave tomorrow. Many of those are extremely highly valued. All the middle-men companies (ride sharing, food delivery, etc.) all work on the principle of outsourcing EVERYTHING. They hold no actual assets and their entire business model can be copied in a lazy weekend. Each and every one of them survives due to brand recognition, habit and by being just a little bit better in some way than alternatives. All of which can disappear in a week.

Tesla and SpaceX are overvalued. But they have factories and a workforce and produce things.Their value is not entirely made up.

We're going to Mars. This is unstoppable money now. They raised three years of NASA budget in one day, becoming worth more as a company than the accumulated total budget of NASA since inception, adjusted for inflation.

Then again, he didn't issue 'pre-emptive' pardons for his family, friends, crackhead son, etc yet,

The only reason Biden issued those pardons was because Trump was bragging about how he was going to weaponize the DOJ to go after people.

As for the clemencies, that does not absolve the person of the crime they committed. All it does is show mercy on them.

Compare that to all the January 6th terrorists who have been pardoned. And now there's talk of paying them for their troubles. No, not the $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund*. There is still talk of paying these people for their crimes.

* Anti-weaponization is straight out of Orwell. Or the Soviet Union. Take your pick. Apparently imprisoning people who attack police aren't criminals in his eyes.

Yes, Lenovo had this feature. They were called the Yoga.

if expense is the concern, don't buy a mac book

Fixed it for you.

Reminds me of that post (quoting from memory) where a guy says the reason he needs to own a gun is because if his child needs an operation, no one's going to stop him from going to Italy where it's cheaper.

When someone builds a company and new product, they are creating wealth. The companies he owns are the net worth.

The only reason he has these companies is because of socialism. He has received billions in taxpayer money to keep his companies alive.

Side note, the same federal agency doling out taxpayer money to him is the same one he targeted under DOGE.

Double side note, Musk whined about another stimulus package after covid, while taking an unknown amount of money from the U.S. taxapyer during covid despite his company being worth $270 billion at that time.

For a slightly longer version of the amount of money the socialist has taken from the U.S. taxpayer, read on.

Yeah, and Russia deliberately targetting train stations, hospitals, maternity hospitals, schools, apartment blocks, churches, and a whole host of civilian sites is perfectly good.

If you're a soldier invading someone else's country, you should expect that country wil do whatever it takes to repel you. You're on their territory. Killing you is their job. Striking anything that supports the war effort has been done for centuries. You think the Allies didn't bomb German factories, oil depots, railheads, or other such targets?

Get a grip.

Killing people invading your country is a war crime? You Russians really are drunks.

I can read. Of course expected, that's implicit in "future" unless someone discovered clairvoyance.

So again, in other words: What do people base those expectations on when so far the company hasn't made any profit at all? In a profitable company, I can extrapolate. I can assume "with X additional cash raised, they can build Y more factories, selling Z more goods." - but for a company that is negative and is making a LOSS on every customer at the moment, growth does not equal profit, it equals more loss.

EU should just order META split up as an illegal garbage monopoly.

Maybe. There's a feature called user namespaces in Linux that effectively allows an unprivileged user to act as if they were a privileged user within a specific environment. (Basically, containerization.) Within such a namespace, a non-privileged user could conceptually access nf_tables as if they were a privileged user. In theory this would only allow them to add additional filters within the namespace, but the vulnerability here can provide direct access to kernel memory.

Some distros add additional layers of security to prevent flaws like that, blocking access to nf_tables even within a namespace, but the vulnerability links to ways around those. (Link to the Wayback Machine from the source vulnerability disclosure.)

It's possible your distro may be secure - or it may not be. It depends on what features are enabled.

Which is great, when they're in transit. But once they're on-device, they're decrypted, and then Apple has access to them.

We know this, because there have been court cases where iCloud-subpeonaed iMessage messages were presented as evidence.

Just because the transit is secure, doesn't mean the endpoints are.