Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | _hyn3's commentslogin

Check out FUTO keyboard with the larger 250 MB model

I use it everyday.

> someone invited a whole mailing list

IIRC, LinkedIn would email everyone in your "address book" (or anything else it could find) back in the day.


You recall correctly. It is too bad they have been rewarded for it instead of the lot of c suite being sent to jail and ill gotten gains clawed back

You're right - the article says 'CPU: Intel Xeon E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10 GHz' but also says DDR3. And the specs page for that CPU (https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/92986/i...) clearly says the 2620 v4 is DDR4.

E5 CPUs have their supported RAM right on the Intel ARK pages, but short version:

E5-xxxxx v1 and v2 are all DDR3

E5-xxxxx v3 and v4 are all DDR4

Not sure why Intel didn't just cut new model numbers instead of keeping them all as "e5"

More concrete example for E5-2660 (great processor) showing v1 and v2 support DDR3, while v3 and v4, DDR4 (again, different motherboards)

DDR3 v1: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/64584/i...

DDR3 v2: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/75272/i...

DDR4 v3: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/81706/i...

DDR4 v4: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/91772/i...

This also means that you need to know the processor your motherboard supports (or, easier, probably RAM) before putting in an order to upgrade the processor. (These processors are incredibly cheap, less than $10 for something that might have cost literally thousands ten years ago, so worthwhile to spend a few minutes and pick out your favorite based on cores, watts, Ghz, etc.)

(Another commenter says that there are some motherboards that accept v3/v4 but also can run slower DDR3 RAM. That's new to me and quite cool - DDR3 is extremely cheap, even now. I did find these motherboards on aliexpress, too: https://www.aliexpress.us/w/wholesale-XD3-motherboard.html?s... and one clearly says v3/v4 cpu's with DDR3 RAM. That could be very useful although memory speeds are slower since CPU performance can be boosted with v3/v4.)

v1: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/...

v2: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/...

v3: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/...

v4: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/series/...


Yeah, or a Macbook Neo! No need to disparage other people's use cases.

Only if you are solely an Apple user, because it's literally not a problem anywhere else. I've taken tons of photos of movies with my Pixels.


My Pixel 8a also blocks screenshots of DRM content. The analog hole remains gaping: pause the movie on your MacBook, and take a picture of the screen with your iPhone.

You have definitely not. Go ahead, try taking a screenshot of a movie playing on Netflix on your pixel right now.

If SOC2 relies on competent auditors (and you're right, it does), than it is an ineffective standard (and it mostly is).

It absolutely doesn't rely on competent auditors. The AICPA that fabricated SOC2, is the same AICPA that gives licenses to the auditors. At some point, they opened it up to getting it over the internet.

Indian companies open up shell businesses in Wyoming and elsewhere, get "certified", and offer rubber stamp auditing services. Few ever check if you actually have SOC2, or what auditor you used (since, by definition, they need to be "legit").

By the way, the AICPA website was recently throwing https expired cert errors. Their solution after weeks of me pointing it out on twitter, was to take down the entire website.


Touche.. actually a good point, but actually those are two different situations. With one, I'm accessing a website and trusting that the certificate is signed by someone I trust; so the trust in my browser certificates (which include certificates from hundreds of certificate authorities all over the world, any one of which could be compromised, robbed, or controlled by an adversarial person or even government) is extended to the site that I'm visiting. To say this is weak sauce rather understates how bad this actually is. (To paraphrase Churchill, this is the worst possible design, except for all the rest.)

With the other, I'm logging into a server for the first time (and I could simply deploy the same trusted host key to all my ssh servers via an autoscaling configuration or whatever). I think it's debatable if TOFU is worse or better than your (granted clever) metaphor.

(to those who'd recommend userify, yes - great for the client login issue and definitely increases security, but to parent's point, TOFU is still needed unless you want to distribute host pubkeys)


Excellent evaluation. From reading the code, it appears that the units for the numbers column is usually milliseconds (ms)

It also looks like squinn is the clear leader for most but not all of the benchmarks.

Even though it's "not scientific", is still very useful as a baseline - thanks for taking this effort and publishing your results!

Also taking a look at monibot.io , looks cool


Thank you.


How is this different from any other self hosted solution; you've still got to manage spam yourself. Might as well go self hosted.


Spam isn't the only challenge of going self-hosted and it's cool to tie into an existing ecosystem for identity. Also it's pretty neat that people can engage outside of your website while you still get to pick what gets surfaced on your own website.


I have a static site. Self hosted would mean I’d need a database and I think right now I want to keep the static generation. Happy to try self hosted in future and write my own solution but right now I got plenty of side projects


What would TSMC do if they couldn't sell chips to the USA? It cuts both ways, like most trade negotiations.


If they could no longer sell in the USA than they would no longer have a reason to care about US restrictions on selling chips to other countries. China would be happy to buy many of the chips the US was no longer buying.


Is “don’t buy stuff with TSMC chips” really a valid option we have?

Isn’t that basically “stop buying high technology” to a large degree?


We can use older processes if we have to. We'd be taking a step back of... maybe 5-10 years? Computers 10 years ago were not that much slower than they are today. Volume would be a bigger concern than performance. Maybe it'd force the tech industry to start writing more efficient user-facing software instead of depending on the incremental advancements made by chip designers and semi fabs.


> We'd be taking a step back of... maybe 5-10 years? Computers 10 years ago were not that much slower than they are today

There’s more to the world of computing than your laptop.

Stepping back to 10 year old GPUs and server CPUs would be a massive handicap on the country.

> Maybe it'd force the tech industry to start writing more efficient user-facing software instead of depending on the incremental advancements made by chip designers and semi fabs.

It’s not about the speed of your laptop loading Slack. Large scale compute is already squeezing as much performance as we can out of server hardware.


Not to mention there wouldn’t even be enough capacity to make all the chips we need even if we went with slower chips.


And that's my friends is how to crash the stock market.


> Is “don’t buy stuff with TSMC chips” really a valid option we have?

Not sure that TSMC would want to do that either! We're probably their biggest market, even allowing for China.

> Isn’t that basically “stop buying high technology” to a large degree?

I think you're right, to an extent, at leastt in the near term.

However, we do have (and especially used to have) various fabbing here in the States, from Samsung to Intel. Especially the latter has been neglected, but these changes would probably accelerate on-shoring and perhaps bring some of it back here.

Don't forget that TSMC is in a country that is probably going to go through some significant instability in the next few years. From a business continuity perspective, we'd need to consider availability and supply chain management with the strong possibility of a major vendor being located in the middle of a hot warzone.


I’m not arguing TSMC is in a good place geopolitically. I agree there’s a huge risk there.

I just don’t think “don’t use TSMC“ is a realistic choice at all right now.

That’s like telling someone in rural Montana “just don’t use a car”. If you want to live a normal life it’s not very doable.


The amazing thing about (near) monopolies is that companies don't have to worry about folks voting with their wallets anymore.

Those pesky customers and their demands have been dealt with!


Sell to the other 95% of humanity I guess.


But what percentage of total sales do they make up?


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

Search: