You wouldnt be using coreml since thats apples software, but likely vulkan versions of llama.cpp or pytorch or what have you. How well that works at the moment i dont know
Take a look at some of the really new ones, like the Milk-V Jupiter 2 based around the SpaceMIT K3[0]. Single core is still lacking but the multi-core isn't all that far behind a pi5 (350 vs 900 single core and 1700 vs 2100 multicore in a geekbench beta version).
And I will note that the other poster didn't say they beat it, just that there are lots of chips being built. I'd imagine that the cores on the tenstorrent cards would blow all the other arm cores out of the water if you could run the benchmarks on them directly, given the much higher core speeds and memory bandwidth etc.
The multicore is only close because the RISC-V one has twice as many cores and uses twice as much power. That would suggest the RISC-V cores are getting around pi3 levels of performance which is a decade old and losing badly as perf/W.
> The main roadblock to the existence of fast RISC-V cores is the entrenchment of large x86 and arm ecosystems.
I'd disagree with that, their existence and decades of a head start mean they've been much more well invested but that's one of the things we're starting to see change, even if it's because of what would appear to be political motivations. We're starting to see a lot of investment into it in China because it looks like it's a reasonable way for tech sovereignty against the x86 monopoly. They've got licenses to some older (not sure about newer) AMD processor designs, I think around Zen2 architecture, for one of their major manufacturing firms but that won't easily let them move forward since they've got to do a lot of work to keep it up with compatibility and performance for newer ISA additions and such. That's one of the reasons they've been subsiding development of LoongSong64 and RISC-V to the point where for a while the larger LoongSong64 cores were illegal to export to some countries[0].
And then you've got a lot of other companies building faster RISC-V cores, for yes more embedded style designs but not the usual traditional embedded designs either. You've got TensTorrent working on AI work loads with real hardware out there that at least for ML stuff can compete on inference if you can get your software to run on it, and then you've got Bolt doing similar for GPU workloads[1]. While both of those are closer to embedded since you're not going to use them as a desktop, they're still making really fast RISC-V cores that could be theoretically turned into a standard RVA23 core by adding the missing extensions to make it work. That's of course not trivial but the entrenchment of x86 and arm aren't quite as daunting as they might have originally seemed.
It's still not as fast as I'd like, simply because I want to start seeing some RISC-V mini pcs get made that are fine for a daily driver office pc to happen.
You aren't disagreeing with the existence of the roadblock, just how hard it is to overcome.
And yes, there is a bunch of funding being pumped into it. I do have hope that some kind of RISC-V linux workstation will be viable in the next 5 years, without sacrificing too much performance or my wallet. I just wouldn't expect that to translate into making inroads into existing markets where x86 and arm have moats, like android/apple smartphones and more typical desktop/laptop workloads (even on linux).
I wouldn't count the AI/GPU stuff, those are generally pretty simple RISC pipelines with large vector units. Though TensTorrent do actually have a high-performance out-of-order rva23 core [1] that would be able to compete in this space. They are currently selling it as a "core for agentic workloads"
The XuanTie C950 looks pretty beefy for a RISC-V chip with integrated TPE. But it isn’t available commercially.
They are moving fast in China, wouldn’t be surprised if they offer a breaking integrated solution in the near future.
There aren’t any benchmarks available for the C950 but the comparisons go towards early Apple M-Series performance.
Firefox has also adopted and supports Manifest v3, but Mozilla did not adopt all of Chrome/Chromium’s Manifest v3 restrictions.
In Chrome/Chromium, Manifest v3 largely replaces extension-controlled network blocking with a more restrictive «declarativeNetRequest», whereas Firefox, by contrast, has deliberately kept support for blocking «webRequest» functionality.
Importantly, the full uBlock Origin is a Manifest V2 extension. The Manifest v3-compatible version is uBlock Origin Lite, which has fewer capabilities.
Brave has certainly said a lot of good things while doing quite [0] a lot [1] of bad [2] things [3] that make me think it's mostly just marketing to lower-knowledge users that's carrying it forward. I see so many 'privacy' influencers that recommend it and Chromium, and then Firefox with no mention of FOSS options like LibreWolf, Tor Browser, IronFox, etc
Yep, I don't trust Brave. A web browser holds so much power over your digital life that it cannot be entrusted to a company that consistently and egregiously compromises its ethics for profit. Most of these examples border on scam behaviour... par for the course for the cryptocurrency space!
For all their faults, Mozilla has never done anything that holds a candle to the kinds of stunts Brave keeps pulling.
more specifically, it was for donating to homophobic political groups trying to pass Prop 8 which made gay marriage illegal in California [0]
the measure passed by 5% [1] - people were fairly incensed that Mozilla Foundation money (paid to him via his salary) might go to future donations of the same kind
I'm sure people will say things about 'well of course he's legally free to do as he wants with this money' but then so too is the desire by employees to not want to be working under someone who has done something ideologically abhorrent to them. and given the multiple controversies that crop up about Brave seemingly every year where they push some combination of crypto, browser AI, etc, it's probably for the best
The judicial branch is part of the US democracy, this was not subversion of the democratic process.
Judges are elected/nominated depending the jurisdiction and in this case the decison of a District judge (nominated by George W Bush, through indirect democracy) stands: that proposition is unconstitutional, and the people who tried to appeal that decision in upper courts had no standing to do it (they suffered no personal and concrete injury from this decison).
would love to live in a society where past harms and mistakes could simply be forgotten because the law has moved forward. I imagine a lot of low-level drug possession charges would be forgiven under that ethical conceit
but since we're a long ways from that reality, the least we can do is to look for accountability from influential people with the same strictness we have for the poorest and least powerful
Well no he quit after a few days. He wasn't fired.
That said I do think the uproar was mostly justified. Mozilla is a very progressive organisation and the foundation is basically an NGO. The CEO should fully stand behind its values. At many companies these things aren't core values but at Mozilla they are.
They're not just an employee, they're a figurehead. It's part of the job. Nobody complains if an individual contributor is doing something like this.
And really, if a CEO at a conservative company or foundation would go and join the pride parade I'm sure they would find themselves in trouble too.
Brave also has native rust based psudo reimplementation of ublock, so it also doesnt necessarily need the functionality to accomplish what most people end up needing it for.
I agree with this, but on macos they are not entirely tired. On iOS because of the way iOS gets performance (as far as I understand it to be the case) through the iOS shared cache, there really isn't a way to totally decouple safari from iOS.
I guess you could allow an alternate newer safari, but the one that comes with the OS would have to be linked into the blob.
It's a really huge deferent from chromium reaching 90%+ browser share. So yes, it is in fact an anti-monopoly browser. iOS isn't even at majority market share in most places in the world.
It is not, because a random user is not able to use it.
A thing only affects a monopoly when it is a choice a consumer can make.
You could say that iphone is an anti-monopoly option vs android, but not that Safari is an anti-monopoly option vs Chrome.
Then on top of that, even for users that do happen to "live in Canada"(1) already, Safari isn't a choice, it's the only allowed option, and full octane firefox is also not available as a choice. (firfox as a front-end to safari is essentially meaningless)
(1) saying "you can use Safari, because you can switch to iphone" is the same as saying you can have something, just move to Canada", ie, invalid and likely disingenuous, because likely the speaker understood that perfectly well.
So, yeah "let's be real" indeed. There is no way to paint Safari as any sort of anti-monopoly.
This user choice argument isn’t what makes safari monopolist. It’s that for some countries iOS has majority share these days, and safari is pushed on users through it.
That’s why I was kinda trying to say it is anti-monopoly monopoly.
If Apple supported read+execute pages for third party applications, it might give users more choice but it would also have the consequence of ushering in the way for total browser domination by chromium. I’d argue that is an even worse scenario as far as monopoly is concerned.
I’m weighing two bad outcomes here. I think it’s a lot worse if there’s only one browser for the entire web than it is for there to be one browser for one singular platform.
Cosmetic filtering and script injection both work fine, they’re just off by default. Everybody works around rule count limits by making the one app register itself as like six different “Safari extensions”, it’s just clutter not a limitation. It requires no permissions up front and later permissions only granularly and rarely, for me only on YouTube, while the Firefox version does require unrestricted access to all domains. I have never seen a “dynamic filtering capability” it lacks or an ad it can’t block, do you have any examples?
yea but also idk if its OT but i pay for apple news premium and its just all ads in safari. like whats the point, like its cheaper to bundle and share with my family. but why am i see ads withing News app when i pay this should be a given.
That's one way to look at it, but in theory, you're paying to access news stories that otherwise would not be available. I've never seen a feature of paying for the "plus" to be ad free. That's like suggesting paying for a subscription to a newspaper or magazine would be ad free when paying for it just gave you the access to it. This is how it has always been, so expecting the leopard to change its spots is kind of silly
It's not silly. If you're satisfied with seeing ads in a paid product then that's fine, but the other person clearly is not. Cancelling a service because it doesn't meet your expectations is perfectly reasonable. It doesn't matter how "it's always been".
What I like about uBO Lite in Safari is that I can use it without allowing it access to any of my data (it works in a purely declarative mode if you want). Even if it’s unlikely that uBO would be sold to a sketchy company, at least this provides protection against any supply chain attacks.
Yes, that was Google’s justification for killing MV2. It isn’t wrong, of course, but I insist on defining my own security posture and I prioritize adblocking.
Regarding the cosmetic filtering and scriptlet injection, are these even relevant? Most uBO users already give full access to the extension, so they'll probably do the same to uBOL to (most permissions + complete filtering mode). So basically they will have these features anyway.
Cosmetic-based filters and scriptlet injection-based filters work by default, they are enforced in _Optimal_ and _complete_ filtering modes. The default filtering mode is _optimal_.
Yep, first instance I know of was from back in 2009, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jul/17/amazon-ki... and the kind of thing keeps happening over the years. It'll continue to happen since you aren't paying for a book. You're paying for a license to read the book for as long as the publisher/owner allows you to do so and they can revoke the permission at any time.
I still find it hilariously ironic that the first instance that was widely reported (as far as I know) was it happening to 1984.
Pay respect to Aaron Swartz, and go download whatever you need. I hear Anna's got an archive, or there is some Z Lib somewhere. If buying isn't ownership, downloading isn't stealing.
It'll be very useful for even local setups when the data needs to be confidential. Look at the research related to medical training of llms (ignore their current lack of direct usefulness/trustworthiness, those are potentially solvable), with a homomorphically encrypted session, the large inference servers never see hipaa protected data in a way that exposes it if the server is compromised even if its an on premises setup in your doctors office processing the data, reducing risk of the data leaking anywhere.
It's more than just for cryo-freezing and attacks like that, it also helps defend against row-hammer and other DRAM refresh related issues since the scrambling means that the host kernel or application can't determine what the physical bits on the chips are going to actually be and end up determining the layout in a way to flip specific bits. It might still be possible but it's yet another layer of defense against memory related security problems.
Oooh, I saw this memory scrambling trying happening on the Open titan chips and I couldn't wrap my head around why they would scramble the memory since on read you descramble it anyway through the circuitry. That makes sense! Thanks for the explanation.
The five command part isn't really possible but you can use custom diffs for merges, git diff, etc. pretty easily. There are projects like diffsitter ( https://github.com/afnanenayet/diffsitter ) for doing more intelligent diffs like this for supported languages.
I think its one reason ive been happy with software based epub readers where upgrading is usually reasonable to do. Either on my phone or android based eink reader. That said if they change too much then yea nobody will produce the new standard and only support the old one if it isnt carefully designed for graceful degredation.
reply