• 13 Posts
  • 294 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle



  • There’s a book on the subject written by Srdja Popovic.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blueprint_for_Revolution

    Summary: protests that start (and try to remain) non-violent have a greater chance to succeed, because they can attract more people to their cause.

    Critique: with some regimes, it’s not possible to non-violently protest. For non-violent protest to work, the environment must respect a minimum amount of human rights.

    Case samples:

    • US during the civil rights movement era: yes
    • USSR under Gorbachev: yes
    • Serbia under Milosevic: yes, with difficulty on every step (Popovic was there doing it)
    • Israel under Netanyahu: probably yes
    • China under Xi: practically no (not for long)
    • USSR under Kruschev/Brezhnev/Andropov/Chernenko: not really
    • Russia under Putin: no, don’t even hold a blank sheet of paper
    • Iran under Khamenei: only if you’re doing a bread riot
    • Saudi Arabia, USSR under Stalin, NK under the Kim dynasty: no, and execution would be a possible outcome

    …etc. In some places, you can’t organize. Then your only option is to fight. As long as you can publicly organize, definitely do so - it’s vastly preferable. :)



  • Opinion:

    Politically, the ayatollah can’t be toppled by foreseeable events, except if an Israeli strike should kill him. His successor in that case is unlikely to be milder. Netanyahu is also firmly in power due to special circumstances, and probably pretty safe from any Iranian attempts.

    Militarily, Iran has taken bigger losses, and has probably lost expensive and important parts of its nuclear programme - but not its stocks of highly enriched uranium, or its ability to launch ballistic missiles. From that perspective, if the Israeli strikes were meant to disarm Iran - they didn’t.

    Prognosis: they will trade more strikes and neither will achieve breakthrough success. Iran will lose more in the process.



    • Not providing a platform for activities that harm society (e.g. scams, disinformation).
    • Not providing a platform for activities that will get you sued or prosecuted (e.g. piracy, child porn).
    • They had to pay a considerable amount for the service.

    On social media, putting the burden of blocking on a million users is naive because:

    • Blocks can be worked around with bots, someone has to actively fight circumvention.
    • Some users don’t have the time to block, simply conclude “this is a hostile environment” and leave.
    • Some users fall for scams / believe the disinfo.

    I have once helped others build an anonymous mix network (I2P). I’m also an anarchist. On Lemmy however, support decentralization, defederating from instances that have bad policies or corrupt management, and harsh moderation. Because the operator of a Lemmy instance is fully exposed.

    Experience has shown that total freedom is a suitable policy for apps that support 1-to-1 conversations via short text messages. Everything else invites too much abuse. If it’s public, it will have rules. If it’s totally private, it can have total freedom.









  • How to make Saudia Arabia a normal society?

    • deny it income
    • deny it access to advanced technology
    • deny it legitimacy and cooperation

    Most importantly: stop using oil and natural gas sooner rather than later.

    Reasoning: the king stays in power by paying cops, security officials and prison guards - and paying people to shut up and tolerate the regime. Once the system runs low on money, things may change.

    Note: women in Europe made rapid progress at getting civil rights at a time when they were needed to run ammunition factories.

    It doesn’t have to be a world war - any development that makes it economically unavoidable that women start going to work outside their home, will change the role of women in society.




  • how did you do it?

    In the BIOS options of that specific server (nothing fancy, a generic Dell with some Xeon processor) the option to enable/disable ME was just plainly offered.

    Chipset features > Intel AMT (active management technology) > disable (or something similar, my memory is a bit fuzzy). I researched the option, got worried about the outcomes if someone learned to exploit it, and made it a policy of turning it off. It was about 2 years ago.

    P.S.

    I’m sure there exist tools for the really security-conscious folks to verify whether ME has become disabled, but I was installing a boring warehouse system, so I didn’t check.


  • please read up on intel management engine

    I’m already familiar with it. On the systems I buy and intall, if they are Intel based, ME gets disabled since I haven’t found a reasonable use for it.

    Oh yeah, ARM also has something similar.

    Since this is more relevant to me (numerically, most of the systems that I install are Raspberry Pi based robots), I’m happy to announce that TrustZone is not supported on Pi 4 (I haven’t checked about other models). I haven’t tested, however - don’t trust my word.

    Who would you buy from in this case?

    From the Raspberry Pi Foundation, who are doubtless ordering silicon from TSMC for the Pico series and ready-made CPUs for their bigger products, and various other services from other companies. If they didn’t exist, I would likely fall back on RockChip based products from China.

    https://www.cryptomuseum.com/covert/bugs/nsaant/firewalk/index.htm

    Wow. :) Neat trick. (Would be revealed in competent hands, though. Snap an X-ray photo and find excess electronics in the socket.)

    However, a radio transceiver is an extremely poor candidate for embedding on a chip. It’s good for bugging boards, not chips.


  • The first and central provision of the bill is the requirement for tracking technology to be embedded in any high-end processor module or device that falls under the U.S. export restrictions.

    As a coder with some hardware awareness, I find the concept laughable.

    How does he think they (read: the Taiwanese, if they are willing to) would go about doing it?

    Add a GPS receiver onto every GPU? Add an inertial navigation module to every GPU? Add a radio to every GPU? :D

    The poor politician needs a technically competent advisor forced on him. To make him aware (preferably in the most blunt way) of real possibilities in the real world.

    In the real world, you can prevent a chip from knowing where it’s running and you can’t add random shit onto a chip, and if someone does, you can stop buying bugged hardware or prevent that random addition from getting a reading.