Das Feuer in Moria

Knapp 13.000 Insassen des Flüchtlingslagers auf Lesbos irren nun obdachlos über die Insel

Knapp 13.000 Insassen des Flüchtlingslagers auf Lesbos irren nun obdachlos über die Insel

Arm’s new Cortex-R82 is its first 64-bit real-time processor

Blending full-stack and real-time CPU designs opens new hardware possibilities.

Stylized image of blue computer code on a black background.

Enlarge / The code in the background of this image is a bit too high-level for a typical RTOS... but it might run under Linux, on the MMU side of a Cortex-R82 real-time CPU. (credit: arm)

Last Friday, Arm announced the newest generation of its real-time processor series, the Cortex-R82. Most people are more familiar with the Cortex A-series of CPUs, which are used as the primary processors in devices such as smartphones and tablets, running full-fledged operating systems. The Cortex-R series, by contrast, is typically used for high-performance applications demanding "real-time" performance—meaning simple, predictable, and extremely low-latency response loops—in much simpler software stacks.

Earlier Cortex R-series processors weren't capable of running full-fledged modern operating systems, including Linux, because they utilized a simple Memory Protection Unit (MPU) rather than the more complex Memory Management Unit (MMU) needed to support functions such as virtual memory. This generally wasn't seen as a problem, since Real-Time Operating System (RTOS) workloads generally need to have much simpler, more predictable control loops.

Real-time versus multitasking

The Cortex R-82 still offers a simple MPU, but it can be optionally configured with an MMU as well—and the CPU's cores can be individually, and dynamically, assigned to either. Arm's Neil Werdmuller hypothesizes storage controllers which might operate with different profiles during peak and off-peak hours, reassigning cores from real-time "pure SSD" duties to "computational storage"—likely meaning onboard AI analysis—as needed.

Read 4 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Apple: “Epic Games ist kein Robin Hood”

Im Streit um Fortnite wehrt sich Apple mit Vorwürfen gegen Epic Games: Dem Spielentwickler gehe es nicht um Freiheit – sondern nur um Geld. (Fortnite, Apple)

Im Streit um Fortnite wehrt sich Apple mit Vorwürfen gegen Epic Games: Dem Spielentwickler gehe es nicht um Freiheit - sondern nur um Geld. (Fortnite, Apple)

Take-Two Wins Injunction to Kill Red Dead Redemption Enhancement Project

Take-Two Interactive and developer Johnathan Wyckoff have agreed to a permanent injunction to kill the latter’s Red Dead Redemption Enhancement Project. Among other things, Wyckoff – aka ‘DemandDev’ – hoped to bring the first edition of the videogame to PC. This resulted in a copyright infringement lawsuit which has now been terminated, provided the developer sticks to its terms.

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

RDRIILast August, an announcement by developer ‘DemandDev’ revealed that work had begun on his ‘Red Dead Redemption: Damned Enhancement Project’.

The goal of the developer was not only to modify the Xbox360 and PS3 versions of RDR1 and bring the game to the PC but also to improve the title with better graphics and additional features.

Threats from Take-Two: Cease and Desist

Just a month after the initial announcement, DemandDev revealed that the project was dead, claiming that he was being bullied by a “corporation”. On December 26, 2019, Take-Two filed a lawsuit at a New York court against a Johnathan Wyckoff, now known to be DemandDev.

Claiming breaches of its intellectual property rights and user licensing agreements, the company said that it was bringing the action “to maintain control of its world-famous video games” and to prevent the distribution of software that would “dramatically change the content of Take-Two’s video games.”

Take-Two stated that it had “repeatedly” asked Wyckoff to cease and desist. When these demands were ignored, the company said it was forced to take legal action, demanding injunctive relief and damages as a result of direct and contributory copyright infringement and breaches of Take-Two’s licensing agreements.

Project Shut Down, Fight Back Begins

Soon after the lawsuit was filed, Wyckoff announced that the project had been canceled but as the months progressed, the developer decided to put up a fight.

Early March 2020 Wyckoff told the court that he believed he was acting in accordance with Take-Two’s policy on ‘PC Single-Player Mods’ which state that the company will generally not take legal action against third-party projects involving Rockstar’s PC games that are single-player, non-commercial, and respect intellectual property rights.

However, less than two weeks earlier the court had already handed down a preliminary injunction, the terms of which were agreed by both sides, which enjoined Wyckoff from “directly or indirectly infringing Take-Two’s copyrights”, including the creation of derivative works based on Take-Two’s games such as Grand Theft Auto V, Red Dead Redemption, and Red Dead Redemption II.

Arbitration

In Wyckoff’s March answer to the original complaint, he pointed out that Take-Two’s ‘user agreement’ contains a clause that compels parties in dispute to enter into an arbitration process, paid for by Take-Two, in order to reach a settlement. Wyckoff asked for that to happen and it appears he got his way.

A letter to the court in April revealed that settlement negotiations had been unsuccessful, so the parties were indeed heading to arbitration. After a two-month filing hiatus, that process is now reported as complete, with Take-Two largely obtaining what they set out to achieve.

Stipulated Permanent Injunction to Kill Projects, Prevent Others

As a result of the arbitration process, Take-Two and Wyckoff told the court late last week that they had agreed that a permanent injunction would be an acceptable conclusion to the case in hand.

The fundamentals of Take-Two’s claims appear to have been taken as fact, with the company and Wyckoff agreeing that he infringed Take-Two’s copyrights, breached its Software Warranty and User Agreements, and interfered with contracts between Take-Two and its users.

On this basis, Take-Two and Wyckoff agreed that the developer should be permanently restrained from a number of actions, including breaching Take-Two’s copyrights by creating “derivative works” based upon any Take-Two software including Red Dead Redemption, Red Dead Redemption II, and Grand Theft Auto.

Wyckoff also agreed not to create, develop, maintain, advertise or distribute any files that alter any Take-Two software in any way, while abstaining from “inducing or materially contributing to the direct infringement or altering of any of Take-Two’s existing or future copyrighted works by others.”

Small But Significant Win For Wyckoff – No Damages

While Wyckoff has now conceded that his work breached copyright law and a number of Take-Two’s additional rights, the developer has avoided what could have been a substantial damages award. The permanent injunction appears to be the end of the matter, providing he doesn’t breach its terms moving forward.

“Upon proof of any violation by Mr. Wyckoff of this Permanent Injunction, the Court and/or the Arbitrator shall be authorized to award damages, injunctive relief, Take-Two’s reasonable attorney’s fees, and other costs incurred in connection with an action to enforce this Permanent Injunction, and any other relief that it deems appropriate,” the injunction reads.

At the request of both parties, United States Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV signed off on the order while agreeing to a termination of the case.

The stipulated permanent injunction and related documents can be found here (1,2,3)

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Configuration Management Tools: Ansible, Chef, Puppet und Saltstack im Vergleich

Die vier bekanntesten Tools zum Configuration Management unterscheiden sich in Konzept, Sprache und Details. Wann setzt man welches am besten ein? Von Boris Mayer (Server-Applikationen, DSL)

Die vier bekanntesten Tools zum Configuration Management unterscheiden sich in Konzept, Sprache und Details. Wann setzt man welches am besten ein? Von Boris Mayer (Server-Applikationen, DSL)

Fünf Tage Haft ohne Richter und Anklage

Die Energie- und Klimawochenschau: Von Tropenstürmen, Feuerkatastrophen und Eisschwund, von LEAGs Zerstörungswut und Polizeistaatsmethoden im Dienste der Braunkohle

Die Energie- und Klimawochenschau: Von Tropenstürmen, Feuerkatastrophen und Eisschwund, von LEAGs Zerstörungswut und Polizeistaatsmethoden im Dienste der Braunkohle