There are pictures online. And for an unexplainable reason it is the person behind the biggest Bitcoin exchange SNAFU of all times (where hackers stole something like 800 000 Bitcoins), Mark Karpeles of "Mt. Gox" (who did jail time btw), who was the first to post them:
Apparently the hacker did remove the battery and replace it with a smaller one, leaving enough room for the tiny eSIM/LTE modem / OCR chip that did recognition of the secret on screen.
It's definitely AI-written, annoying as fuck god damn it, but the photos are good and the descriptions of the boards, are at least at cursory glance, pretty accurate.
tl;dr Implant is just a little cell phone that does OCR of the hardware wallet's screen during setup to steal the recovery phrases. The implant's design has improved notably three different times before landing on a pretty darn sleek spot-welded overlay that is laminated flat onto the host.
Does it do OCR. The screen is very low res(128x64 monochrome iirc), so 2KB for entire buffer. I doubt there is OCR library that use less RAM than that. Better to just send the entire framebuffer and not have to worry about false negative.
Look at the size of the board in something like a late-model iPhone. The biggest part of a regular smartphone is the battery. The modem and RFIC along with supporting discretes are absolutely tiny. They've been making wrist-sized watch-phones for many years.
GDPR was never about cookies but about freely given consent.
Two things that make Utiq absolutely terrible (and imho illegal)
1. It's crazy that any person who is using my internet connection (guest wifi?) can give "consent" that leads to everyone else being tracked.
2. ISPs are abusing their highly privileged position. It's not easy to switch providers (if at all possible), so as "gatekeepers" they should behave responsibly (c.f. DMA designated Gatekeepers etc) and not abuse their power.
In the UK it is very easy to switch providers if you use a BT line. As this is a result of local loop unbundling rules that were in place before Brexit it must be the same within the EU, and other countries may have similar rules.
It is not particularly difficult to switch to providers that have their own local connections if they supply your area either (in the UK, at least).
The thing is, in many cases the provider selling internet to you isn't the same as whoever owns the cables that arrive to your place. So you may switch between providers (which in Spain are owned by 4 groups: MasOrange, Movistar/Telefónica, Vodafone and DIGI) but in many cases your IP goes through Telefónica's network (either by hiring them, or via NEBA, basically renting their infra) or MasOrange (they acquired a lot of local companies like R in Galicia, Euskaltel in the Basque Country, Telecable, and many others, including Orange) and basically own 14 brands as of now [^1].
So even if you do switch providers, chances are you are using one of the same (if not the actual same) provider, and got perhaps other options in those 4 groups. There's an actual coverage map by our Ministry for Digital Transformation[^2] that shows what actual coverage there is. Sometimes there's "Aire Networks" or others, but mostly it's the four large groups I mentioned before.
At least in the UK, if you use a BT line as GP mentioned (via OpenReach), they provide the physical connection but anything on top of that is up to the ISP.
In OSI terms, OpenReach does layers 1 and 2, and the ISP is responsible for 3. That means your IP addresses, your IPv6 PD, etc are all on the ISP. If you change ISPs, it’s a whole new IP infra even if it uses the same OpenReach cables.
Switching provider isn't an option, it's only a matter of time before all the actors implement this garbage, there need to be strong legal bariers. Anyone sane would think we need forbidding laws as broad, vague and expeditive as the ones they use to justify DRMs and shit so corporate won't even try to fuck around because it'd be so easy to find out.
> Switching provider isn't an option, it's only a matter of time before all the actors implement this garbage, there need to be strong legal bariers.
possibly, but there are UK providers who sell at a premium to users who would largely hate thi - e.g. Zen of A & A.
> Anyone sane would think we need forbidding laws as broad, vague and expeditive as the ones they use to justify DRMs and shit so corporate won't even try to fuck around because it'd be so easy to find out.
I will add my current ISP Aquiss to that list. I doubt something like this would go down well with their customers. They’re not nearly as expensive as A&A either.
I'm sure you already made up your mind about heat pumps and that I can't convince you otherwise. But for other readers, let me add some thoughts to your points.
1) well, there's a grid. So as long as someone somewhere on your continent produces green energy it is viable and green.
2) arguable. Depends on your legislation.
3) Again, there's a grid. And even considering the worst case of no renewable sources at all: A heat pump (which uses 1kWh of electricity to provide 3-6kWh of heat) powered by a diesel generator is still more efficient than burning the diesel directly. Now add efficient combined cycle power plants, wind, biomass, hydro and battery storage systems...
We are 40 years in back when it comes to grid infrastructure investmets. Grid is not some magical thing that has infinite capacity and transfer speed and costs.
The reason why powerplants have to be strategically distributed around the country and have to consist of multiple different power geration sources.
Cyting Germany’s cancelor „Going full green was a strategic mistake”
Ps. Heat pump is as effective as the heat source it can use..
There was a time that XPS meant something. I’m still holding on to my XPS 13 9360. It’s (even for today’s standards) lightweight and Linux compatibility has been perfect from day one.
I agree that it’s probably not a big amount. But note that it can be potentially quiet a bit more than the 90$. Task runtimes are always rounded up to the nearest minute.
For example, in our pipeline we have 5 different linter tasks (for different subprojects), running each only a few seconds. Nonetheless, we’ll get billed for 5 minutes on every commit.
Ah I see, they are not minutes as on the clock. They are runtime minutes. That changes my assessment. I was thinking that they picked a balanced price point not to scare away many people except probably personal projects or unfunded open source. If it's something potentially in the ballpark of $500 per month it's a bit too greedy. It's more like: we want only corporate customers, free tier users need not apply.
reply