Archives

Categories

Software Needed for Work

When I first started studying computer science setting up a programming project was easy, write source code files and a Makefile and that was it. IRC was the only IM system and email was the only other communications system that was used much. Writing Makefiles is difficult but products like the Borland Turbo series of IDEs did all that for you so you could just start typing code and press a function key to compile and run (F5 from memory).

Over the years the requirements and expectations of computer use have grown significantly. The typical office worker is now doing many more things with computers than serious programmers used to do. Running an IM system, an online document editing system, and a series of web apps is standard for companies nowadays. Developers have to do all that in addition to tools for version control, continuous integration, bug reporting, and feature tracking. The development process is also more complex with extra steps for reproducible builds, automated tests, and code coverage metrics for the tests. I wonder how many programmers who started in the 90s would have done something else if faced with Github as their introduction.

How much of this is good? Having the ability to send instant messages all around the world is great. Having dozens of different ways of doing so is awful. When a company uses multiple IM systems such as MS-Teams and Slack and forces some of it’s employees to use them both it’s getting ridiculous. Having different friend groups on different IM systems is anti-social networking. In the EU the Digital Markets Act [1] forces some degree of interoperability between different IM systems and as it’s impossible to know who’s actually in the EU that will end up being world-wide.

In corporations document management often involves multiple ways of storing things, you have Google Docs, MS Office online, hosted Wikis like Confluence, and more. Large companies tend to use several such systems which means that people need to learn multiple systems to be able to work and they also need to know which systems are used by the various groups that they communicate with. Microsoft deserves some sort of award for the range of ways they have for managing documents, Sharepoint, OneDrive, Office Online, attachments to Teams rooms, and probably lots more.

During WW2 the predecessor to the CIA produced an excellent manual for simple sabotage [2]. If something like that was written today the section General Interference with Organisations and Production would surely have something about using as many incompatible programs and web sites as possible in the work flow. The proliferation of software required for work is a form of denial of service attack against corporations.

The efficiency of companies doesn’t really bother me. It sucks that companies are creating a demoralising workplace that is unpleasant for workers. But the upside is that the biggest companies are the ones doing the worst things and are also the most afflicted by these problems. It’s almost like the Bureau of Sabotage in some of Frank Herbert’s fiction [3].

The thing that concerns me is the effect of multiple standards on free software development. We have IRC the most traditional IM support system which is getting replaced by Matrix but we also have some projects using Telegram, and Jabber hasn’t gone away. I’m sure there are others too. There are also multiple options for version control (although github seems to dominate the market), forums, bug trackers, etc. Reporting bugs or getting support in free software often requires interacting with several of them. Developing free software usually involves dealing with the bug tracking and documentation systems of the distribution you use as well as the upstream developers of the software. If the problem you have is related to compatibility between two different pieces of free software then you can end up dealing with even more bug tracking systems.

There are real benefits to some of the newer programs to track bugs, write documentation, etc. There is also going to be a cost in changing which gives an incentive for the older projects to keep using what has worked well enough for them in the past,

How can we improve things? Use only the latest tools? Prioritise ease of use? Aim more for the entry level contributors?

ML Training License

Last year a Debian Developer blogged about writing Haskell code to give a bad result for LLMs that were trained on it. I forgot who wrote the post and I’d appreciate the URL if anyone has it.

I respect such technical work to enforce one’s legal rights when they aren’t respected by corporations, but I have a different approach.

As an aside the Fosdem lecture “Fortify AI against regulation, litigation and lobotomies” is interesting on this topic [1], it’s what inspired me to write about this.

For what I write I am at this time happy to allow it to be used as part of a large training data set (consider this blog post a licence grant that applies until such time as I edit this post to change it). But only if aggregated with so much other data that my content is only a tiny portion of the data set by any metric. So I don’t want someone to make a programming LLM that has my code as the only C code or a political data set that has my blog posts as the only left-wing content. If someone wants to train an LLM on only my content to make a Russell-simulator then I don’t license my work for that purpose but also as it’s small enough that anyone with a bit of skill could do it on a weekend I can’t stop it. I would be really interested in seeing the results if someone from the FOSS community wanted to make a Russell-simulator and would probably issue them a license for such work if asked.

If my work comprises more than 0.1% of the content in a particular measure (theme, programming language, political position, etc) in a training data set then I don’t permit that without prior discussion.

Finally if someone wants to make a FOSS training data set to be used for FOSS LLM systems (maybe under the AGPL or some similar license) then I’ll allow my writing to be used as part of that.

Links March 2024

Bruce Schneier wrote an interesting blog post about his workshop on reimagining democracy and the unusual way he structured it [1]. It would be fun to have a security conference run like that!

Matthias write an informative blog post about Wayland “Wayland really breaks things… Just for now” which links to a blog debate about the utility of Wayland [2]. Wayland seems pretty good to me.

Cory Doctorow wrote an insightful article about the AI bubble comparing it to previous bubbles [3].

Charles Stross wrote an insightful analysis of the implications if the UK brought back military conscription [4]. Looks like the era of large armies is over.

Charles Stross wrote an informative blog post about the Worldcon in China, covering issues of vote rigging for location, government censorship vs awards, and business opportunities [5].

The Paris Review has an interesting article about speaking to the CIA’s Creative Writing Group [6]. It doesn’t explain why they have a creative writing group that has some sort of semi-official sanction.

LongNow has an insightful article about the threats to biodiversity in food crops and the threat that poses to humans [7].

Bruce Schneier and Albert Fox Cahn wrote an interesting article about the impacts of chatbots on human discourse [8]. If it makes people speak more precisely then that would be great for all Autistic people!

The Shape of Computers

Introduction

There have been many experiments with the sizes of computers, some of which have stayed around and some have gone away. The trend has been to make computers smaller, the early computers had buildings for them. Recently for come classes computers have started becoming as small as could be reasonably desired. For example phones are thin enough that they can blow away in a strong breeze, smart watches are much the same size as the old fashioned watches they replace, and NUC type computers are as small as they need to be given the size of monitors etc that they connect to.

This means that further development in the size and shape of computers will largely be determined by human factors.

I think we need to consider how computers might be developed to better suit humans and how to write free software to make such computers usable without being constrained by corporate interests.

Those of us who are involved in developing OSs and applications need to consider how to adjust to the changes and ideally anticipate changes. While we can’t anticipate the details of future devices we can easily predict general trends such as being smaller, higher resolution, etc.

Desktop/Laptop PCs

When home computers first came out it was standard to have the keyboard in the main box, the Apple ][ being the most well known example. This has lost popularity due to the demand to have multiple options for a light keyboard that can be moved for convenience combined with multiple options for the box part. But it still pops up occasionally such as the Raspberry Pi 400 [1] which succeeds due to having the computer part being small and light. I think this type of computer will remain a niche product. It could be used in a “add a screen to make a laptop” as opposed to the “add a keyboard to a tablet to make a laptop” model – but a tablet without a keyboard is more useful than a non-server PC without a display.

The PC as “box with connections for keyboard, display, etc” has a long future ahead of it. But the sizes will probably decrease (they should have stopped making PC cases to fit CD/DVD drives at least 10 years ago). The NUC size is a useful option and I think that DVD drives will stop being used for software soon which will allow a range of smaller form factors.

The regular laptop is something that will remain useful, but the tablet with detachable keyboard devices could take a lot of that market. Full functionality for all tasks requires a keyboard because at the moment text editing with a touch screen is an unsolved problem in computer science [2].

The Lenovo Thinkpad X1 Fold [3] and related Lenovo products are very interesting. Advances in materials allow laptops to be thinner and lighter which leaves the screen size as a major limitation to portability. There is a conflict between desiring a large screen to see lots of content and wanting a small size to carry and making a device foldable is an obvious solution that has recently become possible. Making a foldable laptop drives a desire for not having a permanently attached keyboard which then makes a touch screen keyboard a requirement. So this means that user interfaces for PCs have to be adapted to work well on touch screens. The Think line seems to be continuing the history of innovation that it had when owned by IBM. There are also a range of other laptops that have two regular screens so they are essentially the same as the Thinkpad X1 Fold but with two separate screens instead of one folding one, prices are as low as $600US.

I think that the typical interfaces for desktop PCs (EG MS-Windows and KDE) don’t work well for small devices and touch devices and the Android interface generally isn’t a good match for desktop systems. We need to invent more options for this. This is not a criticism of KDE, I use it every day and it works well. But it’s designed for use cases that don’t match new hardware that is on sale. As an aside it would be nice if Lenovo gave samples of their newest gear to people who make significant contributions to GUIs. Give a few Thinkpad Fold devices to KDE people, a few to GNOME people, and a few others to people involved in Wayland development and see how that promotes software development and future sales.

We also need to adopt features from laptops and phones into desktop PCs. When voice recognition software was first released in the 90s it was for desktop PCs, it didn’t take off largely because it wasn’t very accurate (none of them recognised my voice). Now voice recognition in phones is very accurate and it’s very common for desktop PCs to have a webcam or headset with a microphone so it’s time for this to be re-visited. GPS support in laptops is obviously useful and can work via Wifi location, via a USB GPS device, or via wwan mobile phone hardware (even if not used for wwan networking). Another possibility is using the same software interfaces as used for GPS on laptops for a static definition of location for a desktop PC or server.

The Interesting New Things

Watch Like

The wrist-watch [4] has been a standard format for easy access to data when on the go since it’s military use at the end of the 19th century when the practical benefits beat the supposed femininity of the watch. So it seems most likely that they will continue to be in widespread use in computerised form for the forseeable future. For comparison smart phones have been in widespread use as “pocket watches” for about 10 years.

The question is how will watch computers end up? Will we have Dick Tracy style watch phones that you speak into? Will it be the current smart watch functionality of using the watch to answer a call which goes to a bluetooth headset? Will smart watches end up taking over the functionality of the calculator watch [5] which was popular in the 80’s? With today’s technology you could easily have a fully capable PC strapped to your forearm, would that be useful?

Phone Like

Folding phones (originally popularised as Star Trek Tricorders) seem likely to have a long future ahead of them. Engineering technology has only recently developed to the stage of allowing them to work the way people would hope them to work (a folding screen with no gaps). Phones and tablets with multiple folds are coming out now [6]. This will allow phones to take much of the market share that tablets used to have while tablets and laptops merge at the high end. I’ve previously written about Convergence between phones and desktop computers [7], the increased capabilities of phones adds to the case for Convergence.

Folding phones also provide new possibilities for the OS. The Oppo OnePlus Open and the Google Pixel Fold both have a UI based around using the two halves of the folding screen for separate data at some times. I think that the current user interfaces for desktop PCs don’t properly take advantage of multiple monitors and the possibilities raised by folding phones only adds to the lack. My pet peeve with multiple monitor setups is when they don’t make it obvious which monitor has keyboard focus so you send a CTRL-W or ALT-F4 to the wrong screen by mistake, it’s a problem that also happens on a single screen but is worse with multiple screens. There are rumours of phones described as “three fold” (where three means the number of segments – with two folds between them), it will be interesting to see how that goes.

Will phones go the same way as PCs in terms of having a separation between the compute bit and the input device? It’s quite possible to have a compute device in the phone form factor inside a secure pocket which talks via Bluetooth to another device with a display and speakers. Then you could change your phone between a phone-size display and a tablet sized display easily and when using your phone a thief would not be able to easily steal the compute bit (which has passwords etc). Could the “watch” part of the phone (strapped to your wrist and difficult to steal) be the active part and have a tablet size device as an external display? There are already announcements of smart watches with up to 1GB of RAM (same as the Samsung Galaxy S3), that’s enough for a lot of phone functionality.

The Rabbit R1 [8] and the Humane AI Pin [9] have some interesting possibilities for AI speech interfaces. Could that take over some of the current phone use? It seems that visually impaired people have been doing badly in the trend towards touch screen phones so an option of a voice interface phone would be a good option for them. As an aside I hope some people are working on AI stuff for FOSS devices.

Laptop Like

One interesting PC variant I just discovered is the Higole 2 Pro portable battery operated Windows PC with 5.5″ touch screen [10]. It looks too thick to fit in the same pockets as current phones but is still very portable. The version with built in battery is $AU423 which is in the usual price range for low end laptops and tablets. I don’t think this is the future of computing, but it is something that is usable today while we wait for foldable devices to take over.

The recent release of the Apple Vision Pro [11] has driven interest in 3D and head mounted computers. I think this could be a useful peripheral for a laptop or phone but it won’t be part of a primary computing environment. In 2011 I wrote about the possibility of using augmented reality technology for providing a desktop computing environment [12]. I wonder how a Vision Pro would work for that on a train or passenger jet.

Another interesting thing that’s on offer is a laptop with 7″ touch screen beside the keyboard [13]. It seems that someone just looked at what parts are available cheaply in China (due to being parts of more popular devices) and what could fit together. I think a keyboard should be central to the monitor for serious typing, but there may be useful corner cases where typing isn’t that common and a touch-screen display is of use. Developing a range of strange hardware and then seeing which ones get adopted is a good thing and an advantage of Ali Express and Temu.

Useful Hardware for Developing These Things

I recently bought a second hand Thinkpad X1 Yoga Gen3 for $359 which has stylus support [14], and it’s generally a great little laptop in every other way. There’s a common failure case of that model where touch support for fingers breaks but the stylus still works which allows it to be used for testing touch screen functionality while making it cheap.

The PineTime is a nice smart watch from Pine64 which is designed to be open [15]. I am quite happy with it but haven’t done much with it yet (apart from wearing it every day and getting alerts etc from Android). At $50 when delivered to Australia it’s significantly more expensive than most smart watches with similar features but still a lot cheaper than the high end ones. Also the Raspberry Pi Watch [16] is interesting too.

The PinePhonePro is an OK phone made to open standards but it’s hardware isn’t as good as Android phones released in the same year [17]. I’ve got some useful stuff done on mine, but the battery life is a major issue and the screen resolution is low. The Librem 5 phone from Purism has a better hardware design for security with switches to disable functionality [18], but it’s even slower than the PinePhonePro. These are good devices for test and development but not ones that many people would be excited to use every day.

Wwan hardware (for accessing the phone network) in M.2 form factor can be obtained for free if you have access to old/broken laptops. Such devices start at about $35 if you want to buy one. USB GPS devices also start at about $35 so probably not worth getting if you can get a wwan device that does GPS as well.

What We Must Do

Debian appears to have some voice input software in the pocketsphinx package but no documentation on how it’s to be used. This would be a good thing to document, I spent 15 mins looking at it and couldn’t get it going.

To take advantage of the hardware features in phones we need software support and we ideally don’t want free software to lag too far behind proprietary software – which IMHO means the typical Android setup for phones/tablets.

Support for changing screen resolution is already there as is support for touch screens. Support for adapting the GUI to changed screen size is something that needs to be done – even today’s hardware of connecting a small laptop to an external monitor doesn’t have the ideal functionality for changing the UI. There also seem to be some limitations in touch screen support with multiple screens, I haven’t investigated this properly yet, it definitely doesn’t work in an expected manner in Ubuntu 22.04 and I haven’t yet tested the combinations on Debian/Unstable.

ML is becoming a big thing and it has some interesting use cases for small devices where a smart device can compensate for limited input options. There’s a lot of work that needs to be done in this area and we are limited by the fact that we can’t just rip off the work of other people for use as training data in the way that corporations do.

Security is more important for devices that are at high risk of theft. The vast majority of free software installations are way behind Android in terms of security and we need to address that. I have some ideas for improvement but there is always a conflict between security and usability and while Android is usable for it’s own special apps it’s not usable in a “I want to run applications that use any files from any other applicationsin any way I want” sense. My post about Sandboxing Phone apps is relevant for people who are interested in this [19]. We also need to extend security models to cope with things like “ok google” type functionality which has the potential to be a bug and the emerging class of LLM based attacks.

I will write more posts about these thing.

Please write comments mentioning FOSS hardware and software projects that address these issues and also documentation for such things.

Android vs FOSS Phones

To achieve my aims regarding Convergence of mobile phone and PC [1] I need something a big bigger than the 4G of RAM that’s in the PinePhone Pro [2]. The PinePhonePro was released at the end of 2021 but has a SoC that was first released in 2016. That SoC seems to compare well to the ones used in the Pixel and Pixel 2 phones that were released in the same time period so it’s not a bad SoC, but it doesn’t compare well to more recent Android devices and it also isn’t a great fit for the non-Android things I want to do. Also the PinePhonePro and Librem5 have relatively short battery life so reusing Android functionality for power saving could provide a real benefit. So I want a phone designed for the mass market that I can use for running Debian.

PostmarketOS

One thing I’m definitely not going to do is attempt a full port of Linux to a different platform or support of kernel etc. So I need to choose a device that already has support from a somewhat free Linux system. The PostmarketOS system is the first I considered, the PostmarketOS Wiki page of supported devices [3] was the first place I looked. The “main” supported devices are the PinePhone (not Pro) and the Librem5, both of which are under-powered. For the “community” devices there seems to be nothing that supports calls, SMS, mobile data, and USB-OTG and which also has 4G of RAM or more. If I skip USB-OTG (which presumably means I’d have to get dock functionality via wifi – not impossible but not great) then I’m left with the SHIFT6mq which was never sold in Australia and the Xiomi POCO F1 which doesn’t appear to be available on ebay.

LineageOS

The libhybris libraries are a compatibility layer between Android and glibc programs [4]. Which includes running Wayland with Android display drivers. So running a somewhat standard Linux desktop on top of an Android kernel should be possible. Here is a table of the LineageOS supported devices that seem to have a useful feature set and are available in Australia and which could be used for running Debian with firmware and drivers copied from Android. I only checked LineageOS as it seems to be the main free Android build.

Phone RAM External Display Price
Edge 20 Pro [5] 6-12G HDMI $500 not many on sale
Edge S aka moto G100 [6] 6-8G HDMI $500 to $600+
Fairphone 4 6-8G USBC-DP $1000+
Nubia Red Magic 5G 8-16G USBC-DP $600+

The LineageOS device search page [9] allows searching by kernel version. There are no phones with a 6.6 (2023) or 6.1 (2022) Linux kernel and only the Pixel 8/8Pro and the OnePlus 11 5G run 5.15 (2021). There are 8 Google devices (Pixel 6/7 and a tablet) running 5.10 (2020), 18 devices running 5.4 (2019), and 32 devices running 4.19 (2018). There are 186 devices running kernels older than 4.19 – which aren’t in the kernel.org supported release list [10]. The Pixel 8 Pro with 12G of RAM and the OnePlus 11 5G with 16G of RAM are appealing as portable desktop computers, until recently my main laptop had 8G of RAM. But they cost over $1000 second hand compared to $359 for my latest laptop.

Fosdem had an interesting lecture from two Fairphone employees about what they are doing to make phone production fairer for workers and less harmful for the environment [11]. But they don’t have the market power that companies like Google have to tell SoC vendors what they want.

IP Laws and Practices

Bunnie wrote an insightful and informative blog post about the difference between intellectual property practices in China and US influenced countries and his efforts to reverse engineer a commonly used Chinese SoC [12]. This is a major factor in the lack of support for FOSS on phones and other devices.

Droidian and Buying a Note 9

The FOSDEM 2023 has a lecture about the Droidian project which runs Debian with firmware and drivers from Android to make a usable mostly-FOSS system [13]. It’s interesting how they use containers for the necessary Android apps. Here is the list of devices supported by Droidian [14].

Two notable entries in the list of supported devices are the Volla Phone and Volla Phone 22 from Volla – a company dedicated to making open Android based devices [15]. But they don’t seem to be available on ebay and the new price of the Volla Phone 22 is E452 ($AU750) which is more than I want to pay for a device that isn’t as open as the Pine64 and Purism products. The Volla Phone 22 only has 4G of RAM.

Phone RAM Price Issues
Note 9 128G/512G 6G/8G <$300 Not supporting external display
Galaxy S9+ 6G <$300 Not supporting external display
Xperia 5 6G >$300 Hotspot partly working
OnePlus 3T 6G $200 – $400+ photos not working

I just bought a Note 9 with 128G of storage and 6G of RAM for $109 to try out Droidian, it has some screen burn but that’s OK for a test system and if I end up using it seriously I’ll just buy another that’s in as-new condition. With no support for an external display I’ll need to setup a software dock to do Convergence, but that’s not a serious problem. If I end up making a Note 9 with Droidian my daily driver then I’ll use the 512G/8G model for that and use the cheap one for testing.

Mobian

I should have checked the Mobian list first as it’s the main Debian variant for phones.

From the Mobian Devices list [16] the OnePlus 6T has 8G of RAM or more but isn’t available in Australia and costs more than $400 when imported. The PocoPhone F1 doesn’t seem to be available on ebay. The Shift6mq is made by a German company with similar aims to the Fairphone [17], it looks nice but costs E577 which is more than I want to spend and isn’t on the officially supported list.

Smart Watches

The same issues apply to smart watches. AstereoidOS is a free smart phone OS designed for closed hardware [18]. I don’t have time to get involved in this sort of thing though, I can’t hack on every device I use.

Links February 2024

In 2018 Charles Stross wrote an insightful blog post Dude You Broke the Future [1]. It covers AI in both fiction and fact and corporations (the real AIs) and the horrifying things they can do right now.

LongNow has an interesting article about the concept of the Magnum Opus [2]. As an aside I’ve been working on SE Linux for 22 years.

Cory Doctorow wrote an insightful article about the incentives for enshittification of the Internet and how economic issues and regulations shape that [3].

CCC has a lot of great talks, and this talk from the latest CCC about the Triangulation talk on an attak on Kaspersky iPhones is particularly epic [4].

GoodCar is an online sales site for electric cars in Australia [5].

Ulrike wrote an insightful blog post about how the reliance on volunteer work in the FOSS community hurts diversity [6].

Cory Doctorow wrote an insightful article about The Internet’s Original Sin which is misuse of copyright law [7]. He advocates for using copyright strictly for it’s intended purpose and creating other laws for privacy, labor rights, etc.

David Brin wrote an interesting article on neoteny and sexual selection in humans [8].

37C3 has an interesting lecture about software licensing for a circular economy which includes environmental savings from better code [9]. Now they track efficiency in KDE bug reports!

Release Years

In 2008 I wrote about the idea of having a scheduled release for Debian and other distributions as Mark Shuttleworth had proposed [1]. I still believe that Mark’s original idea for synchronised release dates of Linux distributions (or at least synchronised feature sets) is a good one but unfortunately it didn’t take off.

Having been using Ubuntu a bit recently I’ve found the version numbering system to be really good. Ubuntu version 16.04 was release in April 2016, it’s support ended 5 years later in about April 2021, so any commonly available computers from 2020 should run it well and versions of applications released in about 2017 should run on it. If I have to support a Debian 10 (Buster) system I need to start with a web search to discover when it was released (July 2019). That suggests that applications packaged for Ubuntu 18.04 are likely to run on it.

If we had the same numbering system for Debian and Ubuntu then it would be easier to compare versions. Debian 19.06 would be obviously similar to Ubuntu 18.04, or we could plan for the future and call it Debian 2019.

Then it would be ideal if hardware vendors did the same thing (as car manufacturers have been doing for a long time). Which versions of Ubuntu and Debian would run well on a Dell PowerEdge R750? It takes a little searching to discover that the R750 was released in 2021, but if they called it a PowerEdge 2021R70 then it would be quite obvious that Ubuntu 2022.04 would run well on it and that Ubuntu 2020.04 probably has a kernel update with all the hardware supported.

One of the benefits for the car industry in naming model years is that it drives the purchase of a new car. A 2015 car probably isn’t going to impress anyone and you will know that it is missing some of the features in more recent models. It would be easier to get management to sign off on replacing old computers if they had 2015 on the front, trying to estimate hidden costs of support and lost productivity of using old computers is hard but saying “it’s a 2015 model and way out of date” is easy.

There is a history of using dates as software versions. The “Reference Policy” for SE Linux [2] (which is used for Debian) has releases based on date. During the Debian development process I upload policy to Debian based on the upstream Git and use the same version numbering scheme which is more convenient than the “append git date to last full release” system that some maintainers are forced to use. The users can get an idea of how much the Debian/Unstable policy has diverged from the last full release by looking at the dates. Also an observer might see the short difference between release dates of SE Linux policy and Debian release freeze dates as an indication that I beg the upstream maintainers to make a new release just before each Debian freeze – which is expactly what I do.

When I took over the Portslave [3] program I made releases based on date because there were several forks with different version numbering schemes so my options were to just choose a higher number (which is OK initially but doesn’t scale if there are more forks) or use a date and have people know that the recent date is the most recent version. The fact that the latest release of Portslave is version 2010.04.19 shows that I have not been maintaining it in recent years (due to lack of hardware as well as lack of interest), so if someone wants to take over the project I would be happy to help them do so!

I don’t expect people at Dell and other hardware vendors to take much notice of my ideas (I have tweeted them photographic evidence of a problem with no good response). But hopefully this will start a discussion in the free software community.

Thinkpad X1 Yoga Gen3

I just bought myself a Thinkpad X1 Yoga Gen3 for $359.10. I have been quite happy with the Thinkpad X1 Carbon Gen5 I’ve had for just over a year (apart from my mistake in buying one with lost password) [1] and I normally try to get more use out of a computer than that. If I divide total cost by the time that I’ve had it working that comes out to about $1.30 per day. I would pay more than that for a laptop and I have paid much more than that for laptops in the past, but I prefer not to. I was initially tempted to buy a new Thinkpad by the prices of high end X1 devices dropping, this new Yoga has 16G of RAM and a 2560*1440 screen – that’s a good upgrade from 8G with 1920*1080. The CPU of my new Thinkpad is a quad core i5-8350U that rates 6226 [2] and is a decent upgrade from the dual core i5-6300U that rates 3239 [3] although that wasn’t a factor as I found the old CPU fast enough.

The Yoga Gen3 has a minimum weight of 1.4Kg and mine might not be the lightest model in the range while the old Carbon weighs 1.14Kg. I can really feel the difference. It’s also slightly larger but fortunately still fits in the pocket of my Scottware jacket.

The higher resolution screen and more RAM were not sufficient to make me want to spend some money. The deciding factor is that as I’m working on phones with touch screens it is a benefit to use a laptop with a touch screen so I can do more testing. The Yoga I bought was going cheap because the touch part of the touch screen is broken but the stylus still works, this is apparently a common failure mode of the Yoga.

The Yoga has a brighter screen than the Carbon and seems to have better contrast. I think Lenovo had some newer technology for that generation of laptops or maybe my Carbon is slightly defective in that regard. It’s a hazard of buying second hand that if something basically works but isn’t quite as good as it should be then you will never know.

I’m happy with this purchase and I recommend that everyone who buys laptops secondhand the way I do only get 1440p or better displays. I’ve currently got the Kitty terminal emulator [4] setup with 9 windows that each have 103 or 104 columns and 26 or 28 rows of text. That’s a lot of terminals on a laptop screen!

Links January 2024

Long Now has an insightful article about domestication that considers whether humans have evolved to want to control nature [1].

The OMG Elite hacker cable is an interesting device [2]. A Wifi device in a USB cable to allow remote control and monitoring of data transfer, including remote keyboard control and sniffing. Pity that USB-C cables have chips in them so you can’t use a spark to remove unwanted chips from modern cables.

David Brin’s blog post The core goal of tyrants: The “Red-Caesar” Cult and a restored era of The Great Man has some insightful points about authoritarianism [3].

Ron Garret wrote an interesting argument against Christianity [4], and a follow-up titled Why I Don’t Believe in Jesus [5]. He has a link to a well written article about the different theologies of Jesus and Paul [6].

Dimitri John Ledkov wrote an interesting blog post about how they reduced disk space for Ubuntu kernel packages and RAM for the initramfs phase of boot [7]. I hope this gets copied to Debian soon.

Joey Hess wrote an interesting blog post about trying to make LLM systems produce bad code if trained on his code without permission [8].

Arstechnica has an interesting summary of research into the security of fingerprint sensors [9]. Not surprising that the products of the 3 vendors that supply almost all PC fingerprint readers are easy to compromise.

Bruce Schneier wrote an insightful blog post about how AI will allow mass spying (as opposed to mass surveillance) [10].

ZDnet has an informative article How to Write Better ChatGPT Prompts in 5 Steps [11]. I sent this to a bunch of my relatives.

AbortRetryFail has an interesting article about the Itanic Saga [12]. Erberus sounds interesting, maybe VLIW designs could give a good ration of instructions to power – unlike the Itanium which was notorious for being power hungry.

Bruce Schneier wrote an insightful article about AI and Trust [13]. We really need laws controlling these things!

David Brin wrote an interesting blog post on the obsession with historical cycles [14].

Storage Trends 2024

It has been less than a year since my last post about storage trends [1] and enough has changed to make it worth writing again. My previous analysis was that for <2TB only SSD made sense, for 4TB SSD made sense for business use while hard drives were still a good option for home use, and for 8TB+ hard drives were clearly the best choice for most uses. I will start by looking at MSY prices, they aren't the cheapest (you can get cheaper online) but they are competitive and they make it easy to compare the different options. I'll also compare the cheapest options in each size, there are more expensive options but usually if you want to pay more then the performance benefits of SSD (both SATA and NVMe) are even more appealing. All prices are in Australian dollars and of parts that are readily available in Australia, but the relative prices of the parts are probably similar in most countries. The main issue here is when to use SSD and when to use hard disks, and then if SSD is chosen which variety to use.

Small Storage

For my last post the cheapest storage devices from MSY were $19 for a 128G SSD, now it’s $24 for a 128G SSD or NVMe device. I don’t think the Australian dollar has dropped much against foreign currencies, so I guess this is partly companies wanting more profits and partly due to the demand for more storage. Items that can’t sell in quantity need higher profit margins if they are to have them in stock. 500G SSDs are around $33 and 500G NVMe devices for $36 so for most use cases it wouldn’t make sense to buy anything smaller than 500G.

The cheapest hard drive is $45 for a 1TB disk. A 1TB SATA SSD costs $61 and a 1TB NVMe costs $79. So 1TB disks aren’t a good option for any use case.

A 2TB hard drive is $89. A 2TB SATA SSD is $118 and a 2TB NVMe is $145. I don’t think the small savings you can get from using hard drives makes them worth using for 2TB.

For most people if you have a system that’s important to you then $145 on storage isn’t a lot to spend. It seems hardly worth buying less than 2TB of storage, even for a laptop. Even if you don’t use all the space larger storage devices tend to support more writes before wearing out so you still gain from it. A 2TB NVMe device you buy for a laptop now could be used in every replacement laptop for the next 10 years. I only have 512G of storage in my laptop because I have a collection of SSD/NVMe devices that have been replaced in larger systems, so the 512G is essentially free for my laptop as I bought a larger device for a server.

For small business use it doesn’t make sense to buy anything smaller than 2TB for any system other than a router. If you buy smaller devices then you will sometimes have to pay people to install bigger ones and when the price is $145 it’s best to just pay that up front and be done with it.

Medium Storage

A 4TB hard drive is $135. A 4TB SATA SSD is $319 and a 4TB NVMe is $299. The prices haven’t changed a lot since last year, but a small increase in hard drive prices and a small decrease in SSD prices makes SSD more appealing for this market segment.

A common size range for home servers and small business servers is 4TB or 8TB of storage. To do that on SSD means about $600 for 4TB of RAID-1 or $900 for 8TB of RAID-5/RAID-Z. That’s quite affordable for that use.

For 8TB of less important storage a 8TB hard drive costs $239 and a 8TB SATA SSD costs $899 so a hard drive clearly wins for the specific case of non-RAID single device storage. Note that the U.2 devices are more competitive for 8TB than SATA but I included them in the next section because they are more difficult to install.

Serious Storage

With 8TB being an uncommon and expensive option for consumer SSDs the cheapest price is for multiple 4TB devices. To have multiple NVMe devices in one PCIe slot you need PCIe bifurcation (treating the PCIe slot as multiple slots). Most of the machines I use don’t support bifurcation and most affordable systems with ECC RAM don’t have it. For cheap NVMe type storage there are U.2 devices (the “enterprise” form of NVMe). Until recently they were too expensive to use for desktop systems but now there are PCIe cards for internal U.2 devices, $14 for a card that takes a single U.2 is a common price on AliExpress and prices below $600 for a 7.68TB U.2 device are common – that’s cheaper on a per-TB basis than SATA SSD and NVMe! There are PCIe cards that take up to 4*U.2 devices (which probably require bifurcation) which means you could have 8+ U.2 devices in one not particularly high end PC for 56TB of RAID-Z NVMe storage. Admittedly $4200 for 56TB is moderately expensive, but it’s in the price range for a small business server or a high end home server. A more common configuration might be 2*7.68TB U.2 on a single PCIe card (or 2 cards if you don’t have bifurcation) for 7.68TB of RAID-1 storage.

For SATA SSD AliExpress has a 6*2.5″ hot-swap device that fits in a 5.25″ bay for $63, so if you have 2*5.25″ bays you could have 12*4TB SSDs for 44TB of RAID-Z storage. That wouldn’t be much cheaper than 8*7.68TB U.2 devices and would be slower and have less space. But it would be a good option if PCIe bifurcation isn’t possible.

16TB SATA hard drives cost $559 which is almost exactly half the price per TB of U.2 storage. That doesn’t seem like a good deal. If you want 16TB of RAID storage then 3*7.68TB U.2 devices only costs about 50% more than 2*16TB SATA disks. In most cases paying 50% more to get NVMe instead of hard disks is a good option. As sizes go above 16TB prices go up in a more than linear manner, I guess they don’t sell much volume of larger drives.

15.36TB U.2 devices are on sale for about $1300, slightly more than twice the price of a 16TB disk. It’s within the price range of small businesses and serious home users. Also it should be noted that the U.2 devices are designed for “enterprise” levels of reliability and the hard disk prices I’m comparing to are the cheapest available. If “NAS” hard disks were compared then the price benefit of hard disks would be smaller.

Probably the biggest problem with U.2 for most people is that it’s an uncommon technology that few people have much experience with or spare parts for testing. Also you can’t buy U.2 gear at your local computer store which might mean that you want to have spare parts on hand which is an extra expense.

For enterprise use I’ve recently been involved in discussions with a vendor that sells multiple petabyte arrays of NVMe. Apparently NVMe is cheap enough that there’s no need to use anything else if you want a well performing file server.

Do Hard Disks Make Sense?

There are specific cases like comparing a 8TB hard disk to a 8TB SATA SSD or a 16TB hard disk to a 15.36TB U.2 device where hard disks have an apparent advantage. But when comparing RAID storage and counting the performance benefits of SSD the savings of using hard disks don’t seem to be that great.

Is now the time that hard disks are going to die in the market? If they can’t get volume sales then prices will go up due to lack of economy of scale in manufacture and increased stock time for retailers. 8TB hard drives are now more expensive than they were 9 months ago when I wrote my previous post, has a hard drive price death spiral already started?

SSDs are cheaper than hard disks at the smallest sizes, faster (apart from some corner cases with contiguous IO), take less space in a computer, and make less noise. At worst they are a bit over twice the cost per TB. But the most common requirements for storage are small enough and cheap enough that being twice as expensive as hard drives isn’t a problem for most people.

I predict that hard disks will become less popular in future and offer less of a price advantage. The vendors are talking about 50TB hard disks being available in future but right now you can fit more than 50TB of NVMe or U.2 devices in a volume less than that of a 3.5″ hard disk so for storage density SSD can clearly win. Maybe in future hard disks will be used in arrays of 100TB devices for large scale enterprise storage. But for home users and small businesses the current sizes of SSD cover most uses.

At the moment it seems that the one case where hard disks can really compare well is for backup devices. For backups you want large storage, good contiguous write speeds, and low prices so you can buy plenty of them.

Further Issues

The prices I’ve compared for SATA SSD and NVMe devices are all based on the cheapest devices available. I think it’s a bit of a market for lemons [2] as devices often don’t perform as well as expected and the incidence of fake products purporting to be from reputable companies is high on the cheaper sites. So you might as well buy the cheaper devices. An advantage of the U.2 devices is that you know that they will be reliable and perform well.

One thing that concerns me about SSDs is the lack of knowledge of their failure cases. Filesystems like ZFS were specifically designed to cope with common failure cases of hard disks and I don’t think we have that much knowledge about how SSDs fail. But with 3 copies of metadata BTFS or ZFS should survive unexpected SSD failure modes.

I still have some hard drives in my home server, they keep working well enough and the prices on SSDs keep dropping. But if I was buying new storage for such a server now I’d get U.2.

I wonder if tape will make a comeback for backup.

Does anyone know of other good storage options that I missed?