Dunedan

> Sorry, but throwing someone on the floor in front of the congress building for registering clearly sarcastic domains such as "hitler.rocks" and "nuke.africa" is just not what I understand under anti-facism.

I'm not familiar with what happened there, but at least to me these domain names are definitely not "clearly sarcastic".

I had the same experience when dealing with IONOS when I encountered a problem a while ago where the databases of managed websites were suddenly empty. As I couldn't determine why, I contacted the IONOS support, which after some back and forth admitted that they were having a database related incident going on and that the databases will get restored later on. Indeed, a few hours later the databases suddenly weren't empty anymore and contained the data they did contain before. During all of that their status page stayed entirely green as well.

As usual be attentive and suspicious when using such tools as its suggestions might not be appropriate. For example let's take the following code:

  with open("foo") as a:
      contents = a.read(100)

Running it through refurb produces the following suggestion:

> main.py:1:1 [FURB101]: Use `y = Path(x).read_text()` instead of `with open(x, ...) as f: y = f.read()`

0ad is still not really optimized for multiple CPU cores. So with the right settings it'll happily utilize 100% of a single CPU core, but won't utilize all of your CPU cores.

I don't if Intel is doing the same, but AMD's chiplet-based Zen 2 and Zen 3 processors use a less dense manufacturing process (12nm) for their IO-die than for their CPU-die (7nm), which results in the IO-die being comparable large.

I run AOSP and can confirm the claims of the parent comment. It's not just OEM customizations, Android itself got way more memory hungry in the past years.

Regularly I can't even have two apps running at once without one of them being force unloaded and that's with all the "battery optimizations" disabled, because without it's even worse.

> Firecracker is comparable to QEMU; they are both VMMs that utilize KVM, a hypervisor built into the Linux kernel.

That's not accurate: While KVM is mandatory for Firecracker, it isn't for QEMU.

tl;dr: The article describes the details of Firecrackers architecture and CVE-2019-18960, which (as you can imagine) got fixed long ago.

If you omit the "www" HTTPS is working as well: https://brouter.de/brouter-web/

I guess with "1K" they mean 1080p, because then it'd suddenly make sense. I'd be really curious who made the mistake of calling it "1K".

AWS Fargate uses Firecracker as well.

> The enclave solution we use currently on our cloud servers is a technology called SGX built into Intel server processors. Intel’s SGX protects against introspection by encrypting RAM as it’s written into memory and decrypting it as it’s read out. Keys associated with this encryption never leave the underlying CPU, so they’re not accessible to the server owners or anyone else with access to server infrastructure. Someone with access to read the memory space of the program could not access the data because it’s encrypted, and they don’t have the keys to decrypt it. And in Signal’s case, we don’t have these keys either.

Reading this it seems Signal still relies on SGX not being as broken and insecure as it is. I find that quite disappointing to be honest.

Continental Europe has a synchronous power grid, so Amazon can also use electricity produced outside of Germany for its German data centers.

Amazon invests a lot in its own wind and solar parks. Because of that, energy prices on the open market shouldn't affect them too much.

Read more about that at https://sustainability.aboutamazon.com/environment/renewable...

Why didn't you just move the 16GB of RAM from the 11th Gen model to the 12th Gen model? Both use DDR4 after all, don't they?

> The DIMMs were expensive and didn't have broad compatibility. They should have made them in a regular DDR3/4/5 format and half the cost of main memory, or 2x to 4x the density for the same price.

Were the prices intentionally high or was that just because they couldn't compete with the economies of scale of DRAM manufacturers?

Your setup doesn't factor in labor cost and has a vastly lower durability.

That's not to say that S3 is superior compared to your setup, but it's a different solution for different needs.

> I was referencing the full pricing page for s3 that breaks down by region and class.

You were referring to the announcements and these announcements are still available.

The actual pricing pages of course only show current prices. What would be the motivation for AWS to show outdated prices there as well? No other company I can think of does that and given the complexity of the pricing structure for AWS services that'd only confuse users even more.

> A lot of price decreases also might have happened silently (without a blog post)

Do you have an example for that or is this just hearsay?

> or as de facto decreases (widely but privately negotiated, e.g. "sticker price")

Privately negotiated deals aren't regular price reductions as they're only available for customers with a fairly large spend for such AWS services.

> It's hard to come to a firm conclusion since pricing data is held very secretly (AWS quickly deletes announcements of historical price decreases).

That's not correct. Here is the history of every (properly tagged) price reduction AWS ever announced: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/category/price-reduction/

> Yet, AWS S3 pricing hasn't decreased as fast as the underlying storage costs. > […] > Another blog post analyzes the same theory for compute and finds a similar story using pricing data from AWS EC2.

AWS used to do frequent price reductions years ago. At a certain point they seem to have stopped doing that and are now only doing them rarely. That's really a shame as there are still a lot of AWS offerings which are priced way too high (data transfer being the most prominent one).

It'll be interesting to see if and up to which point AWS will keep the prices stable with raising inflation.

You likely can very soon. Linus Tech Tips just fitted a Steam Deck with an engineering sample of a Micron M.2 2230 2TB SSD: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXhT13oZchA&t=122s

Something like that already exists and is called "ICE Sprinter".

Unfortunately there is no English Wikipedia page about it, but here is the German one: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICE_Sprinter

Sorry for being harsh, but it is really screwed up for Firefox users. For me it's completely unusable, because when trying to filter it freezes for more than 20 seconds before displaying the filtered values. And that's on a rather recent desktop PC.

There is an open bug report regarding that, however nothing has happened in the past year to fix it: https://github.com/vantage-sh/ec2instances.info/issues/586

That brings back some very fond memories. Another game included in MS-DOS was Nibbles. I still remember wrapping my head around how Nibbles worked, as the source code didn't seem to fit the actual logic being run. It just looked way too short and simple. That's before I discovered how to view the source code of functions in QBasic. Then it clicked.

The Internet Archive has these games available to play by the way:

https://archive.org/details/NibblesQbasic

https://archive.org/details/GorillasQbasic

Aside from the potential stability concerns already mentioned in sibling comments, the aluminum case is essential for dispersing heat, as the MacBook Air relies on passive cooling instead of using a fan.

Another way to achieve that would be to contribute to Open Source software. Github for example awarded a badge to developers who contributed to libraries which are used by the helicopter on Mars to make such achievements more transparent: https://github.blog/changelog/2021-04-19-new-badge-for-devel...

As AWS doesn't price services based on carbon footprint, you can't infer the carbon footprint from the cost.

I agree however that certain AWS services are disproportional expensive.

> The final result is a chip that lets AWS sell each Graviton 3 core at a lower price, while still delivering a significant performance boost over their previous Graviton 2 chip.

That's not correct. AWS sells Graviton 3 based EC2 instances at a higher price than Graviton 2 based instances!

For example a c6g.large instance (powered by Graviton 2) costs $0.068/hour in us-east-1, while a c7g.large instance (powered by Graviton 3) costs $0.0725/hour [1]. Both instances have the same core count and memory, although c7g instances have slightly better network throughput.

I believe that is pretty unusual as, if my memory serves me right, newer instances family generations are usually cheaper than the previous generation.

[1]: https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/

> Makes one wonder if Tesla's best days are in the past.

Their days of biggest EV market share? Probably. Their best days however? I doubt that.

Compared to other car manufacturers Tesla currently has the following advantages:

- multiple years of technical lead (giga casting, structural battery pack, 4680 cells, ...)

- no corporate debt

- way better gross margins

- much higher production numbers

- a supply chain which is already able to support their high production numbers

> Even if the Cybertruck is delivered in 2023, how can it possibly compete?

All car manufacturers are currently supply constraint when it comes to EVs and I believe that'll still be the case for a few years going forward. While supply already increases, demand seems to increase even more, based on the lead times when buying a new EV. In such a situation every manufacturer will be able to sell every EV vehicle it can produce without having to worry about what their competitors are doing.

Once we reach the point that there is more supply than demand, Tesla can easily lower their prices thanks to their high gross margins to a point where other manufacturers can't compete by price anymore. Once that happens I expect some car manufacturers to go bankrupt, leaving Tesla in an even better position than before.

> Everyone. CCS cars can charge on all CCS chargers on all charging networks, including Tesla's charging network. That's the advantage of a common standard:

I don't know about the situation in the US, but in Europe v2 and v3 superchargers support CCS as well, as do Model 3 and Model Y out of the factory. For the Model S and Model X there is an adapter available, allowing them to use CCS as well.

https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/support/supercharger#ccs contains some additional information regarding CCS support.