127361

Restricting who can profit from work you created sounds reasonable to me. I don't have any problem with that aspect of copyright.

For non safety critical software, this would be absolutely unacceptable to me. We don't want any more gatekeepers who get to control who can participate or not in the industry.

Such gatekeeping almost always ends up preventing new innovative entrants from coming in. It protects those who have the certification from competition. Thus leading to stagnation in the industry.

Some of us scold Mozilla because they have lost track of their original purpose which is to develop a Web browser, instead they have started to become a political advocacy organization. One that is against freedom of speech and in favor of censorship.

Likely fewer ads at the beginning, and then gradually more with time. Sorry. I'll edit my post.

https://www.nytimes.com/1981/01/11/us/advertisers-look-close...

Also what I deem "cargo-cult enshittification" of the Linux desktop, where open-source blindly copies large corporations in enshittifying their platforms. This is particularly notable with UI design, with GNOME being the worst offender.

Large corporations cater to the masses, so they follow these fashionable dumbing down trends in order to satisfy marketing/branding goals and maximize revenue. If it looks "trendy" then it will generate more sales, revenue, etc. And open source software ends up copying it unthinkingly.

At first Cable TV networks had little advertising. It seems to be a natural progression of all mass-media to eventually enshittify. It's not if, it's just when?

A few years ago, I was playing around with an even older variant of this Broadcom chip. It turns out you can configure the PCIe PHY into root complex mode and hook the NIC up to other PCIe devices. You just need to supply the 100MHz REFCLK for both devices. And connect the TX pair to the RX pair of each device (crossover).

Registers 0x7d10 (sequence number) and 0x7d38 (TLP data) allow you to send custom PCIe TLPs, which let you do the configuration space writes required to get the other card to talk to it. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&d... (see page 383)

It's quite suprising to see one NIC blinking the LEDs of another, by writing to its registers over the point-to-point PCIe link (I used twisted-pair wire-wrap wire to connect them together).

Here's the code to do it, you run it on the MIPS processor: https://pastebin.com/ZJdaUpRZ

This is enough to load custom firmware on a GPU, and get the two talking together, with network access, by the way!

Also the Intel i210 NIC can do this as well, it has an ARC Tangent-A4 processor in the management engine. Same for the i225, but I believe that one has secure boot to prevent unauthorized firmware from running.

You could use a Lattice ECP5 FPGA as a fully programmable/customizable NIC, you'll need an external PHY/transciever, this FPGA has 100% open source tooling available. There's an open source BMC implementation for this FPGA, it should be easy to modify to function as a plain Gigabit PCIe NIC.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27105813

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLoKQ1nAkis

Sorry. Yes I agree that you can be morally culpable for it, but not legally. I didn't notice the distinction there.

Some examples, e.g. court judgements?

And it is their negligence there. It should not be the fault of the prankster who used the Flipper Zero to temporarily crash consumer information devices (people's iPhones).

Some schools ban phones completely. And the school is not responsible if the children can't call 911 if there's some emergency for example.

And some buildings are constructed of materials which will obstruct the mobile signal as well. Nobody is held responsible for that when they can't call 911.

And I believe it's perfectly legal for me to use radio-blocking paint on the walls of my own house, that might obstruct the signals for the neighbours as well, if I'm hypothetically in a weak signal area. In that case the mobile operator has no right to force their signals through my home, it's within my right to block it as long as I don't use any form of illegal jamming.

Thanks for that, I wonder how many switches out there have it enabled inadvertently, because of a mistake by the manufacturer?

By the way, Some of the Broadcom chips have an integrated 8051, with on-chip ROM firmware. There are leaked datasheets floating around somewhere as well. If someone has the time to dump the on-chip ROM, it would be interesting to see what's in there. Note, some of the pins marked NC in the datasheet are in fact the 8051 UART TX/RX lines.

I hate the Freedesktop.org organization and their design philosophy. Also their pro-censorship political stance, they were among the first to adopt the polarizing "contributor covenant" code of conduct and other Woke ideas, such as renaming all the git master branches to main. [1][2][3] And I like having a minimal system that's practical and usable.

1. https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/26257

2. https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/NetworkManager/NetworkManager...

3. https://www.inclusivenaming.org/word-lists/ (this one is comical, it is a real project sponsored by the Linux Foundation, it is not satire)

4. https://getwoke.tech/

I've managed to excise D-Bus and other toxic freedesktop.org (Red Hat / GNOME) garbage from my Debian system. And it's still a fully usable desktop environment. Nearly everything works.

The removal process is quite spectacular, you can see apt delete hundreds of interrelated dependencies, one after another. So satisfying to see it all go.

This is ridiculous. Critical safety functions should not be dependent on a unreliable medium that can be easily disrupted. There must always be a fallback mechanism.

A bit off topic: To me the Tetr.io rules page comes across as condescending/paternalistic? I really don't like this.

https://tetr.io/about/rules/

Legal where I am, I've updated the comment.

It's so important in these situations to gather as much hard evidence as possible (audio/video recordings), from the start.

Voice recorders and storage are very cheap nowadays, keep them on you, running at all times if you ever find yourself in any similar circumstances. That way, it's no longer of "he said, she said", and it's clear who the problem is.

Of course assuming this is legal to do so where you live.

The arguments we made for drug prohibition started spreading to other areas of society. So the prohibitionist mindset was expanding, with potentially disastrous consequences for innocent people caught up in it.

I meant individuals living on their own in that case. By all means increase the penalties for the abuse if it's proven to be fueled by drugs.

About time. Finally the harm caused by possession offenses is starting to be recognized by the state.

If they want to ban drugs in general, then they should prosecute those supplying it and those producing it for sale. Not private individuals consuming it in their own homes, and causing absolutely no harm to anyone. And those who are consuming it in public while presenting a danger to others, that can be made illegal. Failing that, they can outright ban public consumption.

I think religion drives superstitious thinking and possibly the belief in conspiracy theories as well. It might be the origin of such distorted patterns of thinking.

The overall treatment of children, especially teenagers, in society is absolutely shocking. Literally they are like slaves. As a child, the family can be the single most tyrannical thing we will ever experience in our lifetimes. It can be a mini totalitarian dictatorship if you are unlucky to have bad parents.

In 100-200 years time from now people will be talking about this, just as we look back to barbaric times in the past now.

Mass hysteria, media sensationalism.

Running open public WiFi at home. Because of fear that someone might download illegal pornography on it.

Yes, and it's better we spend the effort on preventing the physical abuse from happening in the first place.

I absolutely agree with you that possession should not be illegal.

The laws regarding child pornography, which were likely drafted by moral entrepreneurs[1] who created a moral panic out of it, are completely insane. Such persecution belongs in the 17th Century, not the modern age.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_entrepreneur

And deaths resulting from cancer and a whole list of other ailments. The act of living itself carries risk.

Many of the prosecutions are for simple possession of such images. On top of that the "chilling effect" it causes means we can't download large collections of data such as historical web archives (e.g. GeoCities, etc), just in case there are illegal images in there.

The laws regarding child pornography possession are "strict liability" in many jurisdictions. So these laws prevent entirely legitimate activities from being carried out, because of the fear of being persecuted (it has parallels to the Salem Witch Trials).