drum55

Very little uses crystal oscillators, they’re gigantic compared with electronics today and have very wonky performance over temperature and shock.

That's why this is just using off the shelf cartridges with commercial heads.

1 petabyte per 60 second scans implies a kind of comical data rate to storage, even at RAM speeds that’s implausible. Imagine we need to write these to hard drives, they happily sustain 150Mb/s on the high end, which would imply you’d need 115,000 hard drives to absorb that amount of writes. Even with top end NVMe drives you’d need a thousand of them writing simultaneously.

xray, photomultiplier and laser tubes are still SOTA. PM tubes in particular have a huge number of glass feed through for the intermediate plate voltages.

The idea that you could buy any food that doesn’t fit that definition is silly, all foods have additives that’s why you can buy them and they last for more than 60 seconds on a shelf, all foods are processed because we don’t eat raw seeds as the majority of our staple diet. You have to come up with a definition of what “process” is good and bad, and what about them is “bad” before making statements like that.

It’s basically a wildcard, “ultra processed food” is a classification of nothing and everything. There’s nothing inherently bad about processing food, lots of food is terrible for you but that’s unrelated entirely.

There's actually a known prototype MacBook Pro from 2006 with a cellphone radio, and the release MacBook Pros from the time all have a weird looking area near the battery and RAM where the SIM slot was supposed to be, and some leftover parts for the goofy little extendable antenna on the screen. Hopefully they end up doing it.

https://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/14/photos-of-a-prototype-m...

I had a thinkpad at one point that had a slot, but because it wasn't optioned for it you had to patch the BIOS or it wouldn't boot with anything in the slot, it seemed so hostile as to be worthless.

I somehow managed to get it working in 2016 with a lot of hackery, I'd still have it as a usable device if the weird little pouch cells it had didn't die, repacking those batteries seemed like enough of a fire hazard I just didn't bother.

The cause is just that the panel is mounted rotated on the device. It's supposed to be used in a tablet where the top is the short end and the side is the long end, opposite to a laptop.

The GDP devices are amazing except for the keyboard, which is some fever dream layout I've never been able to understand. https://img.website.xin/contents/sitefiles3601/18006016/imag...

I miss my Sony Vaio P series which fitted in a similar sort of niche, the cellphone radio made it just by far the best laptop I've ever used. Modern laptops don't seem to have provision for a LTE/5G radio which always confuses me a bit, in this form factor it would be ideal. I'm surprised nobody has cloned this actually, with phone screens being the right aspect ratio it seems obvious.

https://www.zdnet.com/a/img/2014/10/03/9f923860-4b47-11e4-b6...

They’re used for proofs sometimes, if you expect your security company to do a specific route they need to go to each token on it and touch them, you see iButtons glued to walls outside commercial buildings for that purpose. Systems like that mean they can’t just say they walked the route and go home, I’ve seen them at airport bathrooms for the same reason.

Proof of work doesn’t work here same as it doesn’t work for email. The effort to mint a valid PoW is always going to put the legitimate user at a disadvantage, whatever the implementation is. Someone with an incentive to spam will always be able to do it faster, more efficiently than you.

You can’t submit a PR because your laptop is too slow? Rent some hash rate from someone, and now you’ve just made a system of paying botnet owners to be able to make a typo fix on a github repo. HashCash was never used in the real world for a reason, it sounds cute but the incentives are so insane as to only work in a vacuum where you assume everyone isn’t cheating.

The authors profile is also just ridiculous, hundreds of commits a day and their entire profile is also just AI generated lists of AI generated projects each one filled with pompous sounding AI documentation with implausible goals that have rock solid battle tested solutions. I'd be surprised if there was even a real person behind any of this, if there is they certainly have never read any of "their" own code.

Time crystal detection? 100% Accuracy? Give me a break.

The whole website is AI slop, from the text down to the design.

If it's an actual product who knows, sort of hard to care when the website came from a Claude prompt.

3D printed spring, magnet, hall effect sensor by the looks of it.

That video is very annoying and doesn't in any way replace just having a screenshot of it running.

Yeah I’ve had one, still do, it never gets used because it’s a project car. Compared with one button press and coming back to a print in a few hours, it’s a constant nightmare of debugging, print issues, and manually changing filaments that aren’t stored in an airtight container and get wet. It’s not even competition, as much as I would like to support open source tools the Prusa stuff is an order of magnitude more expensive than a A1 Mini that will make a reliable print every time.

It’s like saying a bicycle is a serious contender to a train, they both have kind of similar things going on but you’d have to be insane to suggest that they do as good of a job as one another at the things people actually want to achieve.

I’ve been running mine offline for years, I don’t know why other people haven’t been. They’re the only competent and reliable printer that isn’t a project car in itself, but they’re obviously not completely trustworthy. Easily fixed with an air gap, updates work just great from a USB drive.

Seems a little pointless, your keys can't be stolen but they can be instantly used by malware to persist across anything you have access to. The keys don't have any value in their own right, the access they provide does.

More or less, no desktop OS other than Qubes and MacOS (to a very limited extent) can handle the user being even vaguely compromised, much less a user with privilege. Keys to the kingdom are already in the user domain, SSH keys, all your emails and photos, contacts, access to other devices in your network. The user can backdoor themselves to get passwords by modifying their own environment, can escalate by modifying the DNS settings of the users browser to gain more access. Root access by and large is completely irrelevant.

Intentionally interfering with 911 would probably be a poor decision.

The ones you hear about are caught quickly, I’m more worried about the non obvious ones. So far none of these have been as simple as changing a true to a false and bypassing all auth for all products or something, and would that be caught by an automated scanner?

The language matters, but your original guess was actually correct, you can do tricks with sha256 where you only end up calculating a fraction of the total double hash in order to get a pass or fail.

Modern bitcoin miners do a double sha256 hash and increment in just a little bit more than a single hash of work. The input is 80 bytes, which is two compression rounds of 64 bytes in sha256, only the data in the second round has changed (the appended nonce), so you don’t bother doing the first compression round again. With other quirks you can end up doing multiple hashes at once “asicboost” due to partial collisions within the input too.

Yes, Anubis is just non standard and obscure, the proof of work bit is completely irrelevant (except for getting people on their phone to not visit your website).

Anybody can prompt Claude to implement this, which was my point, it doesn't stop bots because a bot can literally write the bypass! My prompt was the proof of work function from the repository, asked it to make an implementation in C that could solve it faster, and that was about it.

It doesn't matter if your hottest loop is using string comparisons, as another poster pointed out in C you aren't even doing the majority of the second hash because you know the result (or enough of it) before finishing it. The JavaScript version just does whole hashes and turns them into a Uint8Array, then iterates through it.

Bravo, you even implemented the midstate speedup from Bitcoin, that's way more impressive.

Ironically I used a LLM to write a bypass for this ridiculous tool, doing hashing in a browser makes no sense, Claude's very bad implementation of it in C does tens of megahash a second and passes all of the challenges nearly instantly. It took about 5 minutes for Claude to write that, and it's not even a particularly fast implementation, but it beats the pants off doing string comparisons for every loop in JavaScript which is what the Anubis tool does.

    for (; ;) {
        const hashBuffer = await calculateSHA256(data + nonce);
        const hashArray = new Uint8Array(hashBuffer);

        let isValid = true;
        for (let i = 0; i < requiredZeroBytes; i++) {
          if (hashArray[i] !== 0) {
            isValid = false;
            break;
          }
        }