They buy SSDs. I can also say this in reverse - sure SSDs are fast, but why should I spend more if I am not planning to transfer the data faster than 100mbps or maybe sometimes 1gbps?

It will be useful for archiving and other stuff that needs lot of space and does not require high speeds. Unless the price of an SSD of the same capacity drops below that of a HDD, there will be uses for hard drives.

I buy only enterprise-grade drives and they seem to work. To be fair, I use them in servers running 24/7 so I would rather just spend a bit more to get the better reliability. I do not particularly care about the manufacturers, so when I need to buy more drives, I just buy whatever is the cheapest that is enterprise-grade and not SMR. So far they all seem to work.

Not all data needs to be read/written that fast though. Sometimes the data slowly accumulates and just mostly sits there, for example in an email server or a backup server.
Yeah, rebuilding the array would take a long time, but most of the time the transfer rate would be good enough.

Reducing energy costs should come from using cheaper fuels to produce the energy, reducing taxes on fuel, eliminating carbon tax and other crap that makes energy expensive.

Yeah, I'm sure people could survive on just $999M. They wouldn't even need to work anymore. They could stop their companies and lay everyone off.
Or, you know, they could just move to a different country and take their businesses there. I'm sure the workers in the US will be able to build their own paradise with no stinky capitalists.

He still has friends in high places and abilities. I don't think it would take him too long to go back to at least a billion.
Especially since others would likely be similarly "reduced" and looking for ways to rebuild what they lost in another country. I am also sure that multiple countries would want them and at least offer tax breaks if not even subsidies.

I do not live in the US, so I would not be voting there anyway, but if something like that happened in my country, those politicians would be on a permanent blacklist for me. I mean, sure, today they took money from some rich people, but if that continues, I may end up on top of that list even without having a million EUR.
the Communists in the USSR sent lots of people to Siberia, not just super-rich factory owners.

The good thing is that politicians are rich, so they would not want to do that to themselves and their friends.
I am sure people like Musk could make at least some of the money back, but it would be after leaving the US. The socialist-US, much like the USSR would eventually run out of other people's money and collapse.

I am sure there are some empty places in the US that would be suitable for this purpose.

Or he would just leave before the law went into effect. I know I would. Why the hell would I stay in a country that threatened to take most my money, then evict me from my house (houses usually cost more than 330k) for the crime of having too much money legally?

So, yeah, I would not approve of that, even if the proposal would be changed so there was no risk to me and it only applied to the real bourgeoisie. My country was occupied by the USSR and I can just go and ask my parents about how "nice" it was to live there.

I think the best would be to just take the top 1%, seize their property and send them to Siberia. Oh, this is the US, well, I'm sure there are some empty places in the US where you could put some unwanted people.
Do that every few years and you will have paradise.

Not really, the stock holders will still want their returns and the stock holders will be moving to some other country that would not have this law.

Yeah, I don't get the hiding extensions part. I never used a Mac. The extensions were visible in DOS and Windows 3.1, but for Windows 95 started hiding them. Making the extensions visible is one of the first things I do on a new install.

That, to me, looks less convenient than having file extensions.

Another way to do it would be to analyze the file contents to determine the type, but that also has its own issues - opening a large directory over a slow network connection would be annoying if the PC would start downloading all of them just to figure out their types. While some files have a clearly defined header (png for example), others may not (a php file may start with <html>) so it is not that easy to determine this.
Just having a type field somewhere would IMO be the same as just storing the extension there and it being more difficult to change it if needed and the extension being hidden (what Windows does by default).

I can use Notepad to create a script (.bat or .ps1), a php file a html file and a bunch of other files that would then need to be opened differently.
How did that work on the Mac OS?

renaming .bat to .txt to open it with a text editor on a double click makes sense to me.

Although, if the type was specified separately in the filesystem and was easy o change that would work as well I guess.

That's interesting. Is there a way to make bash tab completion to be case insensitive? I really hate it when I accidentally name a file with an uppercase character.