jagrsw

> Cheaters are serial cheaters, and they will deny deny deny

Please cite research on that.

> There is a reason why sports and just about everything else employs zero-tolerance policies.

The sport doesn't employ zero-tolerance. The verdicts issued by WADA for cheating (doping) in sports are usually a suspension for ~1-6 years (out of the top of my head).

For some e-sports (e.g. ESIC and CS:GO), the verdicts are similar: a few months to maybe 2-3 years suspension from official tournaments.

> You should realize that aluminum foil blocks visible light signals.

Yup, I mentioned the solid box earlier - a non-mesh metal container.

Reading through some more material, it seems that there are ways around it - one can use a static electric field to send signals, e.g. switching it on/off or changing its intensity. I suppose the differing el. charge of the opposing walls of such a cage/box would create en electrical field gradient within such box, which is easy to detect, if one's goal is sending some low-bitrate signals.

It's detectable (i.e. the fact of using it), but the communication scheme itself can be encrypted or encoded, so plausible deniability can be employed.

> unusually quiet and calm to me.

The crux seems to be that a genetl(wo)man would either directly accuse, or remain silent. What M.Carlsen is doing is de-facto accusing while saying "don't look at me, I didn't say it out loud". It's so... un.. hacker.. style.

I attended the EM wave propagation lectures years ago at my Uni, so my knowledge is rusty, and the following might not be something that is true in practice.

The faraday cage tries to equalize electrical field potential over space. It does so by allowing electrons to move more or less freely, typically inside a metal mesh.

But

a). metals (unless we use superconductors) have electrical resistance

b). electrons themselves have rest masses (i.e. don't accelerate infinitely quickly in response to force).

So, the movement of electrons is not instantaneous, therefore the electrical field cannot be equalized ideally. in effect we achieve attenuation of the signal, and not its complete blockage.

Secondly, the mesh must have some relation to the signal frequency (the wave-length), probably at 1:1 or 1:2 ratio. At some frequencies (terahertz, infra-red, visible, xray) you'll need pretty much a solid box to attenuate those.

And there's obviously tech which you cannot block/attenuate, like neutrinos. Producing and receiving such signals is however non-trivial and requires particle accelerators and large cavities filled with mineral oil and bulky detectors, so we can probably skip this :). Gravity waves belong to the same category.

You can also probably try to send and receive particles, like electrons or alpha particles if you use non-solid meshes.

It most likely shouldn't be normal in a company which is used for serious (as in, related to countries' relations or even wars in extreme cases) politics, no matter whether its founders wanted it or not.

It wouldn't be probably an exaggeration to say that ability to post a tweet in someone's name, or ability to see private DMs can have financial effects (scams, frauds of big proportions), or in extreme, yet not unthinkable, circumstances lead to loss of health or life (war, terrorism).

Are you saying that it's possible that Carlsen cheated?

It's interesting that the human scale is (logarithmically) in the middle between the plank distance and the size of the observable universe.

> that articles by the layperson are likely to be referring to bytes

Guidelines: "Anything that good hackers would find interesting.".

Also, it's not a problem with the original article, it uses units correctly - it's a problem with the title, and with some comments.

Folks, b is bits, B is bytes. For someone who deals with IT/telecomm the careless use of bits, bytes, B, b, kB/s, kb/s, kbps, MiB/s, Gbit is a source of confusion, because all those abbreviations have a very specific and distinct meaning.

And whenever someone writes something not very obvious (eg Gbit for line speed, or kb for a size of a file or network transfer chunk), I need to figure out if they don't understand the terms they use, and I should use the more likely meaning, or they know what they're talking about and I assume they really meant what they'd written.

Probably Switzerland - init7 has it in its offer: https://www.init7.net/en/internet/fiber7/

The price is the same as for 1Gbps and 10Gbps (~60USD/month) - though the initial setup price differs: ~300USD for 25Gb/s vs <100USD for 1Gbps

The actual speed within network is indeed 25Gb/s to some fellow users running speedtest.net servers. Inside Switzerland it's maybe ~15Gb/s to some well connected servers in the area of Zurich, and ~10Gb/s across EU. Tested with speedtest.net and iperf.

You didn't want to hear this answer :) but most 2008 football teams would beat their typical modern-day opponents - ie. their 1970 versions.

Players are being noticed much earlier now (pro training starts much much earlier, and from a wider pool of talent), and also modern players are (mostly) saints in terms of maintaining their fitness ("healthy food" based in individual medical testing, no alcohol/smoking/drugs - and tested regularly for this) - while as for the 70's players - it's full of stories of late-night partying.

Given that your reasonable question got downvoted, you probably realized by now that this HN thread is for cult members, and not for mere mortals :). The amount of coffee virtue signaling here is insane ("Id never drink .. coffee. Only X coffee brand tastes good", "You should always..", "Go to Italy to taste real espresso" etc).

  > WSL is good enough for most things.

WSL1 is good for maybe 50% of things I tried - as it has rudimentary or nonexistent support for some syscalls - eg more advanced ptrace() commands are not supported, similarly not all clone() options work. And it's just the beginning of problems

It's good for stdio/net code, but code which makes use of more arcane OS functionalities will frequently break.

I read the story many years ago, but failed to grasp its meaning.

It seems to be piggybacking on themes of afterlife, karma, gods, and those typically are of interest to many. But, what kind of longer-lasting idea it tries to propose, that escapes me.

Only browser(s), the OS is capable of 25Gb/s - checked with iperf and also speedtest-cli - https://www.speedtest.net/result/c/e9104814-294f-4927-af9f-d...

NIC: Intel E810-XXVDA2

Optics: To ISP: Flexoptics (https://www.flexoptix.net/de/p-b1625g-10-ad.html?co10426=972...), Router-PC: https://mikrotik.com/product/S-3553LC20D

Router: Mikrotik CCR-2004 - https://mikrotik.com/product/ccr2004_1g_12s_2xs - warning: it's good to up to ~20Gb/s one way. It can handle ~25Gb/s down, but only ~18Gb/s up, and with IPv6 the max seems to be ~10Gb/s any direction.

If Mikrotik is something you're comfortable using you can also take a look at https://mikrotik.com/product/ccr2216_1g_12xs_2xq - it's more expensive (~2500EUR), but should handle 25Gb/s easily.

Ha.. my ISP does :) I can hit those 25Gb/s when connecting directly (bypassing the router as it barely handles those 25Gb/s).

With it in the way I get ~15-20Gb/s

  $ iperf3 -l 1M --window 64M -P10 -c speedtest.init7.net
  ..
  [SUM]   0.00-1.00   sec  1.87 GBytes  16.0 Gbits/sec  181406

  $ iperf3 -R -l 1M --window 64M -P10 -c speedtest.init7.net
  ..
  [SUM]   0.00-1.00   sec  2.29 GBytes  19.6 Gbits/sec

> As another test point, Firefox doesn't even blink at a symmetric gigabit connection going at full speed (my network is capped by my NIC, the pipe is way fatter).

FWIW Firefox under Linux (Firefox Browser 100.0.2 (64-bit)) behaves pretty much the same as Chrome. The speed raises quickly to 5-8Gb/s, then the UI starts choking, and the shown speed drops to 500Mb/s. It could be that there's some scheduling limit or other bottleneck hit in the OS itself, assuming these are different codebases (are they?).

Yup, the CLI version works well - https://www.speedtest.net/result/c/e9104814-294f-4927-af9f-d...

Something maybe a bit related.

I just had 25Gb/s internet installed (https://www.init7.net/en/internet/fiber7/), and at those speeds Chrome and Firefox (which is Chrome-based) pretty much die when using speedtest.net at around 10-12Gbps.

The symptoms are that the whole tab freezes, and the shown speed drops from those 10-12Gbps to <1Gbps and the page starts updating itself only every second or so.

IIRC Chrome-based browsers use some form of IPC with a separate networking process, which actually handles networking, I wonder if this might be the case that the local speed limit for socketpair/pipe under Linux was reached and that's why I'm seeing this.

My SSD - apparently one of the fastest on the market - KINGSTON SKC3000D2048G - rated 7GB/7GB read/write, after writting data to it, stopped being very fast. No idea, if it's something related to how nvme/ssd-s work, or maybe I have a broken unit.

  $ sudo dd if=/dev/nvme0n1 bs=4096k iflag=direct of=/dev/null status=progress
  ...
  9667870720 bytes (9,7 GB, 9,0 GiB) copied, 20,2714 s, 477 MB/s

But when reading from empty space (as in, non-written yet blocks), it goes at full PCIE x4 Gen4 speeds.

  $ sudo dd if=/dev/nvme0n1 bs=4096k iflag=direct of=/dev/null status=progress skip=450000
  ...
  16710107136 bytes (17 GB, 16 GiB) copied, 2,42802 s, 6,9 GB/s

I have another nvme drive - Force MP510 - and it doesn't care if data was previously written or not. When reading from it, I get ~full x4/Gen3 speeds of 3.5GB/s

PS: nvme smart-log shows 100% available spare, and 0% percentage_used, so it doesn't seem to be wear-related.

FWIW, it's disabled in nsjail by default https://github.com/google/nsjail/blob/6483728e2490c1fc497a81... with relevant comment.

Mind you, you changed 'strength' (noun) to 'strong' (adj) in your example.

"He is forceful" if you insist on playing this game. Another derived adjective if forcible but it has a bit more elusive meaning (forcible entry into a building)

Technically (physically) it's force (as in SI's F).

I used to have Viesna (spring) - https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/ussr-tv-vesna-c-276-3d-...

It even had an additional electronic component which made it accept PAL signal, in addition to its native SECAM.

PS: Some say SECAM was technically superior to PAL, but dunno.

Is the ultimate game for the West to ban export of chipsets to Russia? I mean, the West controls IP for x86 (PC) + ARM (Mobile) + PowerPC/MIPS (Network gear), and Russia cannot probably run their infrastructure on RISC-V alone, and their Elbrus ISA probably didn't take off?

The West can ban Chinese companies and dependent states (S.Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan) from exporting chipsets and devices containing them to Russia.

It'd be an interesting thing to see, how Russia would try to go around this. They will, but it will still be a big problem.

> Most often such comments come from eastern parts of Europe, where nationalistic movements

This is seriously an uncool statement. Such generalisations, are both unethical and unfounded.

> but soon after the Comco has stopped Swisscom from using P2MP which is a big setback

Yup, I'm using some 3rd party ISP. I have from them 1Gb/s (ODC - optical direct link), and the first hop is their IP.

And also 10Gb/s via Swisscom's XGS-PON. Here the first 2-3 hops are located within Swisscom's net (except the immediate gateway). I guess init7 complained about it - i.e. paying more for using Swisscom's L3 net, instead of leasing fiber?

Though beware, its CPU is probably not fast enough to route 25Gb/s with typical setup (NAT, a few firewall rules). More like 15-20Gb/s. Mikrotik itsef says 13Gbps with 25 filter rules.

There's big competition esp. in the Zurich area. I don't understand all historical peculiarities behind this, but it has something to do with monopolistic position of Swisscom - their old national telecom company.

As a part of de-monopolization they made it lease links to any willing ISP (bit-stream access?), so many ISPs arose, and they have relatively "cheap" and advanced offerings: 1Gb/s, 10Gb/s, 25Gb/s, fixed IPs, IPv6 etc.

This bitstream access is now extended to pretty much anyone who installs FTTH. E.g. one can have it installed by a city or cantonal electrical company or TV provider, but still be able to buy IP access from pretty much anyone through some form of open market - https://litexchange.ch/