Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | trympet's commentslogin

My understanding is that it’s got a bespoke 20 core Nvidia Vera CPU - unified RTX Vera Rubin Spark chip. Seems like Nvidia trying to copy Apple M-series chip

Isn't it a mediatek CPU with an Nvidia GPU on the same package? At least thats what most of the reporting for nvidia laptop chips has been saying.

It's the same chip that is in DGX Spark (it was delayed by 1-2 years). Blackwell GPU on one chiplet and Mediatek cpu with off the shelf cores

Do any of the legit scene groups sign their binaries? How do you know a release isn’t tainted?


Info from veeery long ago because I have been out of this stuff for over a decade:

The release will have an .sfv file with a CRC32 checksum for each rar file.

The FTP server checks them after the upload completes. Back in the day glftpd with zipscript was a very popular tool to manage an FTP site. This Readme sums it up well: https://github.com/pzs-ng/pzs-ng

The sfv can be tampered with but the propagation of releases to FTPs happens very fast, within minutes. It would take you longer to meaningfully alter it than it takes the racers to distribute the original files. And once the release is completely uploaded you can't modify the files anymore.

If the release is bad, for example if it doesn't work at all or if it contains a virus, then it simply gets nuked. This propagates within minutes.


Relying on CRC32 for integrity under hostile circumstances feels deeply flawed.


A) there is no real scene any more

B) no one is getting “proper scene releases” from “proper sources” any more.


It's not a scene release. You know a release isn't tainted when you grab it from the source...


That's the whole problem. There's no way to verify the authenticity of a release aside from "getting it from a trusted source" or whatever, whereas digital signatures would easily solve this issue.


On a modern OS, doesn’t the kernel (eventually) take care of the cleanup anyways?


Did you also have a windows 8 laptop with touch screen?


Yep! Sorry I just edited that in. Win8 is thoroughly underrated to me. The file open/close dialogs were shit but the start menu was very good. I quite liked the fullscreen apps and am sad they got discontinued. Fullscreen IE browsing with full touch support (eg swipe for back/forward, no window chromes in the way to mis-click on etc) was very cool. It made every website feel like a fullscreen app. It almost made the terrible browser engine (it was still IE after all) bearable. Almost.

I'm pretty much still on the same setup now, Win11 plus touchscreen. You'll pry my touchscreen out of my cold dead hands. How will I rage-close a "try chrome" popup without a touch screen? You ever try to rage click something with a touchpad? Total non starter.


> How will I rage-close a "try chrome" popup without a touch screen?

Often Esc works.


I tend to agree, but the FMC on Boeing aircraft sure leave something to be desired.. I do not find the menu/tab system very ergonomic (and the non-QWERTY key layout)


Asking for qwerty keyboard in an fmc just screams you have never been in a cockpit. You dont type into the fmc with both hands.


Nice, thank you Martin. How do you punish the fraudsters? Do you send them to prison over CFAA violation terms of service?


I kinda wish I had that much power. There would certainly be less people in the world listening to their phones without headphones..

Usually starts with contacting them over email reminding them of the terms of service and warning them to stop. Then their account might get deactivated and they need to write and promise to not be naughty again. If they ignore that then the account gets removed.

There are a bunch of automated checks that are running all the time as well and will take automated action that then gets later reviewed by humans. At lot of times the process is fast-tracked.

The off-platform 'let's scrape a bunch of data and then spam nice people' is the hardest to police. Linking those mails to an offending GitHub account is hard and very manual, also anyone can send emails saying they are someone they are not and because of that anyone can deny they sent the mail and they'll usually blame a rogue agency they where working with etc.

I probably shouldn't say it, but the public shame that comes from being mentioned on social, in hacker news etc. That stops people who want to be treated as legitimate from doing that sort of thing and helps educate the wider community around what is and isn't acceptable behaviour - that is why it's good to see this thread and see the issue getting attention.


Love the transparency - someone should make you VP of ..uhm dev rel or something! I was being quite hyperbolic in my original comment, however, I _do_ think you are doing the right thing, and you are definitely not the bad guy.

Having said that, there are big corps who have been known to use the CFAA as a way to coerce the long arm of the law upon teenagers and geeks hacking away - not always a great thing either IMO.


> CFAA violation terms of service

This would be a gross miscarriage of justice and bringing successful action under this theory would do widespread harm by expanding the definition of the CFAA.

Just because a company can take some nuclear action, doesn't mean they should.


Will send a strong email: Don’t do bad things.


Security through ..rarity? Maybe not for nation state actors though.


> C# doesn't depend on a VM these days when it is AOT compiled

Maybe I’m being pedantic, but this is an oxymoron. Also the premise is incorrect. It’s not like the VM is gone. Merely baked into the code at compile time. It compiles IL to native code. Same for IL2CPP. The VM is still there.

The term “virtual machine” is confusing. I think you meant to say JIT compiler :-)


The trouble with that level of pedantry is that you then can point to LLVM as a VM and say that Clang and other C/C++/Rust tools that AOT through LLVM are "too tied to a virtual machine". Then you can go back through the history of cross-platform optimizing C/C++ compilers and find VMs in the design in almost all of those, too. LLVM is not hiding it in its very clear name, but low-level VMs were a thing for decades before someone named LLVM.

VMs have a long history in cross-compilation, even for "low-level" languages like C/C++. The AOT versus JIT distinction is blurry, and the "VM language" versus "non-VM language" boundary is blurrier still, especially when you take into account "standard runtimes" such as glibc and vcrt and whether or not those are statically linked.

Is a C program with a compiled with Clang through the LLVM dynamically linking a glibc and statically linking a Boehm GC library "running in a VM"? There's no wrong answer, it's a lot shades of gray. I believe almost every pedantic way to answer that has an equally pedantic counter-argument.


Why?


I reference them every so often


> Apple’s solution affects your whole digital life

I don’t know if that’s generally true. I could lose my apple account and not really give a a damn. Not that I see how such a thing would happen, save for apple burning down all their datacenters. I’m running ADP


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: