This really hits home for me, this is not a brushfire in a wilderness. It's moving fast, too!
5,773 karma · joined September 12, 2011
I know and respect Fabrice from in person interactions. He is exactly who he claims to be. Maybe an interesting question, instead of this current line of discussion, is to find out what led to his successes?
Could it be replicated?
Interesting that all the malicious frameworks known (by ESET) that target air-gapped networks were for some form of espionage.
While I can guess what the collective market is thinking, it's anybody's guess. If you disagree, then short Nvidia?
It'll be a piece of cake, once their customers are angry enough, for a new tool to become popular that circumvents whatever "patch" Microsoft puts out.
The emperor has no clothes.
What the grandparent is saying though is "that differences between AMD and nVidia GPUs are exposed." Vulkan is so low-level that your application needs to implement workarounds for each GPU's quirks.
OpenGL was high level enough that if you didn't care too much about raw speed, the only place you got into the weeds of GPU quirks was writing your shaders. With Vulkan, the weeds of GPU quirks pop up everywhere.
I'm not the best one to explain what it is Helion is doing, but it's not p+B11 -> 4He.
The step up from DDR4 to DDR5 will help fill cache misses that are predictable, but everybody uses a prefetcher already, the net effect of DDR5 is mostly just better efficiency.
The change Apple is making, moving the memory closer to the cores, improves unpredicted cache misses. That's significant.
It would be to teach the masses how to fish and start stocking the lakes and streams with fish and so on. The social network is so 2010. Give us content creator tools and let us do the rest.
Yeah, facebook's never going to be that kind of smart. Oh well.
It looks like there's no proof either way. Are you testing without a SIM card?
If I am going to go with a different OS than Android, I'll get a Librem so I'm paying the company that made the hardware AND software, with incentives aligned for me to be a supported, acknowledged user.
You seem to have missed the biggest part of why I recommend this to some people - never, ever put a SIM in the burner phone. It's just for that burner gmail address you use to get into the Google Walled Garden.
I want the same benefit as the desktop PC, specifically that I own it, control it, and don't have to sign in to use it.
By purchasing a burner phone, I am definitely traceable by law enforcement. You want to be untraceable after a crime - I'm not solving that problem.
Your other suggestions are fine ideas, there's not a specific right or wrong way to do it.
Obviously with iOS this won't work, but then again, iOS devices aren't cheap enough for this to be a reasonable approach anyway.
Device #1: Buy the cheapest device you can. I give my friends specific recommendations. Invent a new burner gmail account for it. Install whatever you want off the Play Store - obviously, use all the normal caution to avoid any malware. Never put any personal info on it, so never put a SIM card in it, just connect over wifi.
Device #2: Buy a nice Android device. Never sign in. Put the SIM card in this one. Side load apps and update them by extracting the APK from device #1. Export your contacts from Google and load them manually (and save a backup). Access your email using IMAP from a third party app. Backup your photos using a third party app. The point is _not_ to use Google Pay, Google Assistant, and Google Cloud.
• Google Maps works without being signed in
• Google Play Store will update Google Maps (and the default apps on the device) without being signed in, but it does use dark patterns to try to get you to sign in
• Android OS updates will work without being signed in
It is more work, no question. It works for me. Your mileage may vary. Disclaimer that I'm posting in kind of a hurry, so I'll just admit the details here probably don't make sense.
Comparing them to Apple is not a very big a complement, however. Apple isn't well known for having the best software. Apple often has well-designed interfaces and has worked hard to improve human-computer interfaces (both the hardware and the software). To be clear, I do not consider that to be "best-in-class software" though.
Here's why hardware companies refuse to participate:
1. CEO says, "You're eroding our business's moat. Let's just rip off linux, shove our garbage driver out the door, and refuse to provide the source code."
2. CFO says, "You're trying to set yourself up as the expert on the standard, creating a career for yourself in the standards body. Sorry, we're not paying for you to fly to conferences. Denied."
(This one is particularly ironic because a company with enough clout to define the standard for the whole industry, and employ the experts on it, would quickly become the industry leader with a modicum of effort.)
3. CTO says, "We use outsourced labor to implement our drivers. Shareholders demand it. As a result we don't own the license to the driver source code. Denied."
I see crowdfunded hardware as the next step in this evolution. It's the innovator's dilemma all over again.
Other than Apple, every other hardware company is _not_ a software company.
Yes, they write software. It is universally garbage. If there is anything well-done about the software, it will be because the hardware company licensed (or more likely, just ripped off) someone else's software.
Google (a software company) cannot make any of the hardware companies in the Android ecosystem produce anything but garbage. Samsung Bixby anybody?
And this should not surprise anyone, as the leadership at a hardware company does not care, at all, about the software. Once you plunked down your coins and bought the hardware, the leadership at the company only sees software as an endless cost center. They want you gone as fast as possible.
It's a classic race to the bottom, and this is the result.
It's also one of the most potent forces driving people to use OpenRGB and every other free/libre open source tool.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man
https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/25-years-later-tank-man-st... (Note: Microsoft owns this page!)
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/remembering-the-t...
Take the moment when the car first gets stuck. It attempts a right turn, spots the cones just fine, and correctly makes the assessment that it can avoid the cones and proceed in the right lane after the turn.
As a human, our thinking process does not stop there. We notice that the traffic already flowing on the street is _not_ using the right hand lane. We notice that the cones are vaguely in a merge pattern to indicate that cars entering from the side street should merge left - if you were looking at the cones from a vantage point behind where the cones are placed, and if you can call the first two cones enough of a "please merge left" pattern.
The Waymo car can't see that, though. It's located sort of off to one side, attempting to reason about it from a high angle. And two cones from this angle could be a lot of things, and it's not 100% clear the cones close off the right lane.
One theory might be that the Waymo model has been trained on a lot of situations but not this specific situation - something about the high angle, something about the position of the cones, something about the route plan managed to find a loophole in the AI training set and produce a weird result.
That's just the limitations of the current state-of-the-art Machine Learning. Find a glaring incorrect answer? Retrain with more training data.
Part of what makes full Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) with deductive reasoning can retrain itself without making mistakes along the way, unless something incomprehensible happens. And I use the word "incomprehensible" here to point straight at AGI's ability to _comprehend_ the situation at a much higher level than current machine learning techniques.
tl;dr: The Waymo Car didn't get it. And that's about what I would expect.
The real gem is that the _humans_ in the assistance team were fighting each other. The remote control operator kept jamming the "unstick yourself" button even as the roadside assistance guys were walking up to take over. The real danger, I think, is more of this in the future: the remote operators defeating all the safeties. Since the remote operator is not at any real risk of personal harm, what do they care?
Investigations of how the Ever Given became lodged sideways in
the canal are continuing. In a recent interview, Rabie suggested
the captain could have "made a mistake" with the ship's steering
or speed, according to Kyodo News.
He emphasized that the two Suez Canal pilots who were on board
to offer guidance were not ultimately responsible for making
decisions and dismissed the idea that strong winds had pushed
the ship off course.
Rabie did not cite any evidence or say how he arrived at
that conclusion.
It's not zero effort, but pretty easy.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." (Hanlon's razor)