Previously discussed in 2014 [-1]. Back then there was far less documentation [0].
[-1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7656300
[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20140427215017/http://muen.sk/
Readit NewsDeleted Comment
LiamPowell commented on Muen – An x86/64 Separation Kernel for High Assurance muen.codelabs.ch/... · Posted by u/LiamPowell
> How hard is that to fix? Aren't they using CoPilot? Just ask it to fix the invisible icon.
Maybe that's the problem? Imagine a Microsoft employee allowed to program only by using a CoPilot prompt, screaming and begging to just apply a patch he already written without touching anything else :D
This might not be too far from what's happening. In the dotnet repos you can see MS employees constantly fighting it across hundreds of PRs: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/120637
The main reason I'm posting this is not because this malware is particularly interesting (although seeing this sort of AI use in the wild is interesting) but because of how it's ending up on people's machines. Specifically, it's being widely advertised via Google ads using the most obviously malicious ads I've seen in a very long time: https://adstransparency.google.com/advertiser/AR129387695568...
I'm really surprised to see that Google has let 2000 of these ads through without catching them and that they have not removed them after reports from weeks ago. When clicking in the ads an exe file is immediately downloaded, which you'd think some tool at Google would be able to trivially catch.
The recalled aircraft include the latest A320neo model, some of which are basically brand new. Why would they be using flight computers from before 2002? Why is an old report from 2008, relating to a completely different aircraft type (A330), relevant to the A320 issue today?
> Why would they be using flight computers from before 2002?
Why would you assume they're not? I don't know about aircraft specifically, but there's plenty of hardware that uses components older than that. Microchip still makes 8051 clones 45 years after the 8051 was released.
LiamPowell commented on G0-G3 corners, visualised: learn what "Apple corners" are printables.com/model/1490... · Posted by u/dgroshev
> the maximum deviation between G1 and G3 is only 0.1mm
In a small 100x100mm box, with a 12mm fillet, G1/G2/G3 corners already have a visible 0.5mm difference. What gives it away is the lack of a hard transition between the flat surface and the corner, that's very noticeable on a reflective surface.
On the mechanical side, I think the effect they refer to also comes down to that transition line - going from a straight line immediately into a curve (G1) which adds lateral forces, vs easing into that curve over a few more steps which avoids jerking the print head.
I may have measured incorrectly in the provided model then. That's still pushing things at 3D printer scales, especially when you don't have a polished surface. I also think an internal corner might be more noticeable by feel.
LiamPowell commented on G0-G3 corners, visualised: learn what "Apple corners" are printables.com/model/1490... · Posted by u/dgroshev
This is also what's happening in an elevator. You not only want the speed to increase slowly, you also want the acceleration to increase slowly, cause that's what actually makes your guts go down. And the best way to do this is to have the acceleration of the acceleration continuous.
In the end the position of the elevator is 3-continuous (why is it called G3? in France we call this C3). And the apple corner is just a graph of the position of an elevator wrt time. Mind blowing
G and C continuity have slightly different meanings. You can have curves that are G^n but not C^n and vice-versa. I'll leave it to you to find a maths textbook that gives a better explanation than I would if I attempted to here.
[1]: https://adstransparency.google.com/advertiser/AR129387695568...