arm-netbook

arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk

1 participants
1078 discussions

Re: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations--Taper
by Richard Wilbur 06 Jan '18

06 Jan '18

The goal of the taper is to minimize the reflection coefficient involved with changes in impedance caused by changes in transmission line geometry. In essence we are trying to make the changes so gentle that we don't scare any electrons. The scared electrons reflect at the point of abrupt changes in impedance(flee back in the direction they came from) which weakens the signal delivered to the HDMI cable and, finally, the display. (Forgive the anthropomorphization of the electrons--it is purely for illustrative purposes.) As the high-frequency differential lines traverse the board from processor pin to connector pin certain parts of the geometry and electromagnetic environment stay fairly constant, other aspects in certain places are not conducive to the transmission environment needed by the HDMI signals we wish to deliver to the connector. Three principles are at work here: 1. Whatever conditions are apparent over the majority of the conduction path will dominate the transmission characteristics. (You could think of the overall impedance as being similar to a length-weighted average of the local impedance of all the sections along the path.) 2. The abruptness of changes in geometry will determine the abruptness of changes in impedance and thus the reflection coefficient associated with the perturbation. 3. Reflections are more troublesome the further you get from the signal source. Close to the source the reflection arrives at the source during the signal rise time and can be overcome by the line driver. The trace width stays mostly constant at 5mil except for component pads at processor, ESD chip, and connector and the two through-hole vias used to transition from layer 1 (processor) to layer 6 (room for differential microstrip transmission lines) back to layer 1 (connector). Both the signal trace copper thickness and the dielectric thickness between signal traces and ground plane change only at the signal vias. The room available on layer 6 allows us to make a controlled-impedance differential transmission line for a good share of the transmission path. Since the HDMI standard specifies 100 +/-15% Ohm impedance, we have designed the geometry to provide a characteristic impedance close to the upper end of the tolerance of the nominal impedance. We have room to impose this geometry for most of the length of the sojourn. At both ends the space is restricted such that the close quarters will no doubt result in a lower local impedance. Where we have room, the distance between a differential pair and any other copper (be it another differential pair or ground) is 15mil. At both ends this is restricted by the spacing between lands in the component layouts down to 5-7mil. From the first principle, we see that the influence of the lower local impedance from the restricted sections will serve to lower the overall impedance. In order to stay within the tolerances of the nominal impedance we attempt to limit the length of the restricted sections (where the inter-pair distance <15mil). In some places this could lead us to maintain 15mil inter-pair distance right up to an obstruction which imposes a 5-7mil inter-pair distance. The second principle leads us to recognize this is an abrupt change and expect that it will cause reflections. The third principle suggests it is more important to deal with abrupt changes at the connector end of the transmission line than the processor end. Hence, we are exploring the feasibility of tapering the inter-pair distance down from 15mil to 5mil as we get to the connector end, in order to soften the effects of the unavoidable space restrictions at the connector end. The other important point is that since we are dealing with differential signals, we are interested in trying to maintain symmetry in dealing with the two traces of each differential pair, lest we push signal energy into common-mode. The idea was inspired by my reading of a discussion on "Microwaves101"[*] of an impedance taper first described by R. W. Klopfenstein in a paper titled "A Transmission Line Taper of Improved Design", published in the Proceedings of the IRE, page 31-35, January 1956. We aren't really doing his work justice as our frequencies are so low that our board is too small to accommodate the length required to get the good low frequency response he demonstrates. Nevertheless, we are interested in making the sequence of small transitions in a somewhat similar fashion. Transmission Line geometry (widths) North ground fill keep out Inter-pair Distance = 15mil HDMI TX2P trace = 5mil Intra-pair Spacing = 5mil HDMI TX2N trace = 5mil Inter-pair Distance = 15mil HDMI TX1P trace = 5mil Intra-pair Spacing = 5mil HDMI TX1N trace = 5mil Inter-pair Distance = 15mil HDMI TX0P trace = 5mil Intra-pair Spacing = 5mil HDMI TX0N trace = 5mil Inter-pair Distance = 15mil HDMI TXCP trace = 5mil Intra-pair Spacing = 5mil HDMI TXCN trace = 5mil Inter-pair Distance = 15mil South ground fill keep out Adding this up yields a total = 135mil When we scale the Inter-pair Distance = 5mil, the total = 85mil This drops 50mil in width. <step> <Inter-pair Distance> <Change> 0 15mil 1 14mil -1mil 2 13mil -1mil 3 12mil -1mil 4 10mil -2mil 5 08mil -2mil 6 07mil -1mil 7 06mil -1mil 8 05mil -1mil If we use 15mil along the signal conduction path from the onset of one change to the next and 45 degree turns to initiate and complete all the changes, and if we choose a geometry to lengthen TXC (clock) the most and leave unchanged TX2, the length along the signal path of the taper will be 7*15mil + 4*1mil = 109mil after which we have no need of manual keep outs for the ground fill as the board rule of 5mil minimum Cu-Cu spacing will suffice. Deviations from path in due NorthEast direction (+ signifies change in the NorthWest direction, - signifies change in the SouthEast direction, units in mil) <step> <Northern keepout> <TX1> <TX0> <TXC> <Southern keepout> 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -1 1 2 3 4 2 -1 1 2 3 4 3 -1 1 2 3 4 4 -2 2 4 6 8 5 -2 2 4 6 8 6 -1 1 2 3 4 7 -1 1 2 3 4 8 -1 1 2 3 4 Diagram attached below. Good grief that took awhile! I'm now completely sold on the concept of Computer-Aided Design (I've used some awkward implementations before but this was done with pencil, pen, measuring tape, and book spine for straight edge). Reference: [*] https://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedias/klopfenstein-taper

3 89

Meltdown and Spectre
by Louis Pearson 05 Jan '18

05 Jan '18

Has anybody else seen the recently published exploits Meltdown and Spectre? Here's a link: https://meltdownattack.com/ I'm wondering if this will increase in Risc-V processors, as most will not be vulnerable to this exploit. It relies on speculative and out-of-order execution which most current Risc-V processors do not have.

4 5

EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing
by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 01 Jan '18

01 Jan '18

ok so the past couple of updates i sent out i mentioned that there's no longer sufficient funds in the current campaign to further pay accommodation or any other living expenses. thus it is *really important* that i find sources of funds, immediately. beyond that, i may have found something that's worth exploring that has the potential to fund pretty much absolutely everything that we want to achieve, if it is leveraged correctly. one of the options that i am exploring is bltclub. i happened to have 0.65 BTC available, the price of bitcoin happened to be rising such that it was worth around USD $5000 at the time, i happened to hear about bitclub from a friend, and my prior experience with bitcoin mining i'd already done the preliminary analysis so it was an extremely easy and fast decision. bitclub - a group of like-minded people who happen to share a common interest - mine three percent of the world's bitcoin. three percent. at today's market rate that's twenty four ***MILLION*** US Dollars being generated by this group, every month. that's a staggering amount of money which immediately made it worthwhile investigating. the members basically make their money in two ways: (a) mining (of which they receive A HUNDRED PERCENT of the bitcoin mined - unlike many other mining clubs which take say 10%) (b) multi-level marketing. this is by far and above the more profitable method and the fact that it exists is precisely why the club can provide 100% of the mined bitcoin to people who *only* wish... to mine bitcoin. if you have ever done bitcoin mining, you will know that it is an absolute pain in the neck, and you will also know that you cannot get the equipment now for love nor money. not even bribes will work because you still have to out-bid everyone else who's offering bribes as well. and once you GET the equipment, if it breaks you lose downtime... that's if you can actually get the person you bribed to honour the warranty. by using a *POOL* of people - buying in bulk - the "share" of the *POOL* is available to you. one piece of equipment fails, so what, that's amortised across thounsands of people. you also don't pay for electricity or cooling. or have fans whirring 24x7 in your house. now, i *already have* two other people signed up: i am a few points away from hitting the first MLM milestone which would result in me receiving TWO HUNDRED US DOLLARS A DAY in *addition* to the bitcoin mining which is coming online in the next 48 hours. i have two separate and distinct questions: (1) is there anyone who does NOT wish to put their own money into buying bitclub shares who would like ME to sign them up, and, over the next few weeks and months, PAY their membership AND pay for their equipment. (2) is there anyone who CAN put their own money into bitclub who would be interested to know more. if yes, and you already know about bitcoin mining and about MLM etc. the link is here http://bitclub.network/lkcl the goal basically is to leverage this to become financially independently wealthy, and use it to fund libre hardware and software. there's about maybe 3 to 5 years in which bitcoin - specifically GROUP mining NOT individual mining - is a viable way to do that. any questions feel free to ask. l.

19 71

Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 01 Jan '18

01 Jan '18

-------- Original Message -------- From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> Apparently from: arm-netbook-bounces(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk To: Linux on small ARM machines <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 09:59:04 +0000 On the current pc card situation I have some remarks. Primarily directed at other pc card supporters. I got the pc card after making some assessments. Did I believe it was a scam, no. Did I believe the pc card had a chance of getting made, yes. Did I believe the pc card enterprise could shipwreck, yes. If so I decided lkcl would not hear a word for it from me. Of course I only made such decision because to me the pc card's price is negligible. If beneficial to lkcl, he can erase me from the shipping list and no refund. I ask others to do the same. I think lkcl has done more than one can expect. He likely has gathered experiences and knowledge about libre hardware, he can use moving forward. If lkcl can contribute to the riscv development, he rather should do that, than potter on an arm cpu, none of us like. What I want to avoid is, that lkcl on economic reasons gets discouraged and jammed. I know the following is not achievable. I say it anyway. One option is, lkcl sets a monthly required amount of money for the next 6 months. I am prepared to pay lkcl 5usd a month. But only if I know lkcl gets the required sum every month. 5Usd is cheap, I know. If you want to pay more do it. To me this matter is another prove of libre software people not being streamlined. Libre software people are up against companies like intel and amd. Libre software people cannot expect to achieve results if the matter is not better organized. Among libre software people there should be a system of fellowships enabling persons to work on free software. No it does not have to be lkcl. But such system should be created. How should it be founded? > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook(a)files.phcomp.co.uk

6 11

Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC
by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 31 Dec '17

31 Dec '17

so, ahh i would say it's christmas come early but it really *is* christmas :) i've been speaking with madhu, the head of the shakti team, they're extremely busy with a tapeout deadline of 1st january 2018, so in about a month or so's time he will have more time to talk, and it will be possible to begin properly planning. unlike many people to whom i've pitched the idea of an entirely libre SoC, madhu instead responded, "ok sure, what would you like?". initially being rather confused by this positive response, i outlined this page http://rhombus-tech.net/riscv/shakti/m_class/ and slowly began asking more questions. it turns out that the indian government has given him a mandate to create THE entire range of computing platforms. in speaking to him about why, well it was pretty obvious: if you were to have everyone in india buy a foreign imported smartphone - and that's just one market - it would LITERALLY bankrupt the country with the exodus of cash. so they have a law requiring that foreign countries, if they wish to sell product in india, that 70% of it must be manufactured locally. apple has apparently asked if they can work around this to get more foreign-made smartphones into india... they've been told unequivocably NO. the sheer scale of the opportunity has not only companies - you can guess who they are - trying to bribe him to shut down the entire programme, but also companies offering free tools and more. this means that with a ZERO financial outlay it is possible to get three (only three) designs through tapeout *AND* the MVP (multi-vendor programme) which will result in around 100 sample bare dies being made (entirely free), of which maybe 30% of those can be expected to actually result in a functioning chip. that's still 30 chips for a zero financial outlay where normally the cost would be around $5m, one each at at 20nm, 28nm and one more at 40nm. the only condition is: the entire SoC *must* be entirely libre. that's right down to the bedrock: not just the entire ASIC design but also the software stack running on it. you know the reasons why: "Intel Management Engine". it just so happens that the overlap between what we would like to see happen and what the shakti team has been set up to achieve happen to align near-100%. this is an incredible opportunity. there are four main tasks / details which need to be taken care of: * designing and specifying the SoC so that it is DESIRABLE in a specific target market or markets * finding the right team(s) of people with links to the free software community to target 3D, Video and so on. * finding a customer base large enough to warrant going to production * bridging finance (if that customer base isn't going to pay cash up-front). now, it turns out that *IF* the processor is designed SUCH THAT it is desirable for use in the indian schools market - either as laptops, netbooks, tablets or desktop machines (laptops would be better), THEN it is a near-automatic process of getting to market, orders of 10 million units are not a problem. note that *this is exactly what the EOMA68 Libre Laptop Housing is for*, and would be an immediate base on which to get demo units in front of people, very very quickly (just have to take care of making an EOMA68-RISCV64 Card). so, any ideas, input etc. welcomed. l.

6 19

Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 31 Dec '17

31 Dec '17

Displaying a form of payment is not good enough. Lkcl should make a website. It should show which amount of money he wants monthly and how much people have paid a given month. It should list several forms of payments. Including paypal. I am not going to register about a new service in order to get to pay. As long as lkcl gets the monthly amount he is asking for, I will pay for the next month. One month lkcl does not get the amount he asks for, I stop my payments. Lkcl not getting the amount he is asking for, tell me people are not interested in paying more in order to get their items. Then I say lkcl should stop production of the pc card, no refunds and negotiate a solution regarding those who wanted a laptop. > > got one https://liberapay.com/~27466/widgets/ > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook(a)files.phcomp.co.uk

4 4

ccc make your own cpu
by ronwirring＠Safe-mail.net 30 Dec '17

30 Dec '17

https://youtu.be/JlshnJjsw8E?t=2185

1 0

Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing
by Joseph Lira 29 Dec '17

29 Dec '17

Luke just a little confused, are you saying if im from the first batch i wont get an eoma68 this June/July 2018? ________________________________ From: arm-netbook <arm-netbook-bounces(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> on behalf of arm-netbook-request(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk <arm-netbook-request(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Sent: December 29, 2017 4:13:18 PM To: arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk Subject: arm-netbook Digest, Vol 89, Issue 31 Send arm-netbook mailing list submissions to arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to arm-netbook-request(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk You can reach the person managing the list at arm-netbook-owner(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of arm-netbook digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC (mike.valk(a)gmail.com) 2. Re: EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) 3. Re: Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC (mike.valk(a)gmail.com) 4. Re: EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) 5. Re: Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) 6. Re: Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) 7. Re: EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing (Alexander Ross) 8. Re: EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing (Sam Huntress) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:21:09 +0100 From: "mike.valk(a)gmail.com" <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC Message-ID: <CAJ2nOYA8x22QQxk-VWMJ1waoA+Hhvy4bSmgY7jAp+H42CtNwfg(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 2017-12-29 15:37 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>: > > On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:25 PM, mike.valk(a)gmail.com > <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> 3D. Wasn't there a PoC from some students in the open macro's? Perhaps >> those guys can be hired to refine their work? > > can you point me towards it with some clues? > I can't seem to find it at the moment. Did find this: https://github.com/VerticalResearchGroup/miaow/wiki https://github.com/jbush001/NyuziProcessor/wiki https://github.com/jbush001/NyuziProcessor/wiki/Similar-Projects Might as well be the Nyuzi one ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 15:23:35 +0000 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing Message-ID: <CAPweEDzJV3csLHTPK2ZPdzDK7qVtn=gcFd6kc2Xz9mwdB3voWg(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Julie Marchant <onpon4(a)riseup.net> wrote: > I'm not familiar with the terms "first batch" and "second batch" as it > pertains to this project. Which was the first and which was the second? the first batch was the first crowd-funded campaign: august 2016. after that, crowdsupply effectively turned the site into a "pre-order shop". none of the money from this SECOND batch has left crowdsupply's bank account. for the first batch, $175k, $25k appx is held by crowdsupply because they'll be handling world-wide shipping. $130k of the $175k went to thinkpenguin. $60k of that $130k immediately went to the factory in china. $25k is left in thinkpenguin's bank account, to deal with the laptops when we get to it. $45k of the $60k is left in mike's bank account in china and that is ENTIRELY taken up with components and PCBs for the EOMA68-A20 2.7.5 and Microdesktop 1.7. so if you're in the first batch there *is* nothing spare to refund *to* anyone. hence the question is absolutely critical because attempting to pull out money which doesn't exist and/or has been allocated for some considerable time does a LOT of damage. but, the 2nd batch? not a problem at all. l. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:24:02 +0100 From: "mike.valk(a)gmail.com" <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC Message-ID: <CAJ2nOYDcL3K6F1EyTkCwwB21ig73tqdK=ftb1tbgjmrPbXrgUg(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 2017-12-29 16:21 GMT+01:00 mike.valk(a)gmail.com <mike.valk(a)gmail.com>: > 2017-12-29 15:37 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>: >> >> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:25 PM, mike.valk(a)gmail.com >> <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 3D. Wasn't there a PoC from some students in the open macro's? Perhaps >>> those guys can be hired to refine their work? >> >> can you point me towards it with some clues? >> > I can't seem to find it at the moment. AH it was the ORGFX now ORSOC I guess https://opencores.org/project,orsoc_graphics_accelerator ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 15:34:20 +0000 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing Message-ID: <CAPweEDx2_6ZSey7pKXiwj7wMbxBi3LuzxaNZAW=95tP+djAsvg(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Sam Huntress <samhuntress(a)gmail.com> wrote: > We all seem to be talking past each other and I fear we may have some > confusion about what a ponzi scheme actually is. > > In a ponzi scheme, money is taken from 'investors' under the false pretense > (lie) that it will be used to fund operations with a positive return on > investment when actually that money is just stashed and given back out to > 'investors' as a fake 'return' on their 'investment'. ... down the tree until it collapses, yes. apart from the US Federal Reserve Ponzi scheme that was cascade-created in 2007 by issuing UNREGULATED bonds a THOUSAND times larger than the entire U.S. Govt regulated market at the time and so consequently it is still in the process of collapsing, what's the largest ponzi scheme that's ever been recorded in human history? in that historically-recorded ponzi scheme, what order of magnitude of money changed hands? (ignoring the multi multi trillion dollar 2007 US Fed Res ponzi scheme) > In this case, the investments they claim to be making are almost 100% > traceable and provable. The Bitcoin ledger can be used to see which wallets > all mined bitcoins have gone to and Bitclub can use standard public/private > key signatures to verify that they own one or more of those wallets. you mean, starting e.g. from here: https://bitclubpool.com/index.php?p=stats and here: https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pool/bitclubnetwork > If Bitclub cannot provide this verification then they may not be > technically competent enough to make good investments. > Given that they already have your money, the best thing to do is hope that > whatever they are running (legitimate or not) holds up long enough for you > to get back what you put in. sam you underestimate the scope of what i seek to achieve here. i'm looking to leverage this so that the team of engineers can be paid for to design the RISCV-64 SoC, the eco-conscious smartphone can be paid for, and in about a year to 18 months time a foundry line of chips can be paid for - outright. i'm certainl not "looking to get back $3500" that's for sure! and *i* am not *personally* looking to get back money beyond that which is sufficient to live on: i am looking to leverage this to fund some absolutely amazing... ... AND ECO-CONSCIOUS .... ... projects. including REPLACING bitcoin. l. ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 15:35:07 +0000 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC Message-ID: <CAPweEDyTi=m_TvK5S-PHne9e5T0=ON+dEhSW3qh=NjTUE4Jf9w(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:24 PM, mike.valk(a)gmail.com <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 2017-12-29 16:21 GMT+01:00 mike.valk(a)gmail.com <mike.valk(a)gmail.com>: >> 2017-12-29 15:37 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>: >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:25 PM, mike.valk(a)gmail.com >>> <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> 3D. Wasn't there a PoC from some students in the open macro's? Perhaps >>>> those guys can be hired to refine their work? >>> >>> can you point me towards it with some clues? >>> >> I can't seem to find it at the moment. > > AH it was the ORGFX now ORSOC I guess > https://opencores.org/project,orsoc_graphics_accelerator yeah that's the one i found, too. that's the one - one of the ones - i want to fund. l. ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 15:37:40 +0000 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] Libre RISC-V RV64GC SoC Message-ID: <CAPweEDz2kV+HsYci91TDs5QtCpOqmjATAe5TGxTFCRvUcjAXkQ(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:21 PM, mike.valk(a)gmail.com <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > 2017-12-29 15:37 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>: >> >> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 2:25 PM, mike.valk(a)gmail.com >> <mike.valk(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 3D. Wasn't there a PoC from some students in the open macro's? Perhaps >>> those guys can be hired to refine their work? >> >> can you point me towards it with some clues? >> > I can't seem to find it at the moment. > > Did find this: > > https://github.com/VerticalResearchGroup/miaow/wiki > https://github.com/jbush001/NyuziProcessor/wiki > https://github.com/jbush001/NyuziProcessor/wiki/Similar-Projects > > Might as well be the Nyuzi one ah yehhh! thank you for reminding me! yeah i forgot about his work, thank you. i know why i forgot it: i spoke to its developer, he said there's some severe limitations... something about how it was put together, it was never really intended to go above.... 50mhz (in an FPGA) or... something. there was a fundamental design flaw in other words. might have changed since then. but i went, "hmm, MIAOU shader engine plus ORSOC_GPU plus RISC-V core would do *really* well" l. ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 16:07:03 +0000 From: Alexander Ross <maillist_arm-netbook(a)aross.me> To: Linux on small ARM machines <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing Message-ID: <c6daffa7-9f49-3e9a-5438-d66fbeee9726(a)aross.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 After recently learning how bitcoin network fees and shot up to £70 min! I asked for alts and was recommended to use dash. https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/thread/20171227.034339.c3c3053f.en.html ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 11:13:10 -0500 From: Sam Huntress <samhuntress(a)gmail.com> To: Eco-Conscious Computing <arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing Message-ID: <CANYNf9sAHK1AVM60Zv-VqMXUyRZuPsgOef-EgwzcGzqN2vOrOA(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > you mean, starting e.g. from here: > https://bitclubpool.com/index.php?p=stats > and here: > https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pool/bitclubnetwork Yes, exactly. The blocks they are mining are being awarded to https://blockchain.info/address/155fzsEBHy9Ri2bMQ8uuuR3tv1YzcDywd4 And blockchain.info does record those blocks as being found by Bitclub. So Bitclub does seem to have significant new BTC coming in. As long as you trust that whoever you sent money to does actually represent Bitclub, further verification does not seem necessary. I do understand that $3500 isn't exactly backbreaking for this project, it just makes me anxious to see anyone start buying in so fully to things that seem 'too-good-to-be-true' On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 10:34 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton < lkcl(a)lkcl.net> wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Sam Huntress <samhuntress(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > We all seem to be talking past each other and I fear we may have some > > confusion about what a ponzi scheme actually is. > > > > In a ponzi scheme, money is taken from 'investors' under the false > pretense > > (lie) that it will be used to fund operations with a positive return on > > investment when actually that money is just stashed and given back out to > > 'investors' as a fake 'return' on their 'investment'. > > ... down the tree until it collapses, yes. > > apart from the US Federal Reserve Ponzi scheme that was > cascade-created in 2007 by issuing UNREGULATED bonds a THOUSAND times > larger than the entire U.S. Govt regulated market at the time and so > consequently it is still in the process of collapsing, what's the > largest ponzi scheme that's ever been recorded in human history? > > in that historically-recorded ponzi scheme, what order of magnitude > of money changed hands? (ignoring the multi multi trillion dollar 2007 > US Fed Res ponzi scheme) > > > > In this case, the investments they claim to be making are almost 100% > > traceable and provable. The Bitcoin ledger can be used to see which > wallets > > all mined bitcoins have gone to and Bitclub can use standard > public/private > > key signatures to verify that they own one or more of those wallets. > > you mean, starting e.g. from here: > https://bitclubpool.com/index.php?p=stats > and here: > https://www.blocktrail.com/BTC/pool/bitclubnetwork > > > > If Bitclub cannot provide this verification then they may not be > > technically competent enough to make good investments. > > > > Given that they already have your money, the best thing to do is hope > that > > whatever they are running (legitimate or not) holds up long enough for > you > > to get back what you put in. > > sam you underestimate the scope of what i seek to achieve here. i'm > looking to leverage this so that the team of engineers can be paid for > to design the RISCV-64 SoC, the eco-conscious smartphone can be paid > for, and in about a year to 18 months time a foundry line of chips can > be paid for - outright. > > i'm certainl not "looking to get back $3500" that's for sure! and > *i* am not *personally* looking to get back money beyond that which is > sufficient to live on: i am looking to leverage this to fund some > absolutely amazing... > > ... AND ECO-CONSCIOUS .... > > ... projects. > > including REPLACING bitcoin. > > l. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook(a)files.phcomp.co.uk > ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook ------------------------------ End of arm-netbook Digest, Vol 89, Issue 31 *******************************************

2 1

Re: [Arm-netbook] EOMA68 / Libre RISC-V team financing
by Julie Marchant 28 Dec '17

28 Dec '17

gnu taler seems sufficient to me. We don't need crypto currency, a way to anonymously and securely transfer actual money should do just fine. -- Julie Marchant https://onpon4.github.io On Dec 28, 2017 11:32 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Sam Huntress <samhuntress(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Currently Bitcoin is an insane gold-rush bubble that is frivolous and > > wasteful but it has the potential to balance out into the secure, > > distributed, democratized digital currency it was designed to be and I > > think that is something worth spending energy on. > > indeed... would it not be worthwhile, do you think, to leverage > *this* opportunity... such that the funds were available to *create* > an eco-responsible coin that is *properly* libre, properly > peer-to-peer distributed, and so on? > > look at what i put out only a few weeks ago, we analysed at least two > alt-coins that, whilst the people behind it had their hearts in the > right places they *still* did not fundamentally get it. > > if we don't do this "properly" then those alt-coins will be all that > is available... oh and bitcoin. is that something we really really > want? > > gone midnight here (julie) i'll write a more complete reply tomorrow. > > l. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook(a)lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook(a)files.phcomp.co.uk

3 2

Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model
by John Luke Gibson 23 Dec '17

23 Dec '17

Neverminding the ridiculous length of that subject line.. I just thought an interesting thought. First, a little context, (I know how rms feels about blockchains) I was investigating slock.it and thinking to myself "why don't they just make a hardware standard like eoma instead of closing their development and calling it open?" (Like, Pi-Top is [n]ever gonna release those stl files) (I realize that's a loaded 'just' cause it sounds easy, but is one of the most difficult possible) Then, it dawned on me: Lulzbot doesn't do that.. Wait, Lulzbot exclusively uses open software in their development.. Then *bam* like a boulder (nothing to do with Lulzbot): GPL-violations, improper GUI training, failing to extend using APIs/Addons, failing to bugsmash/'track-issues', failing to participate in mailing-lists and irc, failing to simply fork when development goals conflict, planned esoteric-ism and/or planned obsolescence, failure to secure clientèle data by using fully free systems (when relevant), failure to participate-in and be-aware-of public conversations about the underlining security of said systems (when relevant), failure to disclose supplychain information/identities (when relevant), failure at general transparency. All of these things traditionally go wrong with not only companies that use open source, but companies in-general. Then, it truly truly dawned on me, free software needs standards organizations as well.

13 50

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

arm-netbook