Squeeze2664

I heavily use the Pi harness with DeepSeek-v4-pro directly from the DeepSeek API almost exclusively and I have have barely ever felt the need for something different. I have some OpenRouter credits and API key ready to go if DeepSeek fails me, and that almost never happens. It's also unbelievably cheap - so cheap, in fact, that I have started using it even for trivial tasks. I use it for coding, code review, managing my systems in general, and even regular-old-questions. Pi is minimal in many regards including system prompt, tools, and UI, and I found this quality much more preferable than what the other harnesses provide. Currently I use only two extensions to extend Pi's capabilities: a web search tool and a page fetch tool. I might look into getting more as the need arises.

I used to be a heavy Claude Code user but I ended my subscription around the time this Fable nonsense started, as I really don't like the direction Anthropic is taking. I now spend less, get more done, have a better time doing it, and feel better about it.

This is basically telling Claude "Make Resizable Bar work on my RTX 3080" and publishing the summary of the conversation.

For context, the RTX 3080 got ReBAR support with a VBIOS update. Some models ship with an updated VBIOS that supports it, some don't. The author's didn't.

The GPU manufacturer only provides Windows executables to update the VBIOS, the author's on Linux.

There is some valuable exploration (e.g. the mismatch in supported args in nvflash on Windows vs Linux) and just about as much information that is only useful on OP's machine (e.g. Ollama and LightDM are stopped before flashing, which is great if you happen to use either of those) or not useful at all (e.g. the word-soup-slop of diagram after diagram including "CPU Overhead Breakdown" -- what are we doing here?)

Thanks for sharing, anyway.

The topic is interesting and you have my thanks for taking the time to look into it and prepare the post. Would you say it's fair to say that if you didn't use LLMs to prepare the post, we would have no blog post at all? In that case, I think I lean more towards being OK with this usage of LLMs, as I'd rather have this content available than not. However, I can only read that one repeated sentence about "booleans" (Ctrl-F "Boolean" and you'll know what I mean) this many times before I start questioning the validity of the entire document. It is not _good_ writing, to be frank.

Cool project.

> Only the current audio/video frame is being sent to the viewers, there is no way they can download/cache the videos either for future usage.

This seems misleading, though. I think I get what was meant: clients can't send a request to download from the start or a specific offset and thus "download" the original file, the server is in charge of what's being sent. However, clients can still capture the frames, save them, and replay them, obviously. And I see a button to "Seek", so...

Even as someone who generally likes and agrees with George, this reads like it was written during some kind of drunken haze. I hope you're OK, George.

I'm only YouTube-level informed on how silicon manufacturing works, but something that is, perhaps intentionally, not made clear to someone unfamiliar with the field is that this is not manufacturing chips in space. This is to grow the crystals only, the very first step in silicon chip manufacturing. This is how you get the ingot, then you slice it to get the wafers upon which the chips are built. The reason you would even consider doing it in space in the first place is because, on Earth, gravity and other forces are stronger and result in lower-purity crystals. Basically, what I'm getting at, is that I believe this is pretty much a glorified oven. Moving the entire manufacturing process in space wouldn't make sense, as I don't think the benefits to other steps of the process like CVD would outweigh the insane costs of sending things into orbit.

I was going to switch to Waterfox in light of this news, but a cursory search revealed that it, too, was sold to an advertising company not long ago. While they have published a blog post opposing Mozilla's AI stance, I'm really past the point of giving ad companies any benefit of the doubt. I'm looking into Librewolf now.

The browser situation grows more grim by the day.

Is GrapheneOS affected?

Can you imagine someone willing to do those things because of some reason other than monetary gain, as it would be in OP's world? How many people currently stuck in Jobs would work toward accomplishing these things with the idea of ending world hunger, because they _want_ to do it, instead of having to do it because they have student loans and bills to pay?

I suppose the difference is that you only have to rush to claim your domain name (the DNS kind) once and then you get to use it for all "open social" platforms rather than doing that for your username on each platform.

Denuvo's is a virtual machine similar to Java's virtual machine, in that it executes bytecode specifically written for it, within an application's process. I believe the parent post was referring to something closer to a Hyper-V virtual machine, an entire virtual computer.

How do you determine the importance of a layer in this case?

Can you point to something to learn more about this?

GAB, you mean?

After looking into this a bit more, it turns out that yes, there are in fact cryptocurrency-based DID methods already: did:sol, did:ion, did:ethr, and more. So I guess the idea does have some merit to it.

I know next to nothing about Bluesky or ATProto outside of what this article told me, but: as I was reading the part about the need to trust who's controlling the PLC directory, I kept thinking that this could be a proper problem for trust-less cryptographic data storage mechanisms (like cryptocurrency ledgers) to solve. Isn't that right? You would shift the risk from "the entity hosting the PLC directory goes rogue and you can't update your data anymore" to "a sybil attack can boot you off the network"

I guess this content isn't meant to be viewed on mobile, or the blue banner on the left wouldn't be covering the first letters of every line.

The remote development extensions don't appear to be open-source. The marketplace page for the "Remote - SSH" extension will point you to a license that says, among other things, "You may not: work around any technical limitations in the software;". The same page brings you to a github repo for the extension that contains no source code; it claims to be for gathering feedback only. I don't know how you can imply everything about this is open source, maybe I'm not looking in the right place?

Surely MS wouldn't abuse that trust.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42245124

A name like llama-pr-review might help with searching for this thing. Preview being an actual word and all.

In some sense, yes. Use-after-free is impossible in safe Rust (if you don't use the unsafe keyword)

What competition? All the videos are on YouTube.

There's also an ARM CPU inside modern x86 processors, little-known fact. Look up AMD's Secure Processor.

They're perfectly capable of inviting you out for coffee. They just can't show up yet.

I just looked into what noyb is, thank you for pointing this out. Perhaps this is something that had to be brought to court at one point or another, so we can set a precedent one way or the other, then. At the moment I think I'm hoping nothing comes out of this.

This seems so backwards to me. As a user of LLMs, it's clear to me that tokens generated by ChatGPT and similar are not to be interpreted as a legally-valid statement by the company making the LLMs, unless explicitly stated by said company. I certainly don't engage with them that way. I believe this to be fairly obvious to anyone who has used such tools, so I just see this as an opportunity to sue for a quick buck.

Sounds like it was working as intended, then! Doing a great job at it, too.

I can understand region-locks for products that need to comply with region-specific regulations but for things like these it makes me scratch my head. What's the rationale? Is Mozilla worried goverments elsewhere might not like this? It seems so weird to me.

Couldn't get it to work on my first try so I uninstalled it. I configured it to only use chocolatey, which I already use, and it showed two identical entries for "Chocolatey" under installed packages, instead of listing the packages that were already installed through chocolatey. Going into the settings and ticking "use system chocolatey" resulted in only one of the aforementioned entries showing up, but nothing else. I guess I'll keep using the CLI.

You don't have access to the data that's sent to Google when you connect the phone to the internet, so how does that help you mitigate or at least be aware of a supply-chain attack? Conversely, if you got a brand new phone, the bootloader is supposed to be locked, so wouldn't you immediately be aware of tampering if it wasn't?