khedoros

It sounds like they're sticking something in a small cavity and covering it. Like a filling. Minus the drilling.

My computer certainly does more than the one 27 years ago did, in the senses of operations it performs in a second, capacity of data storage, increased intercommunication options, increased selection of devices that I can interface with it, and so on. Some of these are just a change in magnitude, and the changes in the software are just as important as changes in the hardware.

There are more parts of the computer (again, both hardware and software) that are undocumented. Taken as a whole, the system is more capable, but closed hardware and software makes me wonder about capabilities in my computer that serve someone that isn't me.

So, if the new advice is to avoid "processed foods", what set of characteristics about processed foods make them bad? Is there a specific pattern? High in triglycerides? Preservatives? Artificial colors and flavors? Out of whichever things are "bad", is it individually, or just in combination? What kinds of "badness scores" would each item/combination get? What kind of individual variability is there?

The code running on the CPU isn't the only thing the computer is doing in that one second, the X86{,_64} opcodes we could capture aren't necessarily exactly what the CPU is doing, and code being run by extra controllers and processors isn't likely to be accessible to anyone but the manufacturer.

In 1989, we'd've also been looking at code running on a single core with a single-task or cooperative-multitasking OS (for most home computers, anyhow), with simpler hardware that an individual could completely understand, and it would run at a speed where analyzing a second of output wouldn't be completely beyond the pale.

I've analyzed CPU logs from DOS-era programs and NES games. I certainly haven't analyzed a full second of the code's execution; I'm usually focused on understanding some particular set of operations.

I don't think it's trespassing for the players to be at Kijkduin, just problematic to have people there in those numbers. The players may be making individually-acceptable choices, and it's just the collective behavior that's a problem. It's easy to say that people should have the judgement not to do some individually-harmful thing. It's harder to argue that individuals should have the judgement not to partake in a harmful collective behavior (humans just aren't generally good at considering things like that).

Niantic's algorithms are sending people around in a pattern that is causing damage. Since they've been made aware of that, and it's difficult to blame the individual players, it's reasonable to ask the company itself to make a change. Niantic's the only one in a position to solve the problem quickly and cheaply.

Agreed. Ditto for most of Europe. Everyone should standardize on YMD. Lexical sorting and least-to-most specific times make the most sense.

I see people complain about the low power of the Pi3...then I think about how I went through college with a slower computer than that, and how the people over the previous 30 years had even slower machines to use (if they had their own personal machine at all).

What you can do with a couple MHz and a few hundred KB of memory is great, given a little ingenuity. Of course, you aren't going to do real-time face recognition on something like that, but 99% of what we need to do is just fine with 0.1% of the performance.

That's the point. They're saying that those 85% of self-made American millionaires aren't as "self-made" as they claim.

Like me: I could talk about starting with almost nothing in my bank accounts, getting a job, working through the ranks, buying a home, and working toward my first million... conveniently leaving out all the advantages that I've had to get me to this point (cultural expectation that I'd go to college instilled in me from a young age, a family well-off enough to support that financially, uninterrupted time to work on the hobbies that grew into a career, etc).

Quanticle seems to be relating the origins of Donald Trump and Bill Gates. Donald describes his fortune as self-made. Bill Gates has been described as self-made. It's true, if you only consider that their wealth is much greater than any gift they've ever received. It's false from the perspective that anyone could do it with enough hard work.

But IME is distinct from "Intel TXT & UEFI Secure Boot" ("this"'s referent).

> Intel didn't force [Intel TXT & UEFI Secure Boot] upon the consumers

is true. Both of those things can be disabled on most hardware. In fact, I disabled them on the laptop the I just bought, because I wanted to install OSes that aren't SecureBoot signed.

It sounds like you operate how I usually do; the communication cost outweighs the benefits of collaboration, and it ends up being a tiring and frustrating experience.

I've seen pair teams working correctly, though. Each of them bounces ideas off the other one, and they progress faster than either would've alone. It's like racing two algorithms against each other, each searching a different part of the problem space, and using the first result that's returned. It lets them move on to the next problem quicker.

I don't usually do that very well, but I can't deny that if you've got the right pair of developers, it's a very powerful technique.

All of my joystick ports were on sound cards. As for the IDE controller, a lot of computers in the late 80s and early 90s only had one IDE channel, and it was pretty common to buy a sound card and CD-ROM at the same time (I remember the first ones my family bought were bundled in a "multimedia upgrade kit"). If you already had two hard drives, you were short on options, except that the sound card provided a solution.

Ghostery hid it from me, but it had a button for "play one time" that worked perfectly.

It sounds a little like a scratchy cello.

I understand the feeling. Mobile phones are great for what they give you, but also great because they're just crappy enough to push you to use a more comfortable solution when one's available. It's great to have a Swiss army knife, but you'll still wish for your toolbox at home.

Twirrim is stating that "ignoring the smart stuff" doesn't necessarily mean buying a dumb TV, and that they buy a smart TV, ignore a bunch of the TV's features, and replace them by using a separate set-top box.

But it doesn't have to be that way, even if it is right now. I wish there were a way to explicitly signal "I bought this Smart TV as a dumb display, and I'm using smart features, just not the ones provided by the TV". If enough people were known to be doing that, it might suggest a market for high-end dumb TVs.

You may be talking about two different situations. "r-w" might be thinking about a build style where compilation just uses the versions of libraries available on the system, rather than going to the package manager on a per-build basis and re-fetching dependencies (so, something more like a C build than a Rust, Haskell, or Node build).

As an aside, and echoed by a few other comments in the thread, what you're calling "dynamic analysis" is what I know as "static analysis", like what I want Coverity to do (watch the build process, and monitor the source that actually goes into each of my build artifacts). "Dynamic analysis" brings to mind something more like Valgrind, or some other tool that monitors and profiles a program during execution.

It needs a microSD for the stuff in the /boot partition (kernel+devicetree files+firmware blobs+bootloader), but everything else should be able to live on an external USB device.

USB+ethernet both use the same connection to the CPU, and it's a USB-OTG implementation basically hacked to act like a USB host, but it's possible to host the filesystem there.

No, but the GPU actually contains a non-ARM general-purpose processor. I think we're in the very early days of knowing how to program for it.

This looks like the source for a Linux Mali-400/450 driver: http://malideveloper.arm.com/?modals=mali-400450-linux-kerne...

I haven't really examined it, though. Maybe there's also a binary blob loaded into the GPU itself or something (the Raspberry Pi does that, for example).

Hopefully they don't need to use a closed-source blob for the C2.

People overreact. When I saw that, I sighed and went on with my day. I consider unsolicited advertisements an unconditional negative, and for Mozilla to say that they included them because they think I'd like to see them is mildly offensive. I've got some similes in mind, but they all seem too over-dramatic.

Mozilla's done a few other things that I mildly dislike, and they tend to clump together in my mind. Nothing that's a big deal, but enough that I usually keep a copy of Pale Moon on the machines I use most often.

I've got a lot of side projects like this one. The programming I do at work has a solid purpose. It's relaxing to work on something that isn't strictly necessary, as long as it satisfies my curiosity.

I like reading through disassemblies of DOS games and figuring out how things work. It's fun recognizing C programming patterns in the assembly. There's something a little charming about looking up what writing to some VGA control register is supposed to do...and I haven't found anyone else who actually thought any of that sounded like fun.

Someday, I'll put together a series of blog posts about it, and maybe I'll have some code that I actually want to show off, but right now I'm just having fun.

> for having fun there are many better ways

There's no accounting for taste. Building something like this sounds a lot more fun to me than most programming projects that I hear other people talk about as "fun". What would you have chosen to do instead?

Why is everything a "product"? Why does everything have to be marketed? Why does there have to be a need for something, for it to be built and to be noteworthy?

This looks like a cool personal project, built by the author as a learning experience, with a convenient API to manipulate the machine that's being simulated. If that doesn't tell you enough about why it exists, then I don't know what to tell you besides "nothing to see here".

A subset of the tiles are paid advertisements. "Completely harmless" depends on your point of view. Personally, if I have a choice, I'll opt for the browser that doesn't show me "sponsored content" on first boot, just out of principle.

> In my new team I got it from 30s to 5s and the effects have been amazing.

I was proud of being part of the team that got the compile time for the core of our product from about 2 hours down to about 30 minutes (the same amount of code, loaded into a RAMdisk and built on a 16-core machine builds in about 2-3 minutes today, but most of our full builds take from 20 minutes to 2 hours now).

After you build the core, a fairly simple plug-in on a reasonable development machine will compile+link in about 5 seconds, maybe. How long it takes to test the fix depends on how far into the program's operation a failure is expected to occur...anywhere from a couple seconds in, if it can't contact the server, to an unbounded length of time, if there's a rare bug triggered by some weird pattern in the customer's data or use of the system.

I enjoy hearing about what other people expect from their dev environments. I've worked almost exclusively in large C++ systems.

I've still got my Game Boy Camera, along with a Game Boy Pelican Codebreaker, with an integrated debugger and flash to backup savegames into (it was great for transferring saves between versions of Pokemon).

I pull them out every once in a while. The Codebreaker is more interesting to play with now than it was as a kid actually, because I can understand more of its functions.

They're people that know that they're wasting small amounts of time for large numbers of people and presumably gaining financially from some small number of those people. I delete the e-mails because it's the quick and convenient thing to do, but I don't have any problem with the idea of someone trying to waste their time. "It's their job" isn't a convincing argument; it sounds too much like the defense of "I was just following orders".

If someone feels entitled to someone else's time, I don't see any problem in turning the situation around. If there wasn't a good enough ROI on cold-call marketing, it would be rarer, and that sounds like a net benefit to me.

> I think is not totally honest, unless they also have a history of not paying up.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. So: Does their agreement say that the bike company will accurately represent their product on their packaging? If the bike company's holding up their end of whatever agreement they have, then there's nothing the least bit questionable about what they're doing.

There's always the potential for misunderstanding. The world's a wide place, and there'll always be the exception that proves the rule. We'll get early stories about situations that blow up bigger than they should've, and then things will settle into a new normal (whatever that turns out to mean).

It's well-organized, but exhausting to read. I can't help but think that the ideas would be communicated more clearly if the author wrote in plainer language.