Peter Horvath

@Redjard @cm0002 Can it be used to root android?

@sbeak Problem of the BSD license is that it can be forked and closed… macos was once a BSD…

@Sxan @Johnnyvibrant I installed linux to my company laptop as an “emergency” because my windows became unbootable, then somehow it remained, sadly ;-)

I know it was risky, but there was a point of the revolt.

I knew that the same stupidity and generally depressive mentality, which prevents my boss to directly call me about it (I actually did not even had a boss), so the same won’t likely tolerate it.

Until I do not make it too open. Doing the same well visibly, it had probably not been tolerated.

@cdzero @viov Btw, Ubuntu mobile is long ceased to exist, what is this ubuntu touch thing now?

@sbeak @Logical_Error Yes. And the sad truth is, being open source, gpl2, it is still possible to do with it the same evil as iSatan does. :-( We must fight!

@victorz They are not even similar on English.

@sbeak @victorz It is “unix car parts shop”

@auntieclokwise @victorz :-) What is the language on which you are thinking on?

@razen @viov The “mobile computing” was organized probably by some really dark circles of the big USA eavesdropping/world police line. It was not at all about that you have a linux (osx) on your phone. IT WAS ABOUT REPLACING THE FREE PC WORLD BY A CONTROLLED SLAVE ONE. We sucked it.

@furtiveParalysis I summarize your answer: “Yes it is closed hardware, you badass linux guy. Here can you crack it, like of a f…ing samsung: <link>”

@furtiveParalysis @viov Fairphone should start the “fairness” that I can reinstall its OS like of a PC. It does not do that, IT IS CLOSED HARDWARE LIKE A SAMSUNG, so do not buy it!!!

@GamingChairModel @Glitch How about formulating meaningful content? Your question is bullshit!

@Snapz @viov Can you really do it? My experience with all Android rooting is that it is always complex and risky.

@iByteABit It helps a lot to the Java guys not knowing what is a tcp port.

@forestbeasts @p4rzivalrp2 Quite honestly, I am a bit disappointed on wayland - it promises a fast X, but it does not provide it. The cause of the slow X was not that it is an old monster, the cause was the much lesser developer resources. Wayland has even much lesser.

Removed by mod

@davidgro That was a different thing. You can write or read from the physical memory address 0 even on the systems of the today - except that practically all the OS-es are using their paging or memory management to make that address unreeachable. Actually, as far I can remember, on Linux, the addresses between 0 - 65535 are mapped unreachable. If try to write them, you will get SIGSEGV. This is because a memory page is 4K, that is the granularity of the memory permissions. Beside that, we also need SIGSEGV (which would map to a “null pointer dereference” or analog) if it actually tried to access the part of a larger struct (what would be visible as an access to a non-zero, but very small memory address).

C64 had no memory protection, you could read or write anywhere where you wanted. Although it had memory-mapped I/O, meaning that instead of bus-level port communication, all the IO, i.e. communication of the CPU with the chips of the mainboard, happened as if they would be memory. Some chip happily crashed the system on such writes, particularly the CIA did it (general purpose I/O chip and hw clock) for not enough well thought memory operations in the $DC00 - $DFFF range.

You could happily write into 0 on C64. Actually, on the address 1, you could access the chip select pin of some RAM chips, meaning that you could with that switch from the basic ROM into an additional RAM area. Writing to the 0 byte did not had any on the spot visible effect on my experiments, but today I read in the docs, it had actually effect to the GPIO ports related to the memory chips managed at the address 1.

Actually, c64 went even more: the first page, i.e. the addresses between 0-255, very accessible a bit faster, because they required a lesser amount of CPU and data bus cycles. Very important registers, used for important operations, were there.

However, this all is about the C64 hardware. The C64 basic v2.0, which was written by the microsoft, quickly evaporating all my youth nostalgy, had nothing similar to the NULL (of C) or null (of Java). It not even had an “unset”, “undefined” or similar type. The 3 types it had, were: 32-bit floating point, 16-bit integer and 0-254 byte long string.

Removed by mod

@misk I think these modchip are exactly what would also really need in the android or iEvil world. Although I am not very sure, how could they be attached into a machine.

@davidgro @hunger Last basic variant I worked with was the basic of the commodore machines. It had no NULL. I have also seen vbscript a little, afaik also it had not.

In Java, null does not mean a real 0 value, I think it is more like a static const, more similar to the None type of the Python. Its name is only a helper for the C/C++ guys to better understand a stack trace.