Let's see... there is a *much* lower than 1 in 4,200 chance of my toy drone injuring anyone or damaging anyone's property but it's controlled by very strict regulations that are supposed to be their for the public's safety and hugely constrain where and when I can fly it.

Someone explain how this works.

Not even the application, just a 120 byte-long binary patch.

And that chunk doesn't have any weirdness that requires a seasoned and actually human reverse-engineer.
(Think segmented memory model on anything pre "_64" of the x86 family - the kind of madness that can kill Ghidra).

Also, if it's not from the 8bit era or the very early 16bit era, chances are high that this bit of machine code didn't start as hand-written assembler but some higher-level compiled language (C most likely). It might be better to run Ghidra on it and have some future ChatBot trained on making sense of that decompiled code.

In short there so many thousands of blockers that have been carefully avoided by going to that 40 year old 120-byte long patch of 6502 binary.

There is a lot of leverage done by the "similarly".

Apple's computers run on 6502.
This was an insanely popular architecture. It's been used in metric shit tons of other hardware from roughly that era. There are insane amounts of resource about this architecture. It was usually programmed in assembly. There has been a lot of patching of binaries back then. These CPUs have also been used in courses and training for a very long time, most of which are easy to come by. So there's an insane amount of material about 6502 instructions , their binary encoding, and general debugging of software on that platform that could be gobbled by the training of the model. The architecture is also extremely simple and straightforward with very little weirdness. It could be possible for something that boils down to a "next word predictor" to not fumble too much.

Anything developed in the modern online era, where you would be interested in finding vulnerabilities is going to be multiple order of magnitude more complex (think more multiple megabytes of firmware not a 120 bytes patch), rely on very weird architecture (a kiosk running on some x86 derivative? one of the later embed architecture that uses multiple weird addressing mode?) and very poorly documented.

Also combine this with the fact that we're very far into the "dimishing returns" part of the AI development, where each minute improvement requires even vastly more resources (insanely large datacenter, power requirement of entire cities) and more training material than available (so "habsburg AI" ?), it's not going to get better easily.

The fact that a chat bot can find a fix a couple of grammar mistake in a short paragraph of English doesn't mean it could generate an entire epic poem in a some dead language like Etruscan (not Indo-European, not that many examples have survived, even less Etruscan-Latin or -Greek bilingual texts have survived to assist understanding).
The fact that a chat bot successfully reverse engineered and debugged a 120-byte snipped of one of the most well studied architecture doesn't mean it will easilly debug multi-mega bytes firmware of some obscure proprietary microcontroller.

Make Lynx Great Again!!!!!

You kids and your graphical browsers... bah!

And while you're at it, get off my lawn!

Eeeeew. Something hit a nerve for sure! How dare anyone insult MiKr0zopht's AI?

or just even more solar and wind, so that even on "bad days" you can produce more, and who cares if you have excedent on "good days".

Correct.
For typical enterprise-grade drive, warranty are in the 5 to 10 years range.
So you can expect them to last that many years at minimum.

So if the bubble pops in 18months as was suggested in the post above, those drives will even still be under warranty, and definitely have quite some life left in them.

...by an normally operating company, where there's somebody who will be held accountable for whatever happens with these drives: yes.
(They'll most likely destroy the drives to avoid any hassle regarding confidentiality, then recycle)

BUT, when a company goes bust, and everybody got laid off, nobody will be around to take care that proper procedures are followed and each drive has a drill shatter its plates. There's no employee left that could be held accountable if the drives "end up in the wrong hands".
Instead the company's assets will be acquired by some debt collector (who isn't bound to the same procedures of data handling), and liquidated in any way that would allow the investors to claw some money back.
That's how you end up with proprietary game dev kits on e-bay after some studio goes bankrupt.

At best there will be a proper bankruptcy auction, and the company handling the liquidation might even put some nomial effort in erasing the drives before putting them on sale.
At worst, everything will be sold by the kilograme to some scrapper, who'll find and single out any valuable to put on eBay like the drives. These will be probably sold as-is with their data content left untouched.

The big ones, yes.

But currently there's a whole zoo of newer companies that specialize in building AI datacenters exclusively. Those one will almost definitely go belly up once the bubble bursts.
Of course the big three will try to salvage whatever is trivial to acquire and re-use in the subsequent firesale (buy a whole warehouse including the convenient palettes of easy to reuse hardware abandonned in there). But whatever is too cumbersome to buy will go to the scrappers and end-up on ebay.

Side note:
I don't know, but Microsoft seems to be on spree to enshitify and run into the ground pretty much everything they produce. (see controversies around Windows 11's unwanted features (Copilot, Recall, etc.), Europe's unease with Microsoft's ability to spy and/or cut you off Office 365 (see: ICC), and similar dumpster fires).
I don't promise anything, but there's a slight chance they run out of profitable businesses to subsidise all their failing ones at some point in the comming decades.

Also, from the article:

ROFLMFAOzors.

There has been Linux distros on ARM hardware with vast selection of software available for ages. At no point in the past half decade of using ARM-based hardware Linux have I run into "doesn't work on ARM".
Actually, quite the opposite in my experience: the open source world has been very fast at adopting new arches (e.g. ARM, or more recently RISC-V) or newer extensions: x86_64 was available of Linux distributions almost immediately (among other: thanks to experience accumulated in previous ports to UltraSPARC, MIPS64, etc.) at a time when "Windows XP 64bits" was a very crashy and useless joke, with barely any drivers.

I suppose this person was disappointed that they can't download a bunch of proprietary binaries downloaded off corporate websites? Or rely heavily on some containerized software only provided for x86_64? (e.g.: some flatpak-ed prorietary software)

Or basically just don't know their way around Linux in general? (A quick look at the titles on their channel: Yup, the presenter openly admits being a linux newb and only recently started experimenting with Fedora)

Mostly due merely because Apple used to hog the finest process(*) available at TSMC (e.g. producing their M chips on "3nm" process while AMD uses "5nm" for their flagship), not as much due to some magic design skills.

And BTW, with the current AI bubble, this advantage of Apple is going to evaporate as now the silicon fabs are going to prioritize buyers with even more (investors', not income) money to burn on the latest and bestest processes. Within a year or so, you could expect the "really efficient, especially if you take energy consumption into account" title will go to some custom AI chipsets by Nvidia and co (server CPUs, datacenter GPUs and NPUs, rack's ultra-high bandwidth interconnects, etc.) mass-produced on crazy scale to fill the "promised" continent-spanning datacenters that the big AI companies accounce in their arm's race to outcompete each-other exaflops-wise; and Apple will slide back to "Yet another CPU manufacturer".

---

(*) note: that still partially(**) explains the high price...
(**) note: but Apple still has ginormous margins compared to the cost of parts.

This outrageous level of paranoia over "alleged" drone sightings will cost human lives soon.

Here we have the US military mis-identifying a party balloon as a drone and firing a powerful laser at it -- while members of the public get prosecuted every year for flicking their laser-pointers at helicopters and airliners.

In Germany, police will be allowed to shoot at "alleged" drones even though it has been clearly proven that most (if not all) of the recent drone sightings were simply mis-identified aircraft lights.

Can anyone see the potential for disaster here?

The mis-identification of aircraft flying at night as "drones" has become rife, dating back beyond the NY/NJ "drone" incidents that caused such concern in the USA a year or two ago. Almost without exception, these "drones" are real aircraft (often passenger flights) carrying people through the skies. How long before one of them is shot down by paranoid trigger-happy idiots?

Paranoia is a mental health issue and it's infecting governments and authorities around the world.

Before someone says "but... Ukraine..." I ask you: how many people have died as the result of actions by bad actors using drones in the USA or outside the war zones in Europe?

That's a big fat ZERO!

Yes, it "could" happen but right now it's far more likely that innocent people will die from friendly fire produced by paranoid idiots on the ground with guns and lasers.

You're right being sarcastic:

Nope, they didn't have 620'000 BTCs (more like 50'000 BTC, mentionned elsewhere in the discussions).

They didn't make actual transaction on the blockchain giving out 620'000 to some random bitcoin account.

They just accidentally wrote +620'000 BTC in the database that manages the exchange (which tracks the internal state of who is selling how much to whom).
So suddenly some user was supposed to be in possession of 620'000 BTCs on the exchange according to the web interface, even if the exchange never saw the number of BTCs it holds according to the blockchain ledger go magically up by that number.

That's merely a big number in some database.

Because this thing is not technically on the blockchain.

The transactions happening on the blockchain are between your own self-managed wallet and the exchange's infrastructure.
(A banking metaphor: Think you getting cash from your pocket and inserting it in the ATM input slot)

The transactions on the exchange are just internal number keeping by the exchange's software stack to keep track of who has how much and oews how much to whom.
(A banking metaphor: when you send money between accounts, e.g., when you use e-banking to pay somebody at the same bank, there is nobody moving actual wads of dollar bills and coins between vault, instead the bank just updates some numbers in their database and now they know you have less and somebody else has more)

Now this is where the banking metaphor breaks: actual real-world banks are extremely regulated and have to pass some high standard to still be licensed as bank, and because of that great effort are put making sure that the database is coherent, that the numbers corresponds to what is metaphorically in their vault.
Nobody would just get magically "+40 billion bucks" on their account due to a mistake.

Meanwhile I wouldn't be surprise if some of the code involved here was vibe coded.
What happened is the exchange did by mistake write "+620'000 BTC" in their database even if they never controlled that much in their actual wallet/there was never that much BTCs according to the blockchain ledger.

(emphasis mine).

So some people decided to be clever and run away as fast as possible with the money (have it transfered out of the exchange).
Except that even if the exchange's database says these users "possess" 620'000 BTCs, the exchange only actually has 50'000 BTCs according to the ledger, so this has very likely set off some warning of dubious or impossibly high sum being requested for withdrawal, leading the exchange to freeze everything before their actual 50'000 being fleeced.

Don't worry... the internet will route around this damage. Discord will become dust.

It's really worth reading the 450 comments on this video Why this crash matters to everyone that flies a drone for a sense of how the recreational drone community is feeling about this crash.

Yes, but for how long? That's the problem.
If the current trends of rising prices of core component keep up (i.e.: unless the AI bubble bursts already), EVERY newly built machine is going to be expensive.