- esp4 (kernel config "CONFIG_AF_RXRPC")

- esp6 (kernel config "CONFIG_INET_ESP")

- rxrpc (kernel config "CONFIG_INET6_ESP")

Is this correct?

I was running in Gentoo "6.18.18" (amd64) and the exploit worked (and all other shells which I PREVIOUSLY opened could then just execute "su -" without password to become "root") -> doing temporarily a "modprobe -r algif_aead" on-the-fly did not fix it as I was still able to swap to "root" from the unprivileged user by executing just "su -".

"6.18.25" fixed it (module "algif_aead" still running).

- Maybe older Kernel versions that don't contain the fix should be blacklisted?

- FYI in Gentoo I had to recompile "sys-fs/zfs-kmod" after the minor kernel upgrade (I initially skipped it, but after rebooting with the new kernel I could not mount my raidz1) -> the same might be needed for other external modules.

My performance when using an RTX 5070 12GiB VRAM, Ryzen 7 9700X 8 cores CPU, 32GiB DDR5 6000MT (2 sticks):

  - "qwen2.5:7b": ~128 tokens/second (this model fits 100% in the VRAM).
  - "qwen2.5:32b": ~4.6 tokens/second.
  - "qwen3:30b-a3b": ~42 tokens/second (this is a MoE model with multiple specialized "brains") (this uses all 12GiB VRAM + 9GiB system RAM, but the GPU usage during tests is only ~25%).
  - qwen3.5:35b-a3b: ~17 tokens/second, but it's highly unstable and crashes -> currently not usable for me.

I would therefore deduce that the most important thing is the amount of VRAM and that performance would be similar even when using an older GPU (e.g. an RTX 3060 with as well 12GiB RAM)?

Performance without a GPU, tested by using a Ryzen 9 5950X 16 cores CPU, 128GiB DDR4 3200 MT:

  - "qwen2.5:7b": ~9 tokens/second
  - "qwen3:32b": ~2 tokens/second
  - "qwen3:30b-a3b": ~16 tokens/second

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47074671

Points: 79

# Comments: 33

Cannot be - there is no competition in Switzerland, but things run pretty smoothly -> in the case of Germany I'd rather say: "lack of oversight, controls, 'konsequent zu sein'" -> in the case of Germany's DB I think that nobody at all levels gives a *hit about its problems.

* English: https://www.theverge.com/news/759016/tesla-in-car-graphics-unreal-engine

* German: https://www.golem.de/news/fahrzeugvisualisierung-tesla-soll-wechsel-zur-unreal-engine-planen-2508-199152.html

...that Tesla might be switching from the "Godot"- to the "Unreal"-engine.

Are there any REAL reasons known for such a switch? (eg. about bad_support/bad_performance/bad_adhoc_customizations/bad_overall_approach/whatever...)

Reason: I just started this week looking for a 3D-engine (candidates so far are Godot & Bevy, other options tbd) and this news made me wonder if I should be "more careful" about Godot... ?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44918453

Points: 10

# Comments: 5

Maybe - I guess that they must have served that "cached" content from DB-records that had it all saved directly (URL X has contents Y => basically a "mirror" of the terms that they indexed) => not having to store that "mirror" (only the search index) might save quite a lot of storage space (and I/O and CPU to decompress it, as users won't be requesting it anymore) => all in all that might save quite a lot of infrastructure costs $$$.

> Could this be an advantage that Google can use to train their models on but others won't have access?

Maybe (if they decided to just get rid of the I/O related to the user requests), but on the other hand I don't know if previously any "Google-consumer" was ever able to perform mass-downloads of Google's "cached" data - could that be done without being banned by Google's webpage (or API)?

> On the beta launch date, Object Storage will be available in Falkenstein (fsn1) only. We plan to add Nuremberg (nbg1) next. After the beta test, Object Storage will be available in all our European locations.

Didn't find pricing infos... .

This is again a forced binary "and/or"-decision, without anything inbetween.

It doesn't have to be like that - both can coexist, if both terms are not extreme.

(disclosure: my post is not related in any way to Israel nor Palestine and I'm personally not linked in/directly to anything related to Israel nor Palestine and this post is not related to the current conflict)

As much as I can respect the idealism about privacy and liberty etc..., I could not ignore the fact that any "really!!!" bad actor could use the same infrastructure to avoid investigation/prosecution, therefore I did not want to provide indirectly any help.

> I feel law enforcement realizes this is a big weakness they can target since a lot of Tor exit operators are individuals with not a lot of resources to fight them. They can use the legal system to scare operators into shutting down.

On one hand I admit that that might be the case, on the other hand even government organizations/departments/agencies can be "local" and scattered (e.g. similar IT departments for each "canton" in Switzerland) and not have huge amounts of resources/knowledge to track/identify perpetrators of all ongoing (sophisticated?) IT crimes => somebody somewhere might see the same IP involved in a lot of "bad" stuff not realizing it's just a TOR node.

I hate the current general trend pushing a position of an either absolute "yes/no" for any theme, including this one (of encryption for privacy/etc vs. crime).

In my opinion it's obvious that the current situation of solutions is in general bad: too much pressure on services that provide privacy because it's too easy for crime to misuse them :o(

https://store.google.com/intl/en_uk/ideas/articles/newest-pi...