Already compressed files like video don’t meaningfully compress more. Compression isn’t magic.

I do believe the people previously loaning money on the property get paid BEFORE the government so the net effect of seizure isn’t seizure FROM innocent parties. So if he owes 100M on a 80M property I’m wondering if the seizure goes through at all as there is no value to seize. if he owes 80M on a 100M property the government gets the 20M and keeps taking his shit. I suspect that the government ends up seizing a broad swath of property and holds it while they figure out what they have actually gotten and it takes months to actually shake out. I think if he’s under water he’ll end up losing it by virtue of being under water in the loan. In WA understandably a different state this is an issue with commercial property. If its revalued at less than the loan the loan can be called.

Here is an interesting question in the example case where he owes 500M on a 300M property ergo negative equity can the government still force the sale when the expected return is negative ergo the government expects to get nothing? Alternatively are seizures irrespective of expected return and if it turns out to be overvalued it’s his problem?

If a property is seized the government only gets the equity that the owner had in it so if Trump owns a 2B in property but owes 1.5B then the government may seize all 2B in order to satisfy the debt he owes the government. Worse the government will try to get as much value as possible but the value realized by a short term sale may be less than could have been realized had the customer had time to find the appropriate buyer. So if they only get 300M they can seize additional properties to satisfy the debt.

Nobody in their right mind wants the government doing this for them instead of mortgaging and or selling their own stuff. He committed such obvious fraud he should have known the jig was up when it went to trial and started seeking buyers or mortgaging. They could have self funded an appeal bond hoping to reduce the damages and prepared for worst case losing it all.

I think when we discuss large volumes of paper it is often the case that much of it is irrelevant and not overly hard to sort an analyze. EG he is asserting that its impossible for him to afford to do this. You don’t need to actually keep reading the statements of his resources to each of the 30 institutions he applied to nor all the refusals unless its likely that something therein may be meaningful. We can probably read ONE and skim another and conclude that the statement that he can’t raise the bond by pledging encumbered real estate he’s constantly lied about won’t work.

This isn’t bail with a small risk of loss paid for by the guaranteed loss of 10% to the bondsman. This is 99% Chance of loss on a settled case with the reasonable expectation that Trump would fight collection tooth and nail, try to pay less than face via bankruptcy etc. It’s a risk of hundreds of millions of dollars that would take YEARS to settle. Years in which lenders could be earning returns if that money was invested elsewhere. 30 institutions said no.

He needs to secure the loan with cash or cash equivalents for the whole shebang. Nobody wants properties which he has already borrowed against even if the net of value and loan are positive to the tune of hundreds of millions its risky and challenging to sell. He should have started mortgaging when the judge told him he’d lost and they were only determining the scope of the loss so he could have obtained favorable terms.

Yes we know from the reports of the documents that they included nuclear secrets and human intelligence sources. The later could cause people who are spying for us to be prosecuted and murdered and the mere suggestion that an idiot could leak this data has probably unfixably damaged our ability to collect intel for the next 20 years.

Secret evidence is literally allowed all the time when dealing with secrets if the document in question is specs of nuclear weapons you redact all the strategically important info and allow them to see the header and subject matter without all the details.

Moderating herein means kicking and banning people whose behavior is unacceptable or locking and removing individual posts and comments that are unacceptable. For instance a conservative sub may have threads on the virtues of tax cuts for the rich by relatively normal folks and threads calling for lynching black folks for imaginary crimes.

I believe the rich should pay their fair share but I sure hope someone normal is willing to allow the former and ban the latter even if the would be lynch mobs threads are couched in polite and indefinite language while they spread their lies and hate. I feel like a normal fellow might be better situated to make such a distinction than someone of a conservative bent who is looking to follow the bare letter of the law so to speak.

65% of rural America voted for Trump in 2020 nearly half 47% believe the election was stolen that’s half of all rurals not half of rural Republicans. Support for political violence is high with 1 in 3 Republicans nationwide and higher yet in rural America. It is easier for violence to take root where their is monocultural acceptance of the false premises used to justify it.

Firstly who cares who a Palestinian thinks about an American presidential election? Next Why on earth would you imagine that Trump would withdraw “support” from Israel. Our support is mostly selling them arms. He supports Israel. He supports their actions.

For practical purposes its capturing revenue from OEMs and users. Android being open source if they didn’t completely sabotage an actual open source market they could well find OEMs or third parties capturing those dollars or indeed those unearned dollars evaporating in a competitive market. Think the IBM PC and Microsoft.

SU software has been a thing for about as long as android about 20 years or about. Has otherwise legitimate su been a source of unattended exploiting?

The obvious risk factors are that users shall be tricked into granting inappropriate permissions to otherwise malicious or compromised software that they have deliberately installed. Outside of mobile platforms this is considered an acceptable risk that competent users can consistently successfully manage on their own hardware.

In fact if you look at actual users even those with very limited technical know how the primary thing that

The secondary risk is that users with no legit source of tools to root

if you use an exploit to gain SU what makes you think a malicious app can’t do the same

They can. 99% of computer security is still not installing malware or being tricked into taking actions that enable your own harm. That said often rooting methods involve physically pressing keys while booting to access the boot loader, ADB, running things with with expansive permissions. Malicious apps install via play store with reasonable permissions will generally have a much harder time breaking out of the sandbox.

Or better yet, find a new exploit in the SU management software you installed

Historically “sudo” tools haven’t been the source of many issues whereas a multitude of problems flowed from complex memory unsafe code.

As soon as you root, you can no longer guarantee root activities are not taking place unbeknownst to you

You can never guarantee this however if you are careful what you install you will remain safe same as it was before.