Live data from Hacker News

Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

arstechnica.com

201–210 of 693 posts

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#201
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I’ve not used Linux as my mainly driver for years. I miss it and I want to come back but I basically don’t have any decent PC anymore so I have the freedom to get/build one. When I used it, ironically, NVidia was the way to go on Linux and ATI/AMD was a shit show. Is AMD ok nowadays ? My needs are mostly confortable casual gaming where I don’t care having more than 60fps and I don’t play online (so this…

Despite my complaints, for casual gaming on a desktop you shouldn't have too many issues with Nvidia's drivers these days as long as you can use the ones packaged by your distro instead of Nvidia's installer. My troubles have mostly been associated with laptops that have both Intel and Nvidia graphics, or desktops used for ML training where the distro-packaged drivers wouldn't work for one reason or another. I've hea…

>I've heard AMD's drivers are OK these days but haven't tried them myself because I care about ML.

They are OK but with some caveats like VP9 HW decode not being available in Linux AMD iGPU drivers for reasons, which won't be a problem if you're running an AMD desktop tower PC, but if you're gonna watch Youtube on your AMD laptop, your battery will take a hit along with possible extra fan noise, which is unacceptable for a great media content consumption experience in Linux when even no-name Android phones and tablets have VP9 HW decode in Youtube out of the box. No bueno.

This is such a mess, as VP9 & AV1 HW video decode is not an issue under linux for Intel iGPUs, but AMD seems to not give a shit to expose VP9 decode on linux for their iGPUs. Also, unlike with Intel iGPUs, under linux, radeon-top does not show GPU decode usage for easy diagnostic purposes. I assume it's because AMD bought the video codec engine IP from some third party fabless IP vendor and they don't have the permission to open source the drivers for the video engine block as part of the licensing agreement, like they do for their in house developed GPU block. But still, regardless of the reason, it sucks for the linux end-users.

And another important issue nobody seems to talk about but one should be aware of, AMD APUs (at least to 5000 series) don't have unified memory between CPU and iGPU like Intel and Apple do, so you have to configure in your laptop BIOS how much of your system RAM you want allocated to your iGPU (512MB/1GB/2GB/4GB), with the rest remaining for the CPU. This sucks big time if you're switching between productivity where you need more memory for applications, and playing video games where you need as much memory as possible for the GPU, so you need to keep rebooting and changing in the BIOS the amount of memory you allocate to your iGPU, vs on Intel chips where the whole system memory is unified and shared dynamically between the CPU and iGPU, and it boils my blood as the whole marketing gimmick of AMD's APUs was the seamless merger between CPU and GPU resources together, while in practice their (5000 series) APUs are just a Ryzen CPU with a Vega GPU glued on the same die without them actually sharing any of the resources properly. Maybe the new 6000 series with RDNA2 changed that but I couldn't find any detailed info.

Honestly, as a laptop owner with AMD APU, if you're planning to go Linux, just get one with an Intel chip instead. Much less head aches as Intel Linux drivers and apps are second to none and have a unified memory model.

The performance and efficiency of AMD APUs is still great though, especially under Windows, but the overall implementation as a whole package seems poorly thought out and rushed out the door, especially under Linux compared to Intel.

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely support making GPUs less attractive to miners. I'd buy a card that could be remotely disabled when usage patterns matched crypto mining if it meant I could spend MSRP on a modern card.

You would allow hardware DRM in your box just to allow Nvidia to "revoke" ownership of your card when you use it "incorrectly". Yeah I'll pass.

I can see why it's attractive when the alternative is no card at all.

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#204
post #164
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cryptocurrencies have shown that you can transform energy into money without any of that messy middle step of doing something useful.

They prevent double spending attacks. That service is useful for some people. You can of course disagree. Just like you can disagree that building and fueling yachts for rich people is useful.

This entire chain of replies is skewed. Yes, real world mining is a serious offender, but that doesn’t exempt crypto mining. Have one look at one photograph of a crypto mining farm for one second and this will be obvious to anyone.

On the point of double spend - collusion in bitcoin mining is very possible and decentralization is not as strong as claimed. There are tons of studies about this.

https://cowles.yale.edu/3a/parlour-miner-collusion-and-bitco...

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#205
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there some practical way to delineate the two product usages that isn't arbitrary I wonder? Maybe make mining only cards more performant and affordable than consumer graphics cards, so that consumer cards will drop in price from less demand? I find it hard to believe that a use case specific device wouldn't be able to dethrone graphics cards as the better choice for miners at the right price, and it should be chea…

You would have to saturate the market with specific mining devices. Like with bitcoin ASIC miners, the crypto mining demands have to increase to the point where using gaming graphic cards becomes unprofitable. Otherwise miners will buy the specific mining devices and the gaming devices. The problem is that Etherum was designed to resist ASIC approaches. Instead of locking cards down, Nvidia could manage the supply. T…

> They could sell their cards in cooperation with Steam: Only people with an active steam account are eligible to a new card. If their performance stats don't improve after the purchase, which means they have resold their hardware, they won't be allowed to buy another card.

I have a baby. I do anything on Steam once a month at best. Crypto miners could pretty trivially make their use cases look like they spend more time gaming than a good 30% of Steam's active user base. This is a non-starter.

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, it absolutely helps the Linux gaming community. Not so much the Windows one though

If they release Nvidia's code it can't really help Linux compatibility out without being an IP nightmare. Miners won't have a problem using it, though.

Not necessarily. There is no law against writing an implementation of the drivers as long as you don't copy the IP-protected code but only use knowledge about how the code works.

If you need to be on the safe side, the person writing the free code should never look at the IP-protected code but instead read a summary of the findings by someone else (clean room implementation).

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#207
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are limits to manufacturing capacity, especially such advanced manufacturing. I feel like if Nvidia could, they would have scaled up. Why wouldn't they want to meet demand?

Uh, because you can inflate MSRP into the stratosphere and blame it on crypto miners? Cryptocurrencies give NVIDIA the perfect bullshit excuse that people won't ponder too hard over, because the story of modern media is simplistic... every story must have a "good guy" and a "bad guy". It has to be dumbed down for all the idiotic plebs like us.

> Uh, because you can inflate MSRP into the stratosphere and blame it on crypto miners?

Cards are still selling for significantly more than MSRP, so if this was the plan they're doing a terrible job of it.

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#208
There are two scenarios where carrying out their threat plausibly helps the open source community:

1) A source drop demonstrates that Nvidia incorporated GPLed code into their drivers. This is, honestly, unlikely - Nvidia has sufficiently competent lawyers to ensure that everyone they employ is extremely aware of what the consequences of that would be

2) The source drop includes the private keys used to sign Nvidia GPU firmware blobs. Nouveau is currently entirely hamstrung on the last few generations of Nvidia cards because they run extremely slowly unless appropriate signed firmware is loaded, and Nvidia refuse permission to distribute that firmware. I'm not aware of any case law around whether private keys are copyrightable (I'd assume not, given that they're supposed to be randomly generated), and whether it's a DMCA violation to make use of leaked keys if you don't violate any other technical protection mechanisms. This would potentially (given a lot of work) allow Nouveau to implement equivalent firmware and sign it, but this would presumably still just result in Nvidia switching to different keys for the next architecture.

Obviously the calculation differs if Nvidia choose under duress to release the drivers under an open source license, but that doesn't seem likely - this still very much reads as an attempt to extort Nvidia into removing restrictions on crypto mining rather than an earnest attempt to improve open source support for their hardware.

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#209

So when do we ban cryptocurrencies already? The only use of this crap is crime.

It's a (relatively) poor argument, but the US dollar* sure facilitates a lot of crime.

There's an argument that if you want to eradicate a great deal of crime, just change the color of your money, and offer a 1-1 exchange at the bank. An awful lot of dirty money would have to surface, and can be asked about.

*other currencies are available.

Re: Cybercriminals who breached Nvidia issue one of the most unusual demands ever

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Bitcoin has been around 13 years at this point and you still don’t get why folks need to use energy to secure their money. In those 13 years it has proven to be nothing more than a Ponzi scheme for cryptobros and probably one of the most wasteful endeavours that humanity has ever started. One can only hope that the next 13 years kill it for good, either by imploding internally, or it being outlawed in every country…

> Ponzi scheme Doesn't meet the requirement: New investor money to pay old investors. Which is not to say it's problem free, but that problem is at the exchange level. Art suffers the same flaws. And Yachts. And on and on and on. That's why we have regulations. Desperately need regulation at the fiat/crypto exchange

Yes it does - Bitcoin is mainly used for speculation. Paying for groceries with Bitcoin is too expensive (transaction fees) and you typically cannot use your Bitcoin savings as a collateral for another investment due to the price volatility.

This means that if you want to cash out, you need someone else to invest their "new investor money" in Bitcoin.

Post reply on HN