• 968 Posts
  • 624 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: June 15th, 2023
  • cm0002@lemmy.worldtoProgrammer Humor@programming.dev•Me can compooter
    12·
    3 days ago

    I was trying to get dual 3090 passthrough working in a VM on my Proxmox server for like a week. The VM would not detect both GPUs, just the first and everything the forums and Reddit threads on this issue checked out. As far as I could tell, it was happy with everything, nothing was amiss. And yet the VM would only ever detect 1 GPU and 1 GPU audio controller.

    I spent a week on it before realizing I had put a .1 in the PCIe ID field in the VM hardware settings instead of .0. .1 references the audio controller of the second GPU and not the GPU itself lolol

  • cm0002@lemmy.worldOPtomemes@lemmy.world•Crazy? Or sensible? Guess we'll find out...
    1·
    5 days ago

    You would have no problem whatsoever if you had no company and just hosted in europe.

    As an individual it would be so much worse, what are you talking about? They’re not going to go “Oh you’re an individual hosting in the EU, guess there’s nothing we can do”

    Companies under the cloud act only have the ability to disagree if the country in question has an agreement with the us which currently only great britain has.

    That’s only applicable for the other way, e.g. Britain (as an example) requesting data from a US provider. There are 2 parts to the act, part 1 is for the SCA to be amended so that the US can compel US companies to turn over data stored overseas and part 2 authorizes the entering of these agreements with foreign governments so when those governments wants data from a US company for their citizens they can fast track it.

    The mechanism is always available if it’s the US wanting the data from a US company with overseas servers

    It’s all right there in my link

  • cm0002@lemmy.worldOPtomemes@lemmy.world•Crazy? Or sensible? Guess we'll find out...
    3·
    5 days ago

    Actually, having an LLC appears to increase my ability to defend against it

    the Act provides a mechanism for a communications provider to challenge the order if disclosing the data would risk violating foreign law. Under the CLOUD Act, the legal protection of an individual’s rights depends on the objection by a provider. There is no direct mechanism for individuals to challenge an order under the CLOUD Act. A court will consider a provider’s challenge of an order for disclosure of data data and review the request under a multi-factor “comity” analysis to assess foreign and other interests at stake. However, U.S. court can require production of that data despite the objection, even where the laws of another nation would be violated.

    https://epic.org/the-cloud-act/

    By running it under an LLC I actually have a lawful mechanism to pull, not fool proof or airtight obviously, but it’s something I wouldn’t have without the LLC

  • cm0002@lemmy.worldOPtomemes@lemmy.world•Crazy? Or sensible? Guess we'll find out...
    1·
    5 days ago

    I think you might have been running those LLCs under false information, maybe someone told you that years ago or something.

    The IRS can’t “revoke” an LLC because an LLC is a state thing, only the state of incorporation can do that. The IRS really doesn’t care if you intend to make a profit or intend to run a business, only that if you do, you pay taxes on it. An LLC isn’t even required to file a return if they don’t make a profit.

    And in most cases, Single-member LLCs (which is what I’d be opening) are dealt with on personal taxes.

    Now, there may be a state that has some weird rules on LLCs where they do need to have an intent to turn a profit out there (and maybe you opened an LLC in your home state that does have these weird rules), but not with any of the “common” states (e.g. Nevada, Wyoming, Delaware)

    Though, I’d be happy to take a look at a link/source you have of something that is directly related to what I’m doing, but I’ve already done a fair amount of research into this and this is the first I’m hearing of requiring an intention of profit

  • cm0002@lemmy.worldOPtomemes@lemmy.world•Crazy? Or sensible? Guess we'll find out...
    1·
    5 days ago

    But that doesn’t say anything about LLCs needing to be run with intent for profit, it’s just a list of factors the IRS put out to help people determine if what they’re doing is considered an actual business or just a hobby. And not a single one said “opening an LLC”.

    Lots of people open LLCs for lots of reasons other than a business to make profit, because it’s a cheap and easy way to get some liability protections

  • cm0002@lemmy.worldOPtomemes@lemmy.world•Crazy? Or sensible? Guess we'll find out...
    51·
    6 days ago

    Actually, neither is true, an LLC can in fact be run as a non-profit, what you’re thinking of is going public. Then yea, you gotta start making line go up (or promise line will go up really soon) because once you go public then you have shareholders and a board to answer to

    A plain private LLC though you can do what ever you want to with it (within legal reason ofc)

    It’s even theoretically possible to get 501©3 status on an LLC (though it’s rather tedious and not guaranteed, so its almost always is spun off to another entity for that)