> every department is fighting for their lives against the others

https://bonkersworld.net/img/2011-06-27_organizational_chart...

I love how Google looks like an MLP. I suspect their leadership would agree with that portrayal. You can imagine the activation functions: "Will this get me promoted?" "Will this get us bad press?"

Obligatory mention, the GNU JUSTIFIED PUBLIC LICENSE: https://tom7.org/bovex/JCOPYING

(for the rabbit hole: https://tom7.org/bovex/)

Hmm…

  To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest 1 to
  attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively 2 state
  the exclusion of warranty 3; and 4 each 5 file 6 should 7 have 8 at 9 10
  least 11 the 12 "copyright 13 line 14 and 15 a 16 pointer 17 to 18 where
  19 the 20 full 21 notice 22 is 23 found 24.

What's up with the numbers?

Looks like it messed-up and they're just for padding, remove them and it makes sense.

I never noticed that before.

As such, I propose a replacement :) :

    To accomplish this, append the following warnings to the software. It is
    safest to place them at the beginning of each source document to clearly
    declare the exclusion of guarantees; plus every single file must include
    a minimum of the "copyright" text and a link detailing the full warning.

The more popular your software is, the more likely you'll get bug reports from people with just bad hardware. I know a few applications now that perform a simple memory/CPU test when sending a bug report and reject those that are basically impossible.

E.g.: 10% of Firefox crashes are caused by bitflips : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47252971

Firefox was the only program that was crashing on my "Vmin Shift Instability" bugged CPU. Before I even knew what the culprit was, I filed a bug report with Firefox and the first question they asked me was if my CPU was a Raptor Lake (it was).

It's mind blowing for me whenever the hardware abstraction leaks like this. You (ie Firefox) had to call the instructions in a specific order to cause the hardware to fail.

It does make sense that a browser, being the thing most people would be running all day, basically fuzzes CPUs for free... they generate their own CPU instructions at runtime from the JIT engine(s), and different styles of webpages could cause every possible combination of instructions to appear throughout the day on every machine.

This is right. There's a reason people squat domain names that differ from well-known ones by a single bit flip. Think of how many old, shitty phones there are in the world, built using the cheapest available components and running in someone's crumb-filled, humid pocket right next to their magnetic key fob thing.

It's higher bandwidth than any dual-channel DDR5 desktop machine, but Apple never quote the memory latency, so hard to compare otherwise.

Would that be a difficult comparison to do fairly sine one is SoC and the other isn’t?

I meant that it's a difficult comparison between platforms without having all the details like memory latency, how the memory controller load increases latency (can increase by 4x on some platforms), cache latency, TLB entries, etc.

Extremely high bandwidth is great for copying data, but not as relevant for walking chains of pointers, where latency/cache/TLB entries are more important.

So just saying "high bandwidth == better" is true when other variables are the same, but they rarely are, especially in comparison to x86-64 offerings.

All of these are independent that it is a SoC with on-package DRAM.

It installed and runs perfectly on my VM with an RTX 4080 passed-though using VFIO. It uses the nvidia module rather than nouveau (at least on my GPU).

For those not on macOS, is there a video?

this should be in the repo, so funny lmao

I did a port of this on https://github.com/DustinBrett/daedalOS#desktopfly

You can go to https://dustinbrett.com/?app=terminal and type "fly" to spawn one, or many.

I also took the raw FlyWire data and increased the neuron count to 1,275.

Thanks for this, really interesting parent project too, I went down a rabbit hole on that one :)

Same, having worked on firmware that controlled relays (and NAND chips) and managed to burn them both out surprisingly quickly due to software bugs :p

Encode every 0 as 10 - then decode every 10 back to 0. Or more efficiently, the first 0 as 10, then decode the the first 10 as 0.

Add 10 to every digit, then multiply it by 10. Concatenate the numbers into the integer you will store.

I love to play absurd games.

That's not very efficient

OAuth is designed so that an end-user never needs to see an API key (OAuth refresh/access token) or even know what one is. When it is implemented to the spec, that happens well.

I think that most of the "just give me an API key" comments are from a <1% of end-users (developers) that know what an API key is, and are facing a broken OAuth implementation.

> and are facing a broken OAuth implementation.

Or didn't bother to read the spec to understand why it's non trivial. Things like this are complex because attacks will force it to be.

Also, the broken implementation might be an OIDC implementation that doesn't support client_credentials for example. Seen that many times and that does make it rather awkward to implement a server to server flow...

Amazon Route 53 is $0.40 per million DNS queries - which would terrify me if I used it, considering a typical 10Gbit server connection hosted at a unscrupulous ASN with no egress IP filtering is capable of sending a million DNS requests per second from random spoofed IP addresses.