FYI, it's been almost two years since us-east-1-chi-2 launched and it's still missing on the site. Any reason for this? Kind of feels like local zones are a 2nd class citizen even at AWS itself.
Thank you for maintaining this, I do use it every few months at $DAYJOB and it's quite useful for my capacity/deployment planning.
Huh...weird. I just looked into this and we do have us-east-1-chi-1....but not chi-2. It appears that chi-2 isn't being returned at all as part of the bulk pricing API from AWS for some reason. We'll see if we can dig deeper on why that's the case but just wanted to let you know that's the root issue from our end.
That NotebookLM podcast was like the most unpleasant way I can imagine to consume content. Reading transcripts of live talks is already pretty annoying because it's less concise than the written word. Having it re-expanded by robot-voice back to audio to be read to me just makes it even more unpleasant.
Also sort of perverse we are going audio->transcript->fake audio.
"YC has said the official video will take a few weeks to release," - I mean shouldn't one of the 100 AI startups solve this for them?
Anyway, maybe it's just me.. I'm the kind of guy that got a cynical chuckle at the airport the other week when I saw a "magazine of audio books".
I have the same perspective - to such a degree that any time I see someone post a notebooklm I wonder if it's paid advertising. Every time I've tried it on something like a whitepaper etc. it just makes stuff up or says things that are kind of worthless. Reminds me of ChatGPT 3.5 in terms of quality of the presented content.
The voices sounded REALLY good the first time I used it. But then sounded exactly the same every time after that and became underwhelmed.
Was it ever explained why? This was an unanswered question I always wondered about from time to time. They must have done something to remove RGH capability?
Yes that revision is patched to specifically counter RGH. Microsoft disabled the ability to get the precise timing needed from the CPU and also added more filtering/robustness so the system will reset properly instead of getting into the inconsistent state of the old revisions.
It's not openwrt even though they pretend it is in their marketing. It's based on openwrt and might be "compatible" to some level with other openwrt packages.
When asked for full source code they seem transparent about it:
The issues regarding GPL compliance or lack thereof are worth noting, however. I made a point of asking for native OpenWrt firmware for the products I have from them, only to discover after the fact that due to closed source firmware blobs, it will likely never be available in that format, which was somewhat disappointing.
Given the fairly low/competitive price point of their hardware, I think it’s worth taking the time to make sure that the device suits your needs in that regard, if it’s important to you.
Are you referring to open source BL2/BL31 for GL-iNet products, and/or for OpenWrt One? I’m not sure it’s possible with either, as haven’t looked into the One in detail yet, as I wasn’t aware it had launched until TFA was posted, though I was aware of it since January or so.
I’d like to run fully open source network stack if possible myself, though I’m not sure if that possible without moving the goalposts and virtualizing something or doing it in software, and even then I’d have to figure out some kind of boot attestation ideally, thought I'm not sure how that's going to pan out. Isn't Intel SGX/AMD SEV/ARM CCA required for that?
Some links I thought we interesting on that topic, as it's adjacent to the discussion:
> A comparison study of intel SGX and AMD memory encryption technology
This isn't entirely accurate. It absolutely is running a full OpenWRT instance. In addition to that, they have produced their own UI/shell, which is the default that you'll land on, but it's not difficult to get into LuCI.
That said, I'm not stating that it's only running OpenWRT, or that the OpenWRT instance it is running is unmodified, or trustworthy.
That said, I have struggled to get gigabit wireguard VPN throughput on other devices that support OpenWRT.
I love FOSS, I love self-hosting, I love DIY-friendly tinkerer-friendly, and I love high levels of user control, I just wish the ecosystem that prioritized these things had a stronger emphasis on high-end hardware that offers high performance.
"The GL.iNet OEM firmware is a fork of OpenWrt and thankfully is compatible with official OpenWrt sysupgrade images, so returning to OEM is done simply by flashing their sysupgrade image without keeping settings and vice versa."
With GL.inet the buyer can install their own OpenWRT images. The OEM OpenWRT fork is a means of installing the buyer's choice of OpenWRT image.
An OEM OpenWRT fork ("intermediate firmware") is (pre)installed, allowing a buyer overwrite it with an open source, GPL compliant OpenWRT image of their choice downloaded from openwrt.org or one compiled from source code downloaded from openwrt.org.
It's not really an issue, since OpenWrt has full support for this device. IIRC the support in OpenWrt 23.05 is pretty good, I have been running 24.10 on a Flint 2 that we use as an AP and I've had zero issues.
I'd argue that even though by default the Flint 2 has a nicer interface for beginners, vanilla OpenWrt is much better. E.g. their old OpenWrt 21.02 build with the proprietary Mediatek SDK does not support baby jumbo frames, which are used by a bunch of providers that still use PPPoE (to get better performance).
Be careful of GL.iNet's products - some of them say they run OpenWRT, but they don't run stock OpenWRT and instead offer a version of OpenWRT supplied by the CPU manufacturer, with binary drivers and no source code.
Yup, it's specifically a problem if you simply go to Amazon, and shop GL.iNet based on price.
Their GL.iNet SFT-1200 "Opal" router does NOT have ANY OSS firmware options. It's a great travel router for $35 USD, but, alas, they're basically abusing the OpenWrt trademark by advertising it as an OpenWrt router when it is not.
Luckily, I think most of the other ones do have OpenWrt builds, but, if you're going to install OpenWrt manually, might as well get a different/cheaper router from some other manufacturer, like Cudy or Dynalink, which are also supported by OpenWrt, and are very affordable for the hardware that you get.
Yeah, it's probably best to pick something with upstream OpenWRT support and flash it when you get the device. I think that's what grandparent was saying, given that they link to the ToH.
I have this router, running the latest official stable build of OpenWRT, and I'm very happy with it. I particularly appreciate that it has two 2.5gbps ports, so it can route a > 1gbps internet connection, unlike the OpenWRT One.
Switching from stock to OpenWRT was incredibly easy.
I have to reboot it about once every month or two (my previous router, a Netgear R7800, only needed to be rebooted maybe once every other year.) But I hear that the nightly builds are a bit better in this respect, so I expect the stable builds will improve with time.
I installed the LibreSpeed-go package, and it can completely saturate the 2.5gbps LAN port.
Thanks for the tip. LibreSpeed-go works slick-enough to actually be useful for the kinds of things I care about at home.
And because it is apparently not cohesively documented anywhere, here's brief instructions for a semi-clued person to quickly make LibreSpeed-go work on OpenWRT:
1. Install the package. Might as well do it from CLI because we need to go there anyway. Log into the router with ssh, and do an "opkg update" and then "opkg install librespeed-go"
2. Enable it. Edit /etc/config/librespeed-go with, eg, "nano /etc/config/librespeed-go" and set "Enabled" from 0 to 1.
3. Start it. "/etc/init.d/librespeed-go restart" works.
Also, 2 x 2.5Gbe, so if you have a > 1Gbit && <= 2.5Gbit connection, you can do line speed without having to resort to more complicated router on a stick configurations.
Besides that it has quite a bit better CPU (quad core rather than dual core), so if you do anything that cannot be hardware-offloaded (e.g. Cake), the performance will be better.
The OpenWrt has better hackability though. USB-C serial is very handy if you manage to mess up your configuration in a way you can't access the device (though LuCI have this features where it can revert changes if a change makes the router non-responsive to the user).
I currently use the Flint 2 as an AP, so I cannot easily test it. I tested it at some point, but it was far less than the 2.5Gbe line speed. I vaguely remember something like 700-800Mbit, but I might misremember, plus disabling hardware acceleration also disabled PPPoE offloading, so it might do better without PPPoE.
The other question is whether it is worth it. As far as I understand, the Filogic in the Flint 2 has hardware support for fq_codel. When doing buffer bloat tests with the waveform test, the score would always be A, whereas on the same connection a Fritz!Box 5590 Fiber would show pretty bad buffer bloat (grade D on the waveform test).
This is somewhat true but their fork of Openwrt is horribly out of date, very hacked, and has a baby interface that doesn't fully provide what openwrt can do. I found myself having to manually edit files on the routers shell. I mean my use-cases aren't exactly normal since I'm testing very arcane networking stuff. But I found myself disappointed.
I want something that has like actual good packages already installed for common internet standards, that are configured by experts (so they work), that supports IPv6 perfectly, and is user-friendly so I can use it for what I need without having to work on router firmware. It's like... maybe I should write my own firmware at this point. Cause everything is actually just shit.
and has a baby interface that doesn't fully provide what openwrt can do. I found myself having to manually edit files on the routers shell. I mean my use-cases aren't exactly normal since I'm testing very arcane networking stuff. But I found myself disappointed.
???
Devices like Flint 2 have LuCI preinstalled. It's even linked in GL.iNets interface (IIRC on the Advanced page).
With shipping and tax the One cost me £94.
The Flint 2 has been on sale for £115.51 twice in the last couple of months, 23% more, so not a huge price difference.
52% of Swedish households are 1 person households[1] so they were sort of self-isolating by default. As you can see from the other replies, that wasn't enough to keep transmission at bay.
I see similar behavior with a 105W 3950X when running prime95. I haven't experienced instability otherwise over the 2 months I've had this build running.
Google's stressapptest runs fine for long durations, building a kernel with make -j32 succeeds (and can boot it), every parallelized archiver like 7z,pbzip2,pigz,xz is ok, and even gaming on a Windows VM using 8c/16t + GPU passthrough works well.
This is my first Ryzen system so I chalked it up to a possible carry over of DDR4 issues from earlier generations. I didn't investigate further since the 3950x had just been released and I couldn't find any other reports of prime95-only instability until now. And just to reiterate, it is perfectly stable otherwise.
Heavy AVX2 workload breaking things fits better so will have to try to collect more data.
I'm still eyeing the 3950x as my next upgrade so I hope this gets resolved through a BIOS update or something. What motherboard are you using for it? (I'm assuming stock settings, no overclock or PBO, AMD doesn't consider PBO to be stock)
I picked the ASRock X570 Taichi since I needed 3 PCIe slots and it was on sale for ~$260. Very happy with it and yeah I'm not overclocking or using any of the quasi-overclock settings either.
Thank you for maintaining this, I do use it every few months at $DAYJOB and it's quite useful for my capacity/deployment planning.