Readit News logoReadit News
play_ac commented on Before OpenAI, Sam Altman was fired from Y Combinator by his mentor   washingtonpost.com/techno... · Posted by u/CartyBoston
bhouston · 2 years ago
> Based on what financial statements do we know FTX was profitable?

The crypto-exchange part I have read many times it was profitable. Running an exchange is a profitable endeavour as you just take a cut of all transactions. As long as you control your costs it is a money printer.

The rest of FTX was full of fraud and Alameda was a money sink via unprofitable speculation. Also likely helping laundry money as well via poor KYC.

Running an exchange is a great business though if you have the volume, doesn't matter if it is crypto or futures or stocks.

play_ac · 2 years ago
No, crypto exchanges are only profitable as a result of massive wash trading and scamming. If they had to actually compete the margins would be hilariously low. Probably even lower than a typical bank because the product is just worse.
play_ac commented on Binance founder Changpeng Zhao agrees to step down, plead guilty   wsj.com/finance/currencie... · Posted by u/himaraya
fidelramos · 2 years ago
What crimes?
play_ac · 2 years ago
For starters, any of the money laundering crimes that CZ just pleaded guilty to. That's what any of these cryptocurrencies mean when they say transactions can't be tracked.
play_ac commented on GTK: Introducing Graphics Offload   blog.gtk.org/2023/11/15/i... · Posted by u/signa11
superkuh · 2 years ago
Uh... don't expose your X.org server to the internet naked. I thought this was obvious. All the problems you mentioned go away. Who exposes X to the net anyway? That's not something a normal desktop install does.

It is cargo culting. It's not actually a problem that my applications are powerful and can do what I want them to do. It is a problem that other locked down OSes like Macs and smartphone systems are not in the user's control and programs cannot do many things by design. This is because on those systems the users are not in control of what is running and the OS makers believe they know better. If they can't do it it is useless (no qualification re: fantasy security issues needed).

... sharing keyboard/mouse with synergy/barrier/etc is secure.

play_ac · 2 years ago
>Uh... don't expose your X.org server to the internet naked.

This is not something the X maintainers can say. They can encourage people not to do it but if they stop maintaining that feature then the complaints start to roll in because someone somewhere was using it. If you think this situation is awful then yes, you're starting to get it: X is in a bad spot where these broken insecure features are holding else everything back and will continue to do so as long as people depend on it. At best they can disable it by default and make it hard to accidentally re-enable it, which is what they've already done.

>That's not something a normal desktop install does.

Yes, most normal desktop installs don't use X11 in any capacity. They use Microsoft Windows.

>It's not actually a problem that my applications are powerful and can do what I want them to do.

I notice you didn't actually respond to my comment about stopping using passwords and private keys and running everything as root. Because I'd bet even you draw a line somewhere, in a place where you think it's a risk to give an application too much power.

>It is a problem that other locked down OSes like Macs and smartphone systems are not in the user's control and programs cannot do many things by design.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Linux or even on those systems either. It's not actually a problem there. If you have root on the system then you are in control and can do whatever you want anyway. The purpose of setting security boundaries and not running everything as root is because not everything needs to access everything else all the time. The security model you're suggesting became obsolete by the mid 1990s.

And let me say this again so it's perfectly clear. When you use X11 there is effectively no security boundary between any X11 clients. So if you start up your root terminal or you use sudo or anything else like that, then any other X11 client on the system also gets root. This is unacceptable and I can't believe I still have to continually point this out to long time Linux users that should be technical enough to understand. It doesn't even matter if you personally think it's fine to run everything as root: maybe you do. But as a user you should have enough understanding of the system to know that this absolutely is not ok for lots of other users and it's simply not appropriate to be shipped as the default in the year 2023.

These are not fantasy issues, these are actual issues that the underlying system was purposely designed to fix. X11 pokes a huge gaping hole in it.

>sharing keyboard/mouse with synergy/barrier/etc is secure.

No. On a typical X11 install it's not, because it relies on insecure APIs.

play_ac commented on Binance founder Changpeng Zhao agrees to step down, plead guilty   wsj.com/finance/currencie... · Posted by u/himaraya
matheusmoreira · 2 years ago
There should not be any on-off ramps to begin with. People should just transact in XMR directly. That's what crypto was supposed to have been like.
play_ac · 2 years ago
That won't happen and would actually be much worse for Monero because it means everything becomes a giant target for thieves and scammers, even more than it already is. The reason it's failed is because the idea of cryptocurrency is fundamentally bad. Monero isn't even trying to hide it. The developers openly say that criminals should use it to commit crimes.
play_ac commented on Binance founder Changpeng Zhao agrees to step down, plead guilty   wsj.com/finance/currencie... · Posted by u/himaraya
rahen · 2 years ago
Lightning has grown beyond its two original creators and now has a healthy community behind it. Worth mentioning are Rusty Russel (iptables, netfilter, some network layers of the Linux kernel) and the fine folks at Acinq (acinq.co).

Yes, it still has some rough edges but it's now mostly usable. https://medium.com/coinmonks/lightning-network-2018-to-2023-...

Besides, about 80% of transactions within exchanges are actually off-chain, so this is nothing new.

play_ac · 2 years ago
"Usable" is a massive stretch. The only way most people will ever be able to use it is through a custodial wallet, so it's right back to bank accounts and centralized exchanges.

But the whole thing is a distraction anyway. The majority of transactions happening off-chain means that Bitcoin is an utter failure at everything it ever set out to accomplish.

play_ac commented on Binance founder Changpeng Zhao agrees to step down, plead guilty   wsj.com/finance/currencie... · Posted by u/himaraya
asterix_pano · 2 years ago
There are now lots of efficient cryptos and some that can run on a single wind turbine. But I am with you, hoping the energyvore ones die as fast as possible.
play_ac · 2 years ago
The efficient ones are still outright scams if not blatantly illegal. All cryptocurrencies should die. After more than a decade it's clear by now that blockchains are a useless technology and the investors are getting more and more desperate to pass the bag.
play_ac commented on GTK: Introducing Graphics Offload   blog.gtk.org/2023/11/15/i... · Posted by u/signa11
sph · 2 years ago
Are you saying that latency in the order of 250ms when editing text is unnoticeable?

Yeah, that is utter nonsense. Just try it for yourself, instead of pulling statements like that out of thin air. You would notice a difference in tens of ms even when editing text. Why do you think people cannot stand writing with VSCode for example?

Re: moving/evolving shapes, I did not think I had to clarify that the brain is a massively parallel system with multiple modes of operation. Editing text does not require you to reprocess all visual signals from scratch, because that is not how the visual cortex works. The perceived latency when editing text is between pressing a key and your brain telling you "my eyes have detected a change on the screen. I will assume that it is the result of me pressing a key". It does NOT take 250ms to make this type of assumption, and is basically how our vision operates. It's a prediction engine, not a CCD sensor.

play_ac · 2 years ago
>Why do you think people cannot stand writing with VSCode for example?

Which people? Every recent study I've seen shows VSCode as the most popular code editor by a large margin. Maybe latency isn't as important as you think?

>Are you saying that latency in the order of 250ms when editing text is unnoticeable?

No. Sorry for the info dump here but I'm going to make it absolutely clear so there's no confusion. The latency of the entire system is the latency of the human operator plus the latency of the computer. My statement is that, assuming you have a magical computer that computes frames and displays pixels faster than the speed of light, the absolute minimum bound of this system for the average person is 250ms. You only see lower response time averages in extreme situations like with pro athletes: so basically, not computer programmers who actually spend much more time thinking about problems, and going to meetings, than they actually spend typing.

Now let's go back to reality: with a standard 60Hz monitor, the theoretical latency added by display synchronization is a maximum of about 16.67ms. That's the theoretical MAXIMUM assuming the software is fully optimized and performs rendering as fast as possible, and your OS has realtime guarantees so it doesn't preempt the rendering thread, and the display hardware doesn't add any latency. So at most, you could reduce the total system latency by about 6% just by optimizing the software. You can't go any higher than that.

However, none of those things are true in practice. Making the renderer use damage tracking everywhere significantly complicates the code and may not even be usable in some situations like syntax highlighting where the entire document state may need to be recomputed after typing a single character. All PC operating systems may have significant unpredictable lag caused by the driver. All display hardware using a scanline-based protocol also still has significant vblank periods. Adding these up you may be able to sometimes get a measurement of around 1ms of savings by doing things this way, in exchange for massively complicating your renderer, and with a high standard deviation. Meaning that you likely will perceive the total latency as being HIGHER because of all the stuttering. This is less than 1% of the total latency in the system and it's not even going to be consistent or perceptible.

Now instead consider you've got a 360Hz monitor. The theoretical maximum you can save here is about 2.78ms. This can give you a CONSISTENT 5% latency reduction against the old monitor as long as the software can keep up with it. Optimizing your software for this improves it in every other situation too, versus the other solution which could make it worse. If it doesn't make it worse, it could only save another theoretical 1% and ONLY in a badly perceptible way. It just doesn't make sense to optimize for this less than 1% when it's mostly just caused by the hardware limitations and nobody actually cares about it and they're happy to use VSCode anyway without all this.

So again, you can avoid these accusations of "utter nonsense" when it's clear you're arguing against something that I never said.

>The perceived latency when editing text is between pressing a key and your brain telling you "my eyes have detected a change on the screen.

Your brain needs to actually process what was typed. Prediction isn't helping you type at all, if it did then the latency wouldn't matter anyway. If you're not just writing boilerplate code then you may have to stop to think many many times while you're coding too.

Dead Comment

play_ac commented on GTK: Introducing Graphics Offload   blog.gtk.org/2023/11/15/i... · Posted by u/signa11
superkuh · 2 years ago
You keep saying X11 is insecure but I've never had a problem with that in the last 20 years. I've never known anyone with an X11 security problem in the last 20 years. I've never heard of anyone having an X11 security problem in the last 20 years. Perhaps you can point me to an incident? The idea that it's "insecure" to let applications on your computer access the inputs of other programs comes from smartphone space where you don't actually control your computer or the software on it and that becomes a problem. But for actual computers you control it just isn't (a problem).

Wayland for "security" is cargo culting smartphone user problems. It's not actually a real issue.

I use the keyboard/mouse sharing in X11 (via synergy) and I have for 20 years. It is vitally important to my workflow. It works on dozens of different OSes including linux. But not the waylands linuxes. Any graphical environment that can't do this is useless to me. Might as well not even release the waylands at all (see how silly applying my personal preferences globally seems?).

play_ac · 2 years ago
>I've never heard of anyone having an X11 security problem in the last 20 years.

Here's 6 CVEs just from last month. Check the mailing lists and you'll see many of these going back for years and years.

https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2023-October/061506.html

https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/2023-October/061514.html

And before you say this is not what you meant, the X server and X client libraries do very little anymore besides parsing untrusted input and passing it somewhere else. That's its main purpose and it's completely bad at it. And because it's X, this input can also come from over the network too so every normal memory bug can also be an RCE. This is probably the single biggest attack vector on a desktop system aside from the toolkit. It's the exact wrong thing for anyone to grant access to every input on the system.

This is not just my personal opinion or me giving anecdotes either, this is paraphrasing what I've heard X developers say after many years of patching these bugs. But that's not even the whole problem as I'll explain shortly.

>But for actual computers you control it just isn't (a problem). Wayland for "security" is cargo culting smartphone user problems. It's not actually a real issue.

Yes it is a problem and no it's not cargo culting. Practically speaking the X11 security model means every X client gets access to everything including all your passwords (and the root password) as you type them, and subsequently lets every X client spawn arbitrary root processes and get access to your whole filesystem including your private keys and insert kernel modules or do whatever. If you actually think this "isn't a real issue" then you should just stop using passwords, stop protecting your private keys, run every program as root, and disable memory protection: because that's what this actually means in practice. No I'm not exaggerating. The security model of X11 has no idea about client boundaries at all. This is completely unacceptable on any other OS but for some reason it's become a meme to say that only smartphones need to care about this. Really? Come on.

>I use the keyboard/mouse sharing in X11 (via synergy) and I have for 20 years. It is vitally important to my workflow. It works on dozens of different OSes including linux. But not the waylands linuxes. Any graphical environment that can't do this is useless to me.

X11 can't do it securely so I would say that's as useless as not implementing the feature, if you have to compromise your security in order to get it.

The feature will be implemented in Wayland eventually when the design for a secure API is finished. There are people working on it now. In comparison, X11 is probably never going to gain a secure way to do that.

play_ac commented on GTK: Introducing Graphics Offload   blog.gtk.org/2023/11/15/i... · Posted by u/signa11
sylware · 2 years ago
play_ac · 2 years ago
Can you tell me which part of this you're referring to?

u/play_ac

KarmaCake day36November 18, 2023View Original