fidzu : debian

A colleague asked me if we should move all our money to our pillow cases after reading the latest AI editorial from Thomas Friedman. The article reads like a press release from Anthropic, repeating the claim that their latest AI model is so good at finding software vulnerabilities that it is a danger to the world.

I think I now know what it's like to be a doctor who is forced to watch Gray's Anatomy.

By now every journalist should be able to recognize the AI publicity playbook:

Step 1: Start with a wildly unsubstantiated claim about how dangerous your product is:

AI will cause human extinction before we have a chance to colonize mars (remember that one? Even Kim Stanley Robinson, author of perhaps the most compelling science fiction on colonizing mars calls bull shit on it).

AI will eliminate all of our jobs (this one was extremely effective at providing cover for software companies laying off staff but it has quickly dawned on people that the companies that did this are living in chaos not humming along happily with functional robots)

AI will discover massive software vulnerabilities allowing bad actors to "hack pretty much every major software system in the world". (Did Friedman pull that directly from Anthropic's press release or was that his contribution?)

Step 2: To help stave off human collapse, only release the new version to a vetted group of software companies and developers, preferably ones with big social media followings

Step 3: Wait for the limited release developers to spew unbridled enthusiasm and shocking examples that seem to suggest this new AI produce is truly unbelievable

Step 4: Watch stock prices and valuations soar

Step 5: Release to the world, and experience a steady stream of mockery as people discover how wrong you are

Step 6: Start over

Even if Friedman missed the text book example of the playbook, I have to ask: if you think bad actors compromising software resulting in massive loss of private data, major outages and wasted resources needs to be reported on, then where have you been for the last 10 years? This literally happens on a daily basis due to the fundamentally flawed way capitalism has been writing software even before the invention of AI. A small part of me wonders - maybe AI writing software is not so bad, because how could it be any worse than it is now?

Also, let's keep in mind that AI's super ability at finding vulnerable software depends on having access to the software's source code, which most companies keep locked up tight. That means the owners of the software can use AI to find vulnerabilities and fix them but bad actors can't.

Oh, but wait, what if a company is so incompetent that they accidentally release their proprietary software to the Internet?

Surely that would allow AI bots to discover their vulnerabilities and destroy the company right? I'm not sure if anyone has discovered world ending vulnerabilities in Anthropic's Claude code since it was accidentally released, but it is fun to watch people mock software that is clearly written by AI (and spoiler alert, it seems way worse that software written now).

Well… we probably should all be keeping our money in a pillow case anyway.

10 Apr 2026 12:27pm GMT

I recently decided to upgrade the CPU in my workstation, the E5-2696 v3 CPU was OK (passmark 2045 for single thread and 21,380 for multi thread) [1] but I felt like buying something better so I got a E5-2696 v4 (passmark 2115 and 24,643) [2]. I chose the E5-2696 v4 because I was looking for a E5-2699 v4 and found an ebay seller who had them at $140 but was offering the E5-2696 v4 for $99 and the passmark results for the two CPUs are almost identical.

After buying the CPU and waiting for it to be delivered I realised that the Z640 doesn't include it in the list of supported CPUs and that the maximum TDP of any supported CPU is 145W while according to passmark it has a TDP of 150W. I looked for information about it on Intel ARK (the official site for specs of Intel CPUs) and discovered that "The Intel® Xeon® Processor E5-2696 v4 is designed to be used by system manufacturers (OEMs), and this means they can modify its specifications depending on the system where it will be implemented" and "The processor does not have an ARK page for this reason, since it has no standard specification from Intel, so depending on the original system, it is necessary to contact that system manufacturer for information" [3]. That's the official response from an Intel employee saying that there are no standard specs for that CPU!!!

Somehow I had used a E5-2696 v3 for 3 years without realising that the same lack of support and specs applies to it [4]!

I installed the new CPU in another Z640 which had a E5-1620 v3 CPU and it worked. I was a little surprised to discover that the hole in the corner is in the bottom right (according to the alignment of the printed text on the top) for all my E5-26xx CPUs while it's in the top left on the E5-1620 v3. Google searches for things like "e5-2600 e5-1600 difference" and "e5-2600 e5-1600 difference hole in corner" didn't turn up any useful information. The best information I found was from the Linus Tech Tips forum which says that the hole is to allow gasses to escape when the CPU package is glued together [5] which implies (but doesn't state) that the location of the hole has no meaning. I had previously thought that the hole was to indicate the location of "pin 1" and was surprised when the new CPU had the hole in the opposite corner. Hopefully in future when people have such concerns they can find this post and not be worried that they are about to destroy their CPU, PC, or both when upgrading the CPU.

The previous Z640 was one I bought from Facebook marketplace for $50 in "unknown condition" in the expectation that I would get at least $50 of parts but it worked perfectly apart from one DIMM socket. The Z640 I'm using now is one I bought from Facebook marketplace for $200 and it's working perfectly with 4 DIMMs, 128G of RAM, and the E5-2696 v4 CPU. $300 for a workstation with ECC RAM and a 22 core CPU is good value for money!

There are some accounts of the E5-2696 v4 not working on white-box motherboards including a claim that when it was selling for $4000US someone's motherboard destroyed one. The best plan for such CPUs is to google for someone who's already got it working in the same machine, which means a name-brand server. That doesn't guarantee that it will work (Intel refuses to supply specs and states that different items may work differently) but greatly improves the probability.

This system has the HP BIOS version 2.61, note that the Linux fwupd package doesn't seem to update the BIOS on HP workstations so you need to manually download it and install it. There is a possibility that a Z640 with an older BIOS won't work with this CPU.

Here is the previous post in my Z640 saga [6].

• [1] https://tinyurl.com/2hrrnqfr
• [2] https://tinyurl.com/2j2gg3es
• [3] https://tinyurl.com/2742z4qm
• [4] https://tinyurl.com/25nzpa5t
• [5] https://tinyurl.com/25ebra97
• [6] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2025/04/05/hp-ml110-gen9-z640/

09 Apr 2026 11:33pm GMT

In January 2025, as a pre-requisite for something else, I published a minimal neovim plugin called nvim-µwiki. It's essentially just the features from vimwiki that I regularly use, which is a small fraction them. I forgot to blog about it. I recently dusted it off and cleaned it up. You can find it here, along with a longer list of its features and how to configure it: https://github.com/jmtd/nvim-microwiki

I had a couple of design goals. I didn't want to define a new filetype, so this is designed to work with the existing markdown one. I'm using neovim, so I wanted to leverage some of its features: this plugin is written in Lua, rather than vimscript. I use the parse trees provided by TreeSitter to navigate the structure of a document. I also decided to "plug into" the existing tag stack navigation, rather than define another dimension of navigation (along with buffers, etc.) to track: Following a wiki-link pushes onto the tag stack, just as if you followed a tag.

This was my first serious bit of Lua programming, as well as my first dive into neovim (or even vim) internals. Lua is quite reasonable. Most of the vim and neovim architecture is reasonable. The emerging conventions about structuring neovim plugins are mostly reasonable. TreeSitter is, well, interesting, but the devil is very much in the details. Somehow all together the experience for me was largely just frustrating, and I didn't really enjoy writing it.

08 Apr 2026 8:31pm GMT