Something like the stm32mp2 series of MCUs can run Linux and act as a PCIe endpoint you can control from a kernel module on the MCU. So you can program an arbitrary PCIe device that way (although it won’t be setting any speed records, and I think the PHY might be limited to PCIe 1x)
interesting... x1 would too slow for large amounts of storage, but as a test, a couple small SSDs could potentially be workable... sounds like im doing some digging...
There are many workloads that would not be able to saturate even an x1 link, it all depends on how much of the processing can be done internally to whatever lives on the other side of that link. Raw storage and layer-to-layer communications in AI applications are probably the worst cases but there are many more that are substantially better than that.
Was expecting some real unproductive and entitled whining based on the title, but was pleasantly surprised - someone actually investigating and debugging their wayland issues rather than putting their head in the sand and screaming “X11 FOREVER!!!”
Hm. I found this (that memory must be stable wherever a SEH exception could be thrown) surprising, because I thought the unwind information generated by the compiler should be able to reconstruct all the correct variable values during stack unwinding.
I have no idea whether the text was generated from an LLM, but “slop” it absolutely is not - it’s clearly a very logically ordered walkthrough about a very thorough debugging process.
If you call anything that comes out of a model “slop” the term uses all meaning.
That’s exactly what it was. He discovered the customer was using a version of ffi that had this “use-after-free” (ish) bug, but the question “is this actually what my customer was seeing or is there _another_ bug lurking” still needed to be answered.
I personally know and have (tangentially) worked with the guy and none of what you’ve said is true.
> Look at his CV. Tiny (but impactful) features ///building on existing infrastructure which has already provably scaled to millions and likely has never seen beneath what is a rest api and a react front end///
Off the top of my head he wrote the socket monitoring infrastructure for Zendesk’s unicorn workers, for example.
Question: what actually reads /etc/pooper to configure the character? I can’t work out how that file’s contents ends up as module parameters and I’d love to know!
I don’t know what you’re basing this on. Good psychiatrists absolutely “call themselves doctors” and definitely seek to exclude or treat organic causes of psychiatric symptoms. All the psychiatrists I know absolutely understand there’s a link between the immune system and mood disorders and will involve immunology/rheumatology for these things.
Your ideas about how psychiatry is practiced might have been correct in the 1950’s but they’re a world away from how it’s done in the 2020s.
> Good psychiatrists absolutely “call themselves doctors” and definitely seek to exclude or treat organic causes of psychiatric symptoms.
Well, yeah, you're just stating the contrapositive corollary to my assertion: that psychiatrists who don't "call themselves doctors" [i.e. who don't think of themselves as treating the patient's problem holistically first-and-foremost, and instead just do "talk therapy but you can prescribe"] are bad psychiatrists.
> Your ideas about how psychiatry is practiced might have been correct in the 1950’s
It might just be where I live (Canada), or the particular moment one will find a psychiatrist in their career to have openings to accept new patients to their private practice without a years-long waitlist... but the vast majority of psychiatrists I've interacted with personally as a patient, or have heard about interactions with through friends, have all had a distinctly 1950s mindset.
It might be because most of them have been seemingly nearly old enough to have gone to medical school in the 1950s. Most of them are only a year or two away from retirement.
(Which is frustrating, because it means I and others I know have to keep getting a referral to a new psychiatrist; wait-listing in to see them for an initial consult; seeing them for 1-2 years; and then getting dropped when the psychiatrist retires. And no, none of the psychiatrists I've been to have ever tried to create treatment continuity by cross-referring to another still-working psychiatrist; you just arrive at their office one day for an appointment you scheduled six months back to find it empty.)
But it also seems to imply that — despite the regular continuing education requirements for maintaining licensing — these folks don't seem to actually put the more-modern perspectives they've been exposed to into practice.
Exactly. I feel like this author doesn't realise how long ago 32 bit was replaced. Only specifically retro gamers are still playing on PCs that old, and they're probably not online.
I'm surprised the launcher still supported any 32 bit operating systems this long.
Retro games are either played through emulators (ScummVM, DOSBox, etc.) or bought secondhand on physical media. Indeed both are offline and replayable forever and ever (granted that you back up the physical media you acquired accordingly).
> Which means your changes have to go through the Ruby team first. Any additional changes would also need to go through them …
I do want to pick on this specifically - people can and should be patching open source projects they depend on and deploying them to production (exactly as described in the article). Something being in the language vs in “user” code should be no barrier to improving it.
There's a pretty huge difference between implementing a performance optimization that works in your use case, and upstreaming that optimization to be generally usable.
The latter is often orders of magnitude more work, and the existing solution is probably chosen to be well suited in general.
Patching a dependency comes with significant downstream costs. You need to carry the patch forward to new upstream versions . This implies remembering that the dependency was patched, extracting a patch from the existing changed code, and reapplying the patch, fixing comflicts, recompiling the now special version of that dependency and running tests, checking/updating required license notices accordingly.
This is in essence another form of technical dept.
reply