They stay on the street in front of your building

You mean like every other municipality in the United States?

It hasn’t even been in existence for 15 years, literally any adult with an income can imagine what life without Airbnb is like.

To be pedantic, they have a navy, just no large ships in said navy.

You overestimate the worth of your inconvenience.

It’s not reasoning, or an argument for or against, it is just a statement. I’d admit that it’s probably a tautology.

What the post described is a taxation and societal problem, not a problem with investing or compound interest in general.

I’d easily agree that society is unfair, and that our taxation policies are directly antagonistic to the middle class, but again, this is simply math (and though it is theoretical, microeconomics).

The best description I have seen for single store franchisees is, you’ve paid a lot to give yourself a job. They are not lucrative, and in fact, are capital intensive, and often predatory.

There is a very high up front cost, and you generally do not own the real estate. This means you are locked into 30 year leases, often with complicated terms that are solely beneficial to the land owner.

Next, with regards to liquidity, if you don’t own the real estate, you often can’t get multiple business loans with a single franchise, so you must secure the loan with your personal assets, which means you will go personally bankrupt if you hit a rough patch.

Then, after dealing with the complicated business to business transactions and legal work, you still have to deal with the corporate bullshit, taxes, and supervisory duties, particularly if you do not already have a strong business partner to do this for you.

Pretty much, unless you are independently wealthy, own the real estate in a high traffic location, or already have multiple other franchises, it’s a losing venture that will kill your soul and eat every dollar you have.

Tens of thousands of children, killed or injured. And people wonder how the Palestinians become radicalized against Israel, the West, and the United States, or why there can’t be peace in the Middle East?

Forgiveness is probably the furthest thing from being on their minds.

What does fairness have to do with it? Compound interest is just math.

One could trivially make an argument that we should redistribute the wealth among the population, but there is not a clear way how to do this effectively, or it would have been done already.

The hard part is taking on the appropriate amount of risk in order to actualize those gains; a bank won’t just give you a 10% interest rate, you have to work your ass of for it. An entrepreneur needs to assess the landscape and invest in what the market will want tomorrow, and most people guess suboptimally (3-6%), or end up losing money, whether in fact (negative returns) or relative to inflation (0-3%).

Even pointing to the S&P 500, as most people do, you still need to make the conscious decision to sell and take profits, FOMO be damned. Or alternatively, taking a perceived loss but actual profit (e.g., you didn’t sell right at the peak, but that’s usually okay). It’s not easy, and most people don’t have the time or stomach for it; these people are best served by long term, government-backed bonds, after which you will come out only slightly ahead of inflation.

Using the rule of 72, and a 3% bond rate, it would actually take you 24 years to double your money, not seven. And that, my friend, is why you and I are not billionaires.

And guess what those business have? Valuations. Stock price is just an aggregate indicator of the valuation for a company, for the given percentage of shares that are publicly traded. But private companies have valuations, too, and even if they’re not tied to a public stock offering, those valuations are used to form these Billionaire lists.

Same thing with real estate. The value of any asset is based on what someone is willing to pay. Sometimes, you’ll find some crazy billionaire or investment firm who grossly overvalues an asset relative to their peers, and that insane overvaluation does get rolled into those lists.

But such is the nature of economics. You’ve neither gained nor lost value until someone pays you. Until then, it’s anyone’s guess.

It’s not like these billionaires are spending this money, so it’s just been invested for 7 years. What’s the old adage, Rule of 72? Given a 10% rate of return, they would be expected to double their money in…

…seven years.

While the tax policies certainly aren’t helping the majority of the population, let’s not pretend compound interest isn’t a thing.

MMORPGs are an easy example, where people form recognizable identities and communities in game. An extension of this would be Second Life, and somewhat more recently, VRChat.

From my understanding, the impetus was that F5 submitted a CVE for a vulnerability, for an optional, “beta” feature that can be enabled. Dounin did not think a CVE should be submitted, since he did not considered it to be “production” feature.

That said, the vulnerability is in shipping code, regardless of whether it is optional or not, so per industry coding practices, it should either be patched or removed entirely in order to resolve the issue.

Authentication is, explicitly, the process of validating that you are who you say you are. Like biometrics, your username is part of your digital identity. So you are correct in arguing that biometrics alone is little stronger than a username, but by definition, both are part of authentication.

That said, to securely authenticate your identity, you need to use multiple factors.

Could you? Yes. But there really is no point— biometrics alone are only a single factor for authentication.

You should have at least two of the three— something you are (fingerprint, facial, or retinal recognition), something you have (badge, token, secure device), and something you know (passphrase).

If they are also sending a validation email, it would fail, so no issue.

Hope they actually have interiors this time.

Because they don’t get the benefit of claiming it’s philanthropy if it is enforced.

This is absolutely standard, due process. Say what you will, he is entitled to an appeal.

We need to have capitalism. We need to have economic freedom.

Freedom to do what, Nikki?

freedom to do or be anything they want to be without government getting in the way.”

Freedom to exploit anything for profit, got it.

So if it’s not illegal, it’s fair game. And guess what wasn’t illegal until the Thirteenth Amendment? And guess what we had to do in order to pass that amendment?

Fight a civil war, right.

1. From the title of your article and your executive summary, the premise of your paper is that CVSS is flawed, and CITE is your solution.
2. From the title of your article, and choice of name, “QHE CVSS Alternative; CITE”. CVSS is a VULNERABILITY Scoring System. CITE, as your propose, is a THREAT evaluation tool. You can see how one could have the impression that they were incorrectly being used interchangeably.

As you yourself stated, CVSS does exactly what it says on the box. It provides a singular rating for a software vulnerability, in a vacuum. It does not prescribe to do anything more, and it does a good job doing what it sets out to do (including specifically as an input to other quantitative risk calculations).

Compare what with attack?

Your methodology heavily relies on “the analysis of cybersecurity experts”, and in particular, frequently references “exploit chains”, mappings which are not clearly defined, and appears to rely on the knowledge of the individual practitioner, rather than existing open frameworks. MITRE ATT&CK and CAPEC already provide such a mapping, as well as a list of threat actor groups leveraging tactics, techniques, and procedures (e.g., exploitation of a given CVE). Here’s a good articlewhich maps similarly to how we operate our cybersecurity program.

I think there is a lot on the mark in your article about the issues with cybersecurity today, but again, I believe that your premise that CVSS needs replacing is flawed, and I don’t think you provided a compelling case to demonstrate how/why it is flawed. If anything, I think you would agree that if organizations are exclusively using CVSS scores to prioritize remediation, they’re doing it wrong, and fighting an impossible battle. But this means the organization’s approach is wrong, not CVSS itself.

Your article stands better alone as a proposal for a methodology for quantifying risk and threat to an organization (or society?), rather than as a takedown of CVSS.