sounds

> There was no capital investment, because why pay to have a huge line that isn't being used.

I'd like to suggest that what Tek did worked back then, and the same insightful leadership wouldn't simply copy the solutions from 20 years ago.

Thus the problem is "there was no capital investment, because there was no visionary leadership," and the problem is also that the short-sighted leadership simply saw "a huge line that isn't being used," instead of a workforce ready to take your company into the next century.

> Military are terrible customers ... You spend a lot of effort and business just evaporates.

This only applies to companies that lack vision, that seem to only be able to keep stamping out the same widget as 20 years ago.

> Tek already struggles to compete against cheaper, adequate solutions.

Seems like a lack of leadership, instead of an existential proof that Tek can't compete.

> We've traded the manufacturing we had 50 years ago for other things. It's not possible to specialize in "everything."

This actually sounds like the kind of visionary leadership that Tek or the larger Portland metro needs.

If I sound combative, please only read this in a curious voice. What kind of visionary leadership could rise from the ashes of the Silicon Forest?

Interesting thought. Could there also be the gradual evaporation of the old culture of fear? The 1940s through the 1960s fear of other countries, races, and ideologies?

I wonder if the fear suppressed the natural behavior of Jim McNerney and others, keeping them from sowing division within the company because of the perceived danger from outside?

Here are some other examples, where today these might sound like an excuse for aggressive business behavior, instead of a unifying mantra --

Andy Grove, "Only the paranoid survive"

Dick Cheney, "Principle is okay up to a certain point, but principle doesn't do any good if you lose."

(Yes, yes, he's outing himself as unprincipled; I'm quoting him intentionally since people were still being people all throughout; does this show the larger populace wide zeitgeist?)

John F. Kennedy, "We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard."

I think it's interesting how the same thought can sound different when my mind is set in different contexts.

Information is light about an actual Proof of Concept here.

I have no actual knowledge, and it makes sense to assume the PIN is required to implement the EM side channel attack, as without a valid PIN the old, vulnerable Infineon library most likely does not complete all the steps.

Summarizing from the article, this link [1] shows that there were more sources of generation that ERCOT didn't ask to come online. Specifically, all the capacity that could come online with 5 minutes was online except for a tiny 130 MW of generation.

[1] https://blog.gridstatus.io/content/images/2024/08/ERCOT-Reca...

Instead of calling for something that needed more than 5 minutes, ERCOT relied on all the batteries on the grid. I don't know what this quote means:

> 2,000 MW of extra capacity released from ECRS.

But I do know what this means:

> battery discharge peaked 20% higher than the previous record, which was set only the day before.

It's referencing this graph: [2]

[2] https://blog.gridstatus.io/content/images/2024/08/ERCOT-Reca...

The graph has units of Megawatts. In other words, the thing that was record setting about the batteries was not the Megawatt-hours, or total storage in battery systems.

What set the record was the instantaneous power usage, and apparently the batteries in Texas were at their hottest ever. (No idea if anything caught on fire though!)

Here are some more assumptions I am reading into this:

* The 130 MW that didn't come online may have been rotated around. Maybe all the generation jumped in at different times, guided by supply and demand, but ERCOT regulations likely played a role in keeping the existing systems from exceeding the demand or blowing up transmission lines, etc.

* The article says "Solar and Demand Were High Throughout the Day" but I assume that simply means that over time, more and more solar will be installed and more businesses and cities are becoming aware of https://www.ercot.com/services/programs/load (Demand Response). It means they can get cheaper electricity at night for instance, so they run their power-hungry machines when the prices are low.

* Never underestimate the power of Nature. Probably the daytime temps in Texas right now drove the high solar production and high demand. High temps usually mean clear, sunny days and everyone huddling near an air con.

I think you're intentionally obscuring the difference between:

(1) A system locked by Microsoft, who benevolently allows some users to achieve freedom by setting up new Platform Keys.

If the big dollar clients demand standardization and openness, then it might curtail the typical Microsoft antitrust shenanigans.

(2) A system that is owned by the purchaser, who may choose to deploy Microsoft or other security solutions, and then remove them, at will.

We already have (2), so any attempt to subvert it is by definition untrustworthy.

Item (1) is what is called "trustworthy computing," and Microsoft still openly celebrates it [1].

Item (2) is what is being obscured.

[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/blog/2022/01/21/cel...

Microsoft only mandated that for the "designed for windows" sticker, while simultaneously mandating that their arm laptops went hard in the opposite direction. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3458679

I remember reading that the local group, Laniakea Supercluster and the great attractor [1] are new developments that helped us refine our understanding of H0 but didn't fundamentally remove the controversy.

It's exciting to see how the question drives many new discoveries.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Attractor

I'll try to paraphrase what it meant: measuring H0 comes down to measuring the relative velocity of galaxies around us. The great attractor was a relatively recent discovery that the "closer" galaxies, the ones we can use in the distance ladder, all have a common component in their velocities which we've recently begun to understand better.

Hmm, a 4-core cluster?

Easiest would be to wire up two chips with bidirectional links and use a fault handler to transfer small blocks of memory across. You're reimplementing a poor man's MESIF https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31876808.

Software (I mean the product, not the code)

Mundane tasks that can be visually inspected at the end (cleaning, organizing, maintenance and mechanical work)

There are more major issues I would hope the article authors would correct. I know, not likely to happen. Here's a few notes to think about -

> The analysed star cluster IRS 13 is located 0.1 light years from the centre of our galaxy. This is very close in astronomical terms, but would still require travelling from one end of our solar system to the other twenty times to cover the distance.

If the "one end to the other" metric, at best, is 2 x 100,000 AU [1] if it means the edge of the Oort cloud. That's about 3.16 light-years.

But GCIRS 13E appears to be 26,000 light-years away. Hint: 3.16 light-years x 20 is not even close to 26,000 light-years.

The article never mentions any theories on the formation of these intermediate-mass black holes, or why confirming the existence of one in our own galaxy would be meaningful science.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GCIRS_13E

I kind of admired the brevity.

Sure, nobody agrees on what the strict definition of great is. I don't think it's reasonable to argue that a blog post titled "My pet theory..." doesn't achieve the minimum word count.

Go back and read the HN thread [1] that was the impetus. Now TFA exists within a lot more words to train an LLM on.

Why not attempt to triangulate what this particular piece of software might look like, if it was the best it could be?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40974768

Most likely something like Qualcomm (or another similar vendor) saying that they refuse to provide the vendor kernel, and will just ship Windows on ARM instead.

It's an interesting challenge because the device is nominally "under ISP control" but any device located in a customer's home is under the physical control of the customer. The mistrust between the ISP and the customer leads to "trusted" devices where the firmware, including the backup, can be overwritten by the ISP, but then cannot recover if it gets corrupted. And believe me, the corrupt firmware scenario happens a lot due to incompetence.

This is getting attention because it wasn't incompetence this time.

But how does blank, unprovisioned equipment discover a path to its provisioning server? Especially in light of the new "trusted" push, this is an arms race in a market segment such as routers where there isn't any money for high end solutions - only the cheapest option is even considered.

tl;dr: a social and economic problem, likely can't be fixed with a purely technical solution

Yes, it was 48 bits virtual but Intel is starting to introduce SKUs with support for 57 bits of virtual address space:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_5-level_paging

HN Guidelines Checklist:

   [ ] When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. For example, arguing with "nonsense" and "has nothing to do with the scenario" detract from HN
   [ ] Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. Avoid saying "I'm not ___" in a reflexive way
   [ ] Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity such as for Lenart Poettering's "a solid reputation"
   [ ] Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate.

I mean, Microsoft pays him a regular paycheck. I think you're moving the goalpost quite a bit to ask that the community accept anyone's contributions until solid proof of malicious intent is shown.

Are you prepared to accept my contribution? I sign my name "JiaT57notThatJiaTan"

Inertia causes the sensor in the accelerometer to read nonzero.

Meta: let's stop arguing what might happen, and do the experiment!

> it does not rely on installed Python as in GN case as other tools.

I'm curious if you can expand on how you're using python, and what pain points you have there? I think python 3.9 was one for us but not too bad.

The researchers are careful to not say that. (Remember the big uproar around LK-99 superconductors?)

To my lay eyes, it looks like they have excellent research showing a pathway used for the regulation of the "innate immune response," which is the fast-acting first response to pathogens. And they saw some strong evidence but not a sure proof that Lupus may be caused by the loss of regulation due to a mutation.

To show that it's more than a nice coincidence, I think they'd take careful steps: maybe a CRISPR therapy trial, maybe a drug trial specifically aiming to regulate this part of the immune system through other careful means. Lots of clinical trials.

To families affected by Lupus this might seem painfully slow. I'm optimistic though: this sounds like the kind of solid research to uncover the exact functioning of the human immune system.

Converting atmospheric CO2 into fuels could contribute to this effort. But bacterial and plant-based fuel production may still be more economical and produce fewer overall emissions than even a solar array and a carbon capture plant.

Try replacing "acting unexpectedly" in your thought process (which superficially I agree with) with the words "acting safely."

It remains to be seen if autonomous driving systems are actually safe. But if the other driver does something that is safe, there's then an onus on the first driver to have accounted for that.

Without diminishing how cool I think the Asahi linux project is, can I shout out the panel at the bottom of the page for device support.

As a tech enthusiast, that's exactly the kind of page I would want if I were buying a new Apple device today. It doesn't show everything, but it's excellent for comparing across Apple's whole Mac Silicon lineup.

Even being at the bottom of the page, I still think that panel is one of the most effective ways of marketing Apple devices -- to me, personally -- vs. anything I've seen.

You lose: this is not a PCIe device.

> There's nothing preventing you from installing your own CAs in normal decices [sic]

Please consider what it would take for me to reflash and install a new digital signature in the UEFI device driver for at least the following PCIe devices: (1) a GPU (2) a network card. It's a requirement that the device can cold boot after the reflash on an enthusiast motherboard that costs less than $200 retail with no other changes except the reflash, because that's what average consumers could do. If an average consumer could follow your procedure and not void their warranty, you win.

PoC or GTFO.

Secure boot and TPM that only come with PCIe card drivers signed by the Microsoft CA are definitely the problem here.

If it weren't closed and controlled by one large corporation's interests, there wouldn't be a monoculture, which would make this less severe of a vulnerability.

Start installing coreboot then?

The phone number registration https://blog.beeper.com/i/139416474/sending-and-receiving-me... will make it possible to enforce legal action against malicious and spammy messages.

Note that iPhones already receive SMS spam and fraud just like every other phone.

However, you are correct that the blue bubble is no longer a guarantee that the bad actor is using an iPhone.

Here's a slightly more in-depth link, still written by Penn State U's PR people but it links to the paper: https://science.psu.edu/news/WangLeja11-2023

I've noticed that even though "They don't owe anyone anything," the community doesn't actually adhere to it. If they shove code over the wall like FAANG companies do now, it appears to upset the community, who will then treat them with hostility.

I can't think of one, so this is only a halfhearted attempt (not the GP here)... maybe he's focusing on the mismatched firmware vs. OS version and how that is more closely analogous to a bad BIOS flash?

I'm undermining my own counterargument... On a PC, a bad BIOS flash is recoverable. Some have two BIOSes - like on video cards. Some have a recovery mode via a USB stick. And attaching a programmer to the SPI flash is also a viable recovery method...

Maybe he doesn't think any of the mac firmware environment is really that different from a general purpose computer?

Ok, I don't know what the counterarguments are. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯