maffydub

Interesting that you see the definitive Amiga as being the A1200 - the definitive one for me was definitely the A500/A500+ - it was definitely way more popular!

BTW, I don't think the software in this repository is compatible with PPC-based Amigas, is it? (Unless they have the add-on board that runs a 68000-series processor in parallel?)

It's a bit complicated and it depends on what exactly you're measuring. The 68000 CPU has 32-bit registers internally, the address bus is 24-bit, and the data bus is 16.

I have to confess I'm not really up to speed on the situation but, from the article...

> However, last month the watchdog said a revised deal that included selling cloud gaming rights outside Europe to Activision Blizzard’s French rival Ubisoft had addressed its concerns, indicating the tie-up would be approved.

Was this as a result of CMA's pressure, or would it have happened anyway?

(If it wouldn't have happened anyway, it doesn't feel like a climb down to me?)

If the case was subject to reporting restrictions (which seems quite possible given what he says), it might be illegal for him to tell us the names.

In the actual example, I don't think the engineers were trying to patent something obvious - it's just not unusual for engineers to casually throw around the word "obvious" for things that are not, and it's unwise to have that written down.

(I was the person who provided the ancedote.)

Working a 4 day week isn't mentioned in the article - maybe the position you were approached for was special?

...but I would not be at all surprised if the requirement to be in the office was prorated too.

In other words, if you work 5 days a week (and that's probably the vast majority of employees, so generalising for an article like this is reasonable), you need to be in 3 days, but it you work 4 you might only need to be in 2.

...so I don't think the job you were approached for contradicts the position put forward in the article?

In previous employment (as a software engineer), I've been told to do this too - mainly around inventions we were trying to patent. The reason is slightly less nefarious than you might think - for example, someone might casually say that some aspect of their patent is "obvious" but they're saying that as an expert in their field who may have spent months or years thinking about the problem and alternative solutions. However, if it came to court, "even the inventor said this was obvious" is a pretty hard thing to respond to.

Thanks, both! This was used in a static build that decrypted and checksummed its binary before execution, which ruled out naive implementations of the attacks above. I agree there are ways round these too, but I believe it was just intended to discourage amateurs rather than protect against serious hacking.

I've seen this used preemptively - have the process ptrace itself on startup (and then do nothing with it) to make it impossible (or at least far-from-trivial) for other interested parties to ptrace it.

Do you have any other references on this?

It seems that it all hinges on what a "modified version" of Ubuntu is. Is redistributing their packages outside of a full disk image a modified version?