Oh, no, it's perfectly "legal." You "agreed" to allow your TV to be used like this in the EULA when you installed the app. ( https://blog.includesecurity.c... )

I just hope that the judge sanctions Xinuos's legal team into oblivion. Given all that has gone before, it should be easy to establish bad faith on their part. Not to mention that kicking a sleeping wolverine (IBM) is unlikely to be ... wise.

SCO and its successors struggled to survive, but interested parties kept the lawsuit alive [ ... ]

You misspelled "Microsoft."

Speaking of which: Is Micros~1 still shaking down companies using Linux for royalties over unspecified patents they allegedly hold?

Depends on how solvent NVIDIA thinks those companies will be. Also I think creditors frequently get paid earlier in a bankruptcy process (before investors at least). Maybe they have it structured like a mechanics lien where they get 100% of the loan back on bankruptcy (I don’t know if that is actually possible), or if they just huger that in a bankruptcy they will get about 80% of the loan back, so they want to make the loan as far ahead of bankruptcy as they can so they get a bunch of payments followed by bankruptcy and then they get a chunk of money awarded by the bankruptcy court (and/or maybe return of the assets?)

Ah! I think that is the one! I bet they are structured as a secured loan, so on bankruptcy the bankrupt company can either surrender the assets (the hardware Nvidia loaded you money for), and Nvidia keeps all prior payments. OR they sign a new agreement both the company and lender agree to which is then omitted from the bankruptcy discharge (i.e. the new agreement can’t be washed away by bankruptcy, so if you still owe say $3m Nvidia can stand firm on that price, or even knock a little off, but whatever is agreed to the bankruptcy court leaves it to stand -- normally, sometimes they will decide there is some sort of bankruptcy fraud going on and you are sheltering money with something like that, normally only if family or close friends are involved though), or the company going into bankruptcy can pay Fair Market Value for the property.

Nvidia might get screwed if companies going bankrupt decide it isn’t worth salvaging the AI hardware either because they pivot to a non-AI busness, or at least a busness where they don’t need Nvidia hardware (like they rent “AI compute” from Google or something, or only needed the Nvidia hardware to refine models and they decide to just run the models they already have and not refine anything).

Nvidia also might get screwed if lots of companies decide AI is BS and the fair market value for AI hardware declines.

Nvidia is also screwed if the whole AI market implodes for a similar reason.

Still it is pretty easy to see how Nvidia is taking a risk, but could “earn” way more money this way. Plus Nvidia gets the interest payments, not a bank (then again Nvidia is taking the risk, not a bank). I don’t know if it is a good idea or not, because it hinges on something I’m awful at predicting: timing. If the house of cards comes down soon Nvidia takes a big bath. If the house of cards stays up for a while Nvidia breaks even, if it stays up long enough Nvidia makes the even bigger bucks.

Actually it is debatable. Anthropic is not making money, they are burning through VC cash. OpenAI is not making money, they are burning through OPM (“Other People’s Money”) as well. NVIDIA _is_ making money selling the AI hardware to the various companies pouring money into finding an AI model+business model that lets them make money. SpaceX’s xAI isn’t usefully broken out into it’s own P&L, but if you want to bet there IK’ll bet they are losing money at the moment as well, if you take the bet and lose you owe me one fancy Starbucks coffee and pastry, if I lose I’ll buy you 5 shares of SpaceX (that is around $1000 vs your $10). Did I forget anyone? Palentier? Also OPM (VC at the moment).

I doubt Apple or Google are making money on AI either, although it is more debatable because they have a bunch of products they can bolster sales with it (people buying a new iPhone because they want something they saw “Apple intelligence” will bring, totally forgetting that Apple hasn’t delivered on their AI promises from 2 years ago yet!), or Google may sell more smart speakers “powered by Gemini” then they sold of their prior assistant powered speakers, or get more Google searches because of Gemini answers. Although I expect the searches will merely manage to better hold onto market share by offering Gemini, which is important, but defending a multibillion dollar a year Business isn’t at all the same a “making money with AI”. Google has definitly said they are cutting headcount by using AI, but I’m not sure if they actually have a productivity increase or merely an increase in code per unit time even if the volume says nothing (or is of lower quality so it produced more bugs per unit code, and more critical outages per unit codebut more volume of code fixes!)

I’m not saying that NVidia are the only ones that can ever make money at this, or that only the hardware makers will ever make money, but that is how it is right now for sure.

Google's argument is simply a trivial permutation of that slob's "worthless clause" defense, with which he tried (and failed) to escape felony criminal conviction for fraud.

Perhaps more significantly, Google is now on record, testifying and admitting, under oath, that their LLM-generated summaries are garbage.

Does it try to make use of ten nanofarad diodes?

As I understand it Mythos’ “big leap” is not in finding specific flaws it is in chaining them together into a “bigger” flaw. So finding a minor issue in curl that lets you put a file where you shouldn’t, plus a flaw in something that assumes some file location is “safe” and it doesn’t have to parse things with an advassery in mind, plus a flaw in something that relies on that thing, and so on.

When doing that kind of security work you don’t need to find a bunch of significant flaws in each tool, just a minor flaw in places that turn out to be useful when combined with say up to 9 other minor flaws. So from the viewpoint of cUrl which doesn’t rely on a lot of other tools to provide its services nothing has changed. The pain is experienced on a wider scale like over a whole OS where there are a lot of tools any of which might contribute a minor flaw so Mythos can find way to gain “the prize” (maybe remote execution, or a privilege escalation, or both).

Maybe a better way to think about Mythos is it doesn’t have to hyper focus on one tool like “can I break into the system using cUrl?” (and is not actually any better at that question then prior AI), but it does a far far better job at answering the question “can I break into the system using up to a dozen or so flaws together out of this pool of 1000+ tools?”. I assume it may be a bit better at finding flaws in single tool if the flaws require putting more bugs together or more steps to reach the state where an existing flaw shows up, but again that isn’t the big deal. The big deal is at a system level it puts multiple sub-critical flaws together to combine into a critical flaw. (queue transformers joke here)

Is Cuda a lock in because there is a critical mass of solutions written in Cuda and people that think about problems in terms of Cuda already so nothing is really going to unseat it that isn’t a close clone of Cuda and making one of this is for some reason impossible, or is the problem that you can make something else that lets you be expressive in the imprint ways Cuda is while giving the backend the same kind of flexibility to schedule operations, but nobody else has made one that isn’t “too buggy” to use on real world problems?

In the distant past very few C/C++ complies existed, they were “too complex” for small companies to make, and now we have very few commercial compilers and a billion open source projects that are all forks of gcc or llvm (or a fork of a fork of the llvm derived clang). We don’t have a billion non-C derived programming environments though (we have a few, JavaScript is popular, and I’ll argue Java is C-derived, although removing pointers form C doesn’t leave a lot, so I’ll also accept it as a distinct environment, but if so, so is Swift, and Rust also counts as distinct...still that is only handful). It doesn’t prove a lot, but I would say even the moat of a programming language and environment only lasts so long.

Do you actually believe that? I mean, yeah sure “we asked them what was up and they gave a flimsy excuse” doesn’t mean you have to believe it!

The only thing that points towards them maybe telling the truth is it might be obvious if the data center were operating and you don’t want to get caught in a provable lie. However it is also possible the data center is partly operating while construction continues and they figure “hey there aren’t people coming and going, who will know if the data center is operating as opposed to testing equipment if we get caught!”.

"Hey, what's the big deal? We used to append 'P.S. I love you. Get your free email at Hotmail' to every outgoing email way back in the day, and no one ever had a problem with that..."

Welcome to the all-new eStop! We know you have concerns, so let us put them to rest straight away.

The site will not change. We respect the investment you've made in learning and navigating the site. However, if you're feeling curious or adventurous, feel free to check out our [new site design prototype]. (This design will become the default landing page in mid-2027; the old site UI will enter maintenance mode for only the most critical bugs.)

To thwart LLMs and other bots, new default limits on bidding have been imposed. Accounts may only bid on a given item no more frequently than once every 20 minutes. If your circumstances require more frequent bidding, have a look at our [eStop Pro Membership Plan] for only $9.95/month (billed annually; no pro-rated refunds), which will allow unlimited bidding frequency. And for members who want to have more than 20 items on sale simultaneously, take some time to review our [eStop Bulk Vendor Programs], charging only 25% of gross sales, or $3600/year + 20% of gross sales.

And to help with "doomscrolling" for that one specific thing you're looking for, we've also partnered with Anthrop\c and X's Grok to help curate your buying experience, surfacing the items most likely to interest you.

(All terms are subject to change without notice.)

(a/k/a Innovation Subscribers Don't Need)

It still amazes me that, as late as the 1990's, and well after 56kbit modems were prolific, ISDN was being offered up by the ILECs as "broadband," at metered rates that made Ma Bell's long distance charges look like spare change.

Happily, it wasn't too long before ISDN was put out of everyone's misery when DSL showed up. And now, finally, after fifty years of pissing about, fiber is finally being pulled to the premises.

If you really need ongoing ISDN support, you can pull the source code from an old Git commit and update it. But I feel quite comfortable in opining: ISDN support will not be missed.

e benchmarks I saw had it about the same. The 2020 M1 Air slightly faster in single threaded, slightly slower in multithreaded, or do I have those two swapped. Either way, it's abouth the same overall.

Geekbench puts them at Neo 3535/8920 (s/m) & MBA 2347/8342 (s/m). So the Neo is significantly ahead on single core performance, and ahead (but just barely) in muti threaded even with the reduced core count! Which is decent for half the price! (well if you get the EDU discount on the Neo, the M1 MBA doesn’t have a EDU discount that I know of).

To be clear at the price point not too much slower would be Ok, but the benchmarks have it at way faster for single thread, and faster but basely a tie for MT.

To be honest a used M1 Air or M3 Air would seem a better deal

A used M1 Air at under the Neo's price would be a good deal. The M3 at the Neo’s price would be a great deal. I mean the Neo is pretty damn good at its price point. It is fast, it works surprisingly well for its RAM configuration. The +$100 model has touchID and slightly less pathetic local storage. The Neo’s display is physically smaller, but the whole device is quite small, some people prefer smaller devices for carrying about and use in cramped areas. I mean from my view point (16” MBP with large external displays) both the Neo and MBA have tiny cramped displays! However both are shockingly fast for their price.