What the instruction does is well documented, and the history of other invalid instructions being used for the same purpose in the past I'm guessing there is also well known, though a quick search doesn't turn up any official Intel documentation on the matter.
Given who this is and the overall quality of his output over the years, I'm willing to trust it isn't pure guesswork - and anyway, I'd trust his guesswork over many other people's absolute facts.
ACPI firmware is not code that runs by itself. It is code that the kernel interprets. If the kernel doesn't interpret it, it won't run. SMM firmware runs by itself but also can't interact with ACPI locks anyway.
> The author history was harder to understand. An earlier package file listed Pierre-Louis Favreau, Jean-Pierre Lo, and Nicolas Dehandschoewercker. The version that replaced it removed all three names and substituted another author. The only change to the files was the author list. GitHub’s activity record shows that the replacement happened through a force push in August, before our investigation this September.
Wow, this looks pretty damning. I can't imagine Google seeing this as worth the risks. Is an innocent explanation possible here?
This is normal (specific to pyproject.toml overwriting authors). I am not sure about pyproject.toml conventions but I would have done the same. This is the equivalent of telling you who the maintainers of the project are.
Usually what you see in the code is the retention of Copyright statements on source code and LICENSE with some reference on README.
If there is an innocent explanation, I'd love to hear it, because it kind of reads like the force push was done to move the commit with the attribution change out of the public eye so it wasnt clear what they had done.
Maybe it is possible the google engineer didn't understand how open source licenses work, or didn't care since maybe it was supposed to be an internal project first that eventually ended up open sourced?
For over a decade at least, Google has been a hostile entity hoarding trillion dollar's worth of wealth at the expense of everyone else's freedom and well-being. We don't need to embolden them any further by hunting for excuses.
Given the replacement author and email seem like a random person rather than an employee, I wonder if whomever did this thought they had found the "real" author and that somehow the others were incorrect? It's confusing, I don't know.
> As in, if I meant to travel at 70 and was instead doing 100 it doesn’t matter that I sincerely meant not to speed and did not know I was speeding, I can still be convicted even if the judge believes I had no intent.
IANAL but from what I've looked up in the last there's at least willfulness that matters for these things. For example if you could prove that happened because your car accelerator pedal broke and you had no opportunity to react, I'm pretty sure you would not be guilty, strict liability or not.
I'm not sure winning in the midterms will be a net positive for Democrats (barring an infeasible supermajority). Even if they stop everything Republicans want to do (which they won't even get close to), that's just going to become the excuse for the next Republican campaign to blame Democrats for a dysfunctional government, and there's a good chance Democrats would lose as a result. I wouldn't be surprised if it would actually turn out better for Democrats if they stay a minority so that they can't get the blame during the presidential election.
The left needs to stop giving the right a cudgel with which to beat them every election. It's a cudgel of culture-war memes and badvocate tik-toks that resonates with voters more than corruption, autocracy, debt, wars, and the dismantling of our democracy. Meanwhile the DNC gerontocracy hires an army of feckless corpo-humanoid consultants to issue press releases listing all the people Dems fight for - a list that happens to leave out men and white people.
I mean what I wrote: that the list does not include men or white people. It's not that they're at the top, they aren't on the list.
To elucidate more my own 90's era influenced view, is that a list of identities is..."silly" comes to mind but isn't strong enough. "Stupid" is perhaps accurate, but lacks erudition. Perhaps "self-sabotaging" is best, as it reflects my understanding of corpo-politics as a cynical, amoral enterprise that has one goal: to win. It is a sad irony that perhaps this is an example of WHY such an enterprise cannot and perhaps should not attempt any big moral moves. It will always be ham-handed and cause harm.
Take the overt anti-male attitude of the left. That immediately alienates 50% of the population. Full stop. This is not just white men, but black men, Asian men, Latin men. It's all men. I hate this (I use the word "hate" advisedly) because it is bigotry masquerading as compassion, and it fundamentally undermines any claim to principled moral superiority the left has, or ever had. After all, if it is correct to bias against men today, what does that do to previous arguments that bias against women was wrong yesterday? Plus, on a more practical note, you simply can't win elections when you alienate 50% of the population.
I'm under no illusion that I can convince you, or anyone on the left, to change. I've no doubt that the reflexive "he's a sexist, racist, ist-ist" would be your first defense. But I'd hope that, in a moment of clarity, you'd look at the apparently unthinkable victory of Trump, especially the second term, and realize that such policies and attitudes cannot win general elections in the US even against a convicted felon, a rapist, a liar, twice-impeached, and a self-aggrandizing narcissist who is doddering into geriatric solipsism. If you can't beat him with these views, I daresay you can't beat anyone.
Four years ago democrats were in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, and it took economic calamity, high inflation and gas prices, to break that (the same thing that's about to happen to republicans).
Voters aren't that deep. For better or worse, no matter how badly partisans wish them to, identity politics don't matter nearly as much as basic economic issues.
Winning the midterms would make the house speaker a democrat, which would allow for the removal of both the president and vice president via impeachment such that the democratic speaker of the house becomes the acting president, effectively stopping the bullshit of this administration. The question then becomes if the amount of flipped senate seats + the number of republican senators voting yes on impeachment reaches a supermajority. Possible for Trump, highly unlikely for Vance. This was likely the angle Republicans plan to take, as that would make Vance the Incumbent in the 2028 elections, giving him a statistical edge. It also allows for the current republicans in office to look like they are trying to meet the demands of their constituents without giving up any real power and effectively not changing their agenda. A reminder that although Trump is a rapist, the fight against this administration will not end with him. Republicans will continue to employ smoke and mirrors strategies and lean heavily into value extraction from the US and global economy as has been occuring.
> Winning the midterms would make the house speaker a democrat, which would allow for the removal of both the president and vice president via impeachment
That's... not how it works. Democrats literally had a House speaker and the president was, as you could see, not removed despite impeachment.
Impeachment means nothing without convinction by a super majority in the senate. The republicans had a chance to convict trump and remove him from our politics right after he tried to murder them on Jan 6, but most of them were still to stupid or spineless to vote for it. No chance they are going to suddenly spring into action next year.
We're all stuck with two more years of an increasingly demented trump. The best Dems can do is highlight to incompetence/corruption, limt the damage, and get their own brand out of the mud so they can win a strong majority in 2028.
I suggest finding something else, electrical tape starts coming off after a few years, leaving behind sticky residue that's impossible to remove without some kind of solvent. Same goes for masking tape.
I should have clarified: I use a 1" piece of maybe 5mm wide good quality 3M tape that wraps over itself.
This follows (at least my local) electrical code--it's quite robust. I have 40 year old electrical conduit that has tape applied like this and there's no movement, no fraying, no stickiness.
I've yet to find instances where electrical tape comes off of its own accord when wrapped. Even the electrical tape submerged 24x7 on my well pump had to be unwrapped.
Heatshrink is great if you're making cables but you would need a really high shrinkage ratio to fit over the connector and then shrink enough, the common cheap stuff is usually 2:1, maybe 3:1.
You could cut the heatshrink tube, wrap it around the cable and then secure it with transparent tape. It would slide around but at least it wouldn't leave residue on the cable.
Maybe clip-on cable markers like this? [1] Easy to 3D print if you're so inclined.
Brother label printers (and I assume others) can print text small enough and sharp enough to fit onto USB connectors. (You'll need to manually trim the label with scissors to fit of course)
Visually, if it's something I'm going to be staring at on a daily basis, I like this much better than having tags hanging off of the cable. Tip: consider white-on-black labels.
The labels have been plenty durable in my experience, but if you need extra durability, you could probably just brush some lacquer over it with a Q-tip.
Man, I really need to get a label printer. There’s been a whole bunch of stuff I’d like to label already, but I’ve had no idea you could also change the font.
That sounds hard. Is a USB-A-to-C cable in the A group or C group or neither? What about the inverse? What about cables that only do data but can't transmit enough power? What about cables that are slow but high power? What about thick cables like USB4 that barely bend or fit in the bag? What about male-to-female vs. male-to-male? What about brand-specific cables that have their own abilities (say, high-powered but not PD)? The list goes on and on...
I think I hardly have any pairs of cables that are similar enough to be interchangeable, and at this point most of them are USB-C, so they'd all mostly end up in the same bag if that's the criterion.
It's not for everybody (what ever is, rite?) and since you "hardly have any pairs of cables that are similar enough to be interchangeable" then congrats, you're winning at life and don't need anything like this.
The sounds hard
Doesn't feel hard to me. I have a bag for USB A, a bag for USB C, and a bag for USB A<->C.
My USB-C charging cables are all 3' or longer, so they're visually distinct from the crappy little cables that come for free inside the package for various budget-priced gizmos.
My Thunderbolt/USB4 cables are labeled as such, and I am very confused that you are talking about Thunderbolt/USB4 cables so stiff that they cannot bend to fit into a container or bag.... I mean, mine are stiff but not that stiff. Plus these are expensive cables. Not sure I have any spares. Those are bought for purpose.
I think I disagree. I just (re-)discovered a couple of my cables don't have data lines a few hours ago, prompted by the earlier discussion. My initial instinct was also to throw them away like you said. But then I realized they're actually quite useful for any case where you want to prevent data transmission, whether due to security or other reasons.
agree. i have no issue with charging only cables, they’re often lighter and more flexible, but i do require the 56k ohm resistor to wrangle misbehaving devices that could start a fire.
Definitely not winning at life with this lol, it's actually frustrating because the cables are so similar. One has a higher speed, one has a higher power, one is shorter, one is longer, one is more flexible, one has a display showing when it's connected, etc... and in many cases it's hard to tell which at a glance so it's always a pain trying to figure out if I'm using a cable unnecessarily somewhere and unnecessarily buying another one because of that.
Charging is an interesting case, I actually deliberately use crappy cables for that too, depending on the charging time I need!
Re: stiffness: I mean I guess it depends, how big is your bag. I'm thinking like a freezer bag not a grocery bag. I could bend them to fit but then I'd probably mess them up.
When I look up thick thunderbolt 4 cables I see a bend radius of 2 inches at most. And my very thick 15 foot 4K displayport/HDMI cables came packed in a box with a 3 inch bend radius. You can manage a 3 inch bend radius with a quart bag, let alone the 1 gallon or 2 gallon bags that I'd expect to act as reasonable cable storage.
Everybody's situation is different but for me, it hasn't been too big a problem really.
There are only a couple of places where I need the fancier cables that can carry video and have super high xfer speeds. Those don't move around because they're connected to monitors and external hard drives and usually come labeled USB4/Thunderbolt from the factory anyway.
The rest of my USB cables are just rando charging cables... attached to various chargers sticking out of various outlets around my house. No data functionality required and I think iPhone and Android both warn you now if you're plugged into a slow charger.... so I don't really need to differentiate these...
> Re: stiffness: I mean I guess it depends, how big is your bag. I'm thinking like a freezer bag not a grocery bag. I could bend them to fit but then I'd probably mess them up.
A few years back I bought a crapton of 2mil and 4mil clear ziploc style bags in various sizes from amazon. The 6x6" ones are plenty big enough for nearly any modern cable, except for long HDMI/Ethernet. Then those get grouped into big 2x2ft ish 4mil bags.
I guess maybe it is a bit of work in an absolute sense. But, it requires basically zero brainpower. I just sorted and bagged them all up when I was watching a game on TV or something. So it didn't really feel like work lmao
My solution is a big drawer block with lots of spots for different cables. USB c cables with video go in the video cable drawer, high power goes in the power drawer, etc. Can't mistake USB c with HDMI (and mini HDMI can burn in hell). And only buy USB C cables that state their capabilities on the housing, if they don't I'll permanently attach them to a place where they can be most useful.
This is exactly why my reaction to this was “who has one box of cables? Doesn’t everyone have an array of 18 stackable bins of cables sorted by function and vaguely grouped by vintage?”
Don’t ever let anyone take away your wildly overengineered cable shrine.
I suspect the fundamental problem here is it's hard (if not impossible) to determine if someone who tried the winning approach deserves the credit for the discovery, because there's always the chance that they could've done something differently, or stopped before finishing, and thus never actually made the discovery. They might've even tried the approach just based on a whim, without really thinking it would work, and might've given up without a final insight. And fundings run out, people end up in hospitals, etc. What do you credit them with when the work isn't finished? For trying an approach that sounded promising? You can do that I guess, but is that what they want?
reply