...and there I go posting without sufficiently previewing. Comment editing sure would be a nice feature on a platform like this in 2022...

Anyways, I was gonna say some stuff about the relationship between pressure and temperature, and how mean molecular velocity is a key attribute of both, but the moment has now passed. So it goes.

That is literally the definition of temperature.

Dude. They aren't even destroying their ACTUAL cutting-edge tech before handing it over to Ukraine. Pantsir, S300/400, their comms trucks full of encryption gear with current keys, tanks with ERA intact and fully loaded with ammo, publicized prototype equipment deployed and then abandoned... it goes on and on. Their front lines do not give half a crap whether their tech is compromised.

I relinquished my Galaxy S9+ for a Pixel 5, and convinced my family members to do the same. We wanted to love them. Unfortunately, we all hate them. It's the only phone we've had which doesn't reliably make phone calls. They have persistent audio handling bugs which cause silence during phone calls, WIFI calling which frequently doesn't work and doesn't failover to 4G/5G, bad speakers compared to other cheaper phones, UI bugs which make them nonresponsive when receiving calls sometimes, bizarre SMS-handling bugs after switching SIM cards (required factory resets, reoccurred several times), and bad cell reception compared to Samsung phones in the same location. They are just buggy, poorly-performing hardware. These bugs are all widely complained about online, with few reliable resolutions and little support from Google. We'll be going back to Samsung as soon as we get fed up enough to sell out the cash and ditch these suckers. Quite disappointing, because they seem like such a good product in theory but the execution is inadequate.

"Interference" with another country is not inherently an "act of war" as that term is traditionally defined. Of course, sovereign nations can choose to get as pissed as they want about whatever they choose, and declare anything to be an "act of war" in their judgment. But providing communications to citizens is not something which would usually be considered so.

If your implication is that the US is morally wrong for trying to give Cubans free access to the Internet, against their government's wishes, I humbly suggest that your moral compass is severely defective. Free and open communications are a fundamental human right, and governments which deny their citizens the means to communicate are oppressive.

The GPU die itself is large, though, and non-uniform in power dissipation across its surface area. A single temperature sensor (or even several of them) cannot accurately detect a situation where the total power dissipation and average die temperature are acceptable, but a localized region of the die is responsible for the majority of that power dissipation and thus has a peak temperature beyond acceptable limits.

Really? Like what? The future of electric vehicle technology, renewable energy, space travel, manufacturing automation, or AI? Because he seems quite insightful and thoroughly informed on all those topics. In fact, I haven't heard him say anything on a technical subject which isn't thoroughly well considered. Are you sure you don't just have some sort of political conflict with him, or hate his wealth?

You're off on a couple important points: first, none of the three intentionally buggy patches they submitted were approved and merged - they were all rejected (but not all because the malicious code was identified). Second, and perhaps more importantly, the same group of people were simultaneously responsible for piping the output of a poorly-functioning automated code review tool directly into the patch submission process, flooding the kernel devs with a large number of bad and often nonsensical patch submissions which had not been reviewed by any humans, were not disclosed to be the output of an un-validated automated tool, and which were labeled with high priority and importance despite mostly being unhelpful or trivial. This effectively spammed the patch pipeline with a bunch of crap at the same time that these same people were submitting their intentionally buggy patches for their undisclosed penetration testing project. To me, it's the combination of these actions which is especially objectionable.

I'm so glad this completely non-partisan news reporting so thoroughly analyzed the nuances of this new plan to... legislate outcomes directly, by federal mandate. Because that approach to government has an excellent track record and totally doesn't cause unintended consequences.

I'd also note that I'm pretty sure these aren't UCC transactions. I'm not seeing any aspect that would put them within it's scope, unless I'm missing something.

That's not so clear yet, and depends on a lot of facts we don't know. The criminal laws potentially at issue here would relate to fraud. Cricut's business practice has been to sell hardware, and encumber that hardware with restrictions which compel buyers to spend more money to keep using what they already bought. This isn't uncommon, and isn't fraudulent by itself - but it can be dangerous territory. This new change which reduces the functionality of hardware already sold, compelling owners to spend more money just to continue using functionality which was previously free, could be a real problem depending on the details. For example, hypothetically, this change could have been planned in advance when the hardware was first designed, but kept secret from buyers. If that were the case, there is an argument to be made that the initial sales involved fraud in the failure to disclose that a subscription would later be required to use the equipment. That type of consumer fraud (if that were to occur) may be a violation of criminal laws in some states, and if it's done in interstate commerce (especially with any aspect involving mail) then federal statutes may also apply. So there are some possible factual scenarios where this could end up being a criminal matter, depending on the details.

You might think the summary doesn't match the headline. That's because the summary omits the entire point of this appellate ruling. From the article:

“We do not disturb the Claims Court’s findings [of an implied license]. The Claims Court ended its analysis of this case prematurely, however, by failing to consider whether the Navy complied with the terms of the implied license,” the Appeals Court writes. “The implied license was conditioned on the Navy using a license-tracking software, Flexera, to ‘FlexWrap’ the program and monitor the number of simultaneous users. It is undisputed that the Navy failed to effectively FlexWrap the copies it made,” the Court adds. “Such unauthorized copying is copyright infringement. We therefore vacate the Claims Court’s judgment and remand for a determination of damages,” the Appeals Court clarifies.

It is inherently unethical to cripple defensive tools by burdening them with a failure-prone system which can disable the device when it's needed most - especially when it's trivial to build guns without this technology, thus ensuring that people who are unconcerned with regulatory compliance will always have access to guns they can freely use against the people with AI-equipped "ethically restricted" pistols.

Actually, someone on Twitter claiming to be a lower-level IT employee at Robinhood said exactly that. And that others called, too. This remains unverified by other sources, but the accusation has been made by someone claiming first-hand knowledge.

The subreddit is back up. The content is intact. It got slammed with bots this afternoon, and a flood of shitposting (which is really saying something over there). The sub gained a million users overnight and is the epicenter of a historic event, so there's a lot to handle. The GME short squeeze is ongoing and the sentiment on the sub seems to be to hold or buy, and to extend puts ("WE LIKE THE STOCK!" is the mantra over there). Although some of the short sellers (apparently including Melvin) seem to be claiming that they've covered already, I'm not convinced - and it doesn't look like others are convinced either. GME may or may not still be shorted beyond the float, it seems. At this point it's hard to tell if the price is being driven more by the short squeeze or simply by insane tulip-like buying pressure. I wouldn't even venture a guess on that.

It'll almost certainly crash, but the saving grace here is that everyone involved seems completely aware of this inevitable fate and accepts the risk. I have not jumped in.