> For repairing a broken thing? After provably trying in vain to get the landlord to fix it?
Down the hallway from my office used to be the management of a small hotel chain. We often had lunch together and I got to hear a bunch of interesting anecdotes over the years.
Way back when they started up and didn't yet have enough cash to actually own the buildings they operated in, they rented. One of the buildings turned out to have numerous issues (holes in the roof, gaps near exterior walls, etc...). To the point that they eventually didn't pass a fire inspection. They repeatedly asked the owner to have it fixed. Pressed for time, they themselves eventually payed someone, out of their own pocket, so it would at least be up to code for the fire inspection.
From what I was told, the owner threw a tantrum over them modifying the building, terminated the contract and sued them. Successfully.
If you are a tenant in a rental apartment, you'd probably have more leniency on the legal side (compared to a company renting a business property). But still, I'd be very careful making any assumptions about the legal situation rather than risking some sort of Kafkaesque legal mess.
Over here at least, it is very common in apartment complexes that the apartment owner is a different person/entity than the building owner and only the later has the rights to mess with stuff installed in the walls (e.g. plumbing) and especially stuff elsewhere in the building (e.g. an external intercom system). If you ask the landlord to fix it, the best they could do is forward that request to the building owner. If you pulled a stunt like the OP did, there's a good chance that the building owner will sue your landlord.
In the US states that I know well, a residential tenant may perform necessary repairs to bring the space up to health and safety codes, and may deduct the cost from their rent. They have an obligation to notify the property manager, in advance in the case of non-emergency repairs, or after the fact otherwise. There are additional details to consider as well.
I don't know if this would apply to a commercial tenant.
But it would definitely not apply to non-violating conditions like the OP's case.
> the owner threw a tantrum over them modifying the building, terminated the contract and sued them. Successfully.
Was the unauthorized modification permanent or undoable? If the latter, I think some people should really get their judge card (or landlord card) revoked.
Did the judge at least suggest what alternative action the tenant should have taken to comply with the law and code?
Most likely the (legally) correct thing to do in the US is to first report the landlord to the relevant agency, possibly named something like Licensing and Inspections or Fair Housing or somesuch. Each local jurisdiction will have it's own agencies for this, so do research. Failure to respond to that would next involve a landlord-tenant lawyer.
Whether or not it's worth all the trouble and time is a different matter. For most people, I'd say reporting to relevant authorities to make the landlord's life harder without needing much continuing effort is probably worth doing, but the lawsuit side is likely to be a huge time and money sink and it's almost always easier to just move. Let the city sue them for continuing to accrue complaints of unsafe living conditions.
In the same way, a landlord cannot evict you themself if you just fail to pay rent, but there are multiple legal mechanisms to eventually get the sheriff to do it for them. Basically, if landlord-tenant negotiation fails, I think the only legal recourse is to involve governmental third parties unless you technically open yourself up to legal reprisal.
> It's interesting how they found the unused code.
From the article: the code was broken.
The breaking bug was discovered in 2023 by syzbot, a fuzzer, and found out to have been introduced in 2016. This means that probably nobody has been using UDP-Lite (at least on a recent kernel, even LTS) for quite some time now.
It is now 2026, it has been proposed and discussed to remove UDP-Lite entirely, the patch set has gone through several iterations on the netdev mailing list. Apparently nobody complained that, actually, they do need that and it has been merged to the netdev tree, likely ending up in the next release.
I must admit just from reading the description, it doesn't sound that the correct inference is that it's never been used.
"In 2023, syzbot found a null-ptr-deref bug triggered when UDP-Lite attempted to charge an skb after the total memory usage for UDP-Lite _and_ UDP exceeded a system-wide threshold, net.ipv4.udp_mem." to me reads that if the total memory usage never exceeded that threshold then the bug wouldn't trigger. So, wouldn't this bug only affect people who changed that threshold down below the current usage? Because otherwise, usage wouldn't go above the threshold anyway?
And just because the kernel is logging a deprecation notice, there's no guarantee that anyone would ever see that, depending how often it was logged.
But that said, I'd never even heard of this feature, and wouldn't be at all surprised if many routers hadn't just silently dropped these packets anyway because they didn't recognise the protocol version.
Yes, but it's not natural to say "It's not <non sequitur thing no one was talking about>. It's <amazing globally impactful thing that should make you pay attention>." That's how LLMs write though.
A Pentium 4, overclocked to 5GHz with liquid nitrogen cooling.
Watching this was such an amazing throwback. I remember clearly the last time I saw it, which was when an excited friend showed it to me on a PC at our schools library. A year or so before YouTube even existed.
By 2005, my Pentium 4 Prescott at home had some 3.6GHz without overclocking, 4GHz models for the consumer market were already announced (but plagued by delays), but surely 10GHz was "just a few more years away".
IIRC, part of the GHz problem is that very long pipelines like that of the Pentium 4 tend to show increasing benefits at higher clocks. If you can keep the pipeline full then the system reaps the benefits. Sort of like a drag racer - goes very fast in a straight line but terrible on corners.
But with longer pipelines comes larger penalties when the pipeline needs to be flushed, so the P4 eventually hit a wall and Intel returned to the late Pentium 3 Tualatin core, refining it into the Pentium M which later evolved into the first Core CPUs.
> I wonder how many out there seriously think we could ever completely rid ourselves of the CPU. It seems to be a rising sentiment.
This sentiment is not a recent thing. Ever since GPGPU became a thing, there have been people who first hear about it, don't understand processor architectures and get excited about GPUs magically making everything faster.
I vividly recall a discussion with some management type back in 2011, who was gushing about getting PHP to run on the new Nvidia Teslas, how amazingly fast websites will be!
Similar discussions also spring up around FPGAs again and again.
The more recent change in sentiment is a different one: the "graphics" origin of GPUs seem to have been lost to history. I have met people (plural) in recent years who thought (surprisingly long into the conversation) that I mean stable diffusion when talking about rendering pictures on a GPU.
Nowadays, the 'G' in GPU probably stands for GPGPU.
The dream I think has always been heterogeneous computing. The closest here I think is probably apple with their multi-core cpus with different cores, and a gpu with unified memory. (someone with more knowledge of computer architecture could probably correct me here).
Have a CPU, GPU, FPGA, and other specific chips like Neural chips. All there with unified memory and somehow pipelining specific work loads to each chip optimally to be optimal.
I wasn't really aware people thought we would be running websites on GPUs.
> How feasible is it to make a crt from parts? [...] I've never seen a DIY CRT kit before.
The closest thing that springs to mind: A friend of mine once drilled a hole into an empty Vodka bottle, stuck two wires in it (one at each end), a hose adapter for a vacuum pump, "sealed" the whole thing with a hot glue gun and hooked it up to several scavenged microwave oven transformers in series. Yes, the output was rectified and capacitors were also involved.
I suppose rearranging the electrodes (using a piece of sheet metal with a hole in it; both fed through the neck of the bottle) and wrapping the sides of the bottle with 4 strips of aluminium foil could get you a beam and some crude deflection control. Not sure tough what you would coat the end of the bottle with, but I guess vacuum coating would be applicable.
If that sounds absolutely insane to you, I'd wholeheartedly agree.
At least to my ears, trying to build a CRT from first principles, combined with learning-by-doing and learning-EE-from-youtube-tutorials, sounds like a fast path to end up either dead or in a permanent care facility. Not exactly something I'd hand out in beginner-friendly kit form.
from the turn of the previous player, your intended move will typically be more complicated to visualize (at least for children) - this is what this game is about - so children tended to name a "Eckkarte" an "Ätschkarte".
Maybe that game exists, but it's an old word and you can find references for it that are hundreds of years old. Its meaning fits to the browser. Your statement that it's just some kind of reference to some special game is not correct.
I'm pretty sure if you really want to, you could do something like this as a hobbyist with a Pentium right now.
Instead of futzing with wires on a breadboard you could simply designing a PCB up front, throw the design over the fence at JLC or PCBWay, insert coin, wait patiently at the mailbox, solder your scavenged Socket 7 onto the board.
The days of toner transfer and aquarium pumps are already long gone. Getting production quality, one-off, multi layer PCBs done as a hobbyist is dirt cheap these days, no government budgets required.
> you could simply designing a PCB up front, throw the design over the fence at JLC or PCBWay, insert coin, wait patiently at the mailbox
It blows my mind that I can use free-as-in-beer Free-as-in-Speech software to design a PCB, email it to a dude in China, and get a finished working professional-looking PCB back in my hand within a week, for the price of a couple of coffees. And if I want the components stuck on too, it'll cost a little extra, maybe three coffees it costs now.
If I want it really quickly then for the price of a decent takeaway curry I can have it flown over next day. What the actual hell?
Edit: the slowest part of "next day" is when it hits the UK, and if I could guarantee it just gets delivered to DHL's Edinburgh depot I could drive down there in two hours.
The reality is that's just how cheap commodity circuit construction is, and even small shops in the US sometimes approach that low cost, and we've been paying crazy markup on electronics for decades. That dirt cheap board is so profitable it is using air freight to get back to you. It is literally burning money just for convenience, yet that is the "cheap" option.
Electronics cost a lot to manufacture in the 70s, but is entirely automated now but for "reasons" we have only seen a small part of that savings.
When you buy the "Cheap" version on AliExpress, they are still making a healthy margin, yet Americans will happily buy the exact same product off Amazon for next day shipping for 10x the cost and think they are getting a "deal"
This extends to cars as well, with the F150 costing as little as $20k to build, even with "Expensive" very unionized and well compensated labor. The higher market trims only cost a little more to make but take in far higher profit margins. How much of China's supposedly "Subsidized" car price (as if the US doesn't do anything to subsidize cars) is just a lower profit margin?
Things should be way cheaper to western consumers. Where does all that extra money go? "Marketing and administration", basically bloated executive suites, bloated middle management, and the pockets of Meta, Google, AWS, and Apple. Oh gee, those exact companies seem absurdly wealthy and are basically responsible for all economic growth in the past few decades.
> even small shops in the US sometimes approach that low cost
It's ludicrously expensive to ship things to and from the US though, and since they're now paying some insane markup because no-one understands what tariffs are the prices have got even sillier.
Down the hallway from my office used to be the management of a small hotel chain. We often had lunch together and I got to hear a bunch of interesting anecdotes over the years.
Way back when they started up and didn't yet have enough cash to actually own the buildings they operated in, they rented. One of the buildings turned out to have numerous issues (holes in the roof, gaps near exterior walls, etc...). To the point that they eventually didn't pass a fire inspection. They repeatedly asked the owner to have it fixed. Pressed for time, they themselves eventually payed someone, out of their own pocket, so it would at least be up to code for the fire inspection.
From what I was told, the owner threw a tantrum over them modifying the building, terminated the contract and sued them. Successfully.
If you are a tenant in a rental apartment, you'd probably have more leniency on the legal side (compared to a company renting a business property). But still, I'd be very careful making any assumptions about the legal situation rather than risking some sort of Kafkaesque legal mess.
Over here at least, it is very common in apartment complexes that the apartment owner is a different person/entity than the building owner and only the later has the rights to mess with stuff installed in the walls (e.g. plumbing) and especially stuff elsewhere in the building (e.g. an external intercom system). If you ask the landlord to fix it, the best they could do is forward that request to the building owner. If you pulled a stunt like the OP did, there's a good chance that the building owner will sue your landlord.
reply