Tag Archives: dav

Steal This Show S03E12: Attack Of The Propaganda Bots

Post Syndicated from J.J. King original https://torrentfreak.com/steal-show-s03e12-attack-propaganda-bots/

stslogo180If you enjoy this episode, consider becoming a patron and getting involved with the show. Check out Steal This Show’s Patreon campaign: support us and get all kinds of fantastic benefits!

In this episode, we meet Sam Woolley, director of the Digital Intelligence Lab at the Institute for the Future, to dig deeper into the topic of troll farms, political disinformation and the use of social media bots to create what Sam calls ‘Computational Propaganda’.

What happens when the ability to create propaganda is democratized out of the hands of governments and corporate media and into the hands of unknown, weird and downright dangerous online actors?

Steal This Show aims to release bi-weekly episodes featuring insiders discussing copyright and file-sharing news. It complements our regular reporting by adding more room for opinion, commentary, and analysis.

The guests for our news discussions will vary, and we’ll aim to introduce voices from different backgrounds and persuasions. In addition to news, STS will also produce features interviewing some of the great innovators and minds.

Host: Jamie King

Guest: Sam Woolley

Produced by Jamie King
Edited & Mixed by Riley Byrne
Original Music by David Triana
Web Production by Siraje Amarniss

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Piracy Notices Can Mess With Your Thermostat, ISP Warns

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-notices-can-mess-with-your-thermostat-isp-warns-171224/

Since the early 2000’s copyright holders have been sending ISPs takedown notices, to alert account holders that someone’s been using their connection to share copyrighted material.

The goal of these warnings is to deter people from sharing pirated material in the future.

Internet providers are not legally obliged to forward the notices, but many do. What ISPs are required to do is implement a policy to deal with frequent offenders.

Keeping pirates on board without taking any action can make the ISP liable, as Cox found out the hard way. While this case is currently on appeal, some ISPs have already put stringent measures in place.

Take Armstrong Zoom Internet, for example, which has roughly a million subscribers in the Northeastern part of the U.S. Like many other ISPs it reserves the right to terminate repeat infringers, a policy which it doesn’t hide.

Our attention was caught by a recent letter the company sent to one of its users. The ISP points out that it received multiple copyright infringement notices, urging the customer to stop, or else.

“…please be advised that, if Armstrong receives additional notifications of infringement connected With your Zoom Internet Service, Armstrong will remove you from your current service level and place you at the lowest service level.

“This will allow you to access email, but limit your speeds and affect your ability to upload or download material to the internet or use other file-sharing capabilities.”

Armstrong warning (via)

While reduced Internet speeds are bad enough, there’s another scary prospect. The reduced service level may also prevent subscribers from controlling their thermostat remotely. Not ideal during the winter.

“Please be advised that this may affect other services which you may have connected to your internet service, such as the ability to control your thermostat remotely or video monitoring services.”

Accused pirates who want their full service restored, and regain control over their thermostats, have to answer some copyright questions and read an educational piece about copyright infringement.

When they sign an agreement acknowledging that they have done so, full Internet access is restored. However, if more complaints come in later, the consequences will be more severe.

“…if Armstrong received additional notifications after you sign the Acknowledgement, your Zoom Internet Service will be terminated,” the provider writes.

Getting back in after that is only possible after signing an affidavit, so under penalty of perjury, and by paying a fee.

Only then they will regain full control over their thermostat again.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Journeying with green sea turtles and the Arribada Initiative

Post Syndicated from Alex Bate original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/sea-turtles/

Today, a guest post: Alasdair Davies, co-founder of Naturebytes, ZSL London’s Conservation Technology Specialist and Shuttleworth Foundation Fellow, shares the work of the Arribada Initiative. The project uses the Raspberry Pi Zero and camera module to follow the journey of green sea turtles. The footage captured from the backs of these magnificent creatures is just incredible – prepare to be blown away!

Pit Stop Camera on Green Sea Turtle 01

Footage from the new Arribada PS-C (pit-stop camera) video tag recently trialled on the island of Principe in unison with the Principe Trust. Engineered by Institute IRNAS (http://irnas.eu/) for the Arribada Initiative (http://blog.arribada.org/).

Access to affordable, open and customisable conservation technologies in the animal tracking world is often limited. I’ve been a conservation technologist for the past ten years, co-founding Naturebytes and working at ZSL London Zoo, and this was a problem that continued to frustrate me. It was inherently expensive to collect valuable data that was necessary to inform policy, to designate marine protected areas, or to identify threats to species.

In March this year, I got a supercharged opportunity to break through these barriers by becoming a Shuttleworth Foundation Fellow, meaning I had the time and resources to concentrate on cracking the problem. The Arribada Initiative was founded, and ten months later, the open source Arribada PS-C green sea turtle tag was born. The video above was captured two weeks ago in the waters of Principe Island, West Africa.

Alasdair Davies on Twitter

On route to Principe island with 10 second gen green sea #turtle tags for testing. This version has a video & accelerometer payload for behavioural studies, plus a nice wireless charging carry case made by @institute_irnas @ShuttleworthFdn

The tag comprises a Raspberry Pi Zero W sporting the Raspberry Pi camera module, a PiRA power management board, two lithium-ion cells, and a rather nice enclosure. It was built in unison with Institute IRNAS, and there’s a nice user-friendly wireless charging case to make it easy for the marine guards to replace the tags after their voyages at sea. When a tag is returned to one of the docking stations in the case, we use resin.io to manage it, download videos, and configure the tag remotely.

Green Sea Turtle Alasdair Davies Raspberry Pi
Green Sea Turtle Alasdair Davies Raspberry Pi

The tags can also be configured to take video clips at timed intervals, meaning we can now observe the presence of marine litter, plastic debris, before/after changes to the ocean environment due to nearby construction, pollution, and other threats.

Discarded fishing nets are lethal to sea turtles, so using this new tag at scale – now finally possible, as the Raspberry Pi Zero helps to drive down costs dramatically whilst retaining excellent video quality – offers real value to scientists in the field. Next year we will be releasing an optimised, affordable GPS version.

green sea turtle Alasdair Davies Raspberry Pi Arribada Initiative

To make this all possible we had to devise a quicker method of attaching the tag to the sea turtles too, so we came up with the “pit-stop” technique (which is what the PS in the name “Arribada PS-C” stands for). Just as a Formula 1 car would visit the pits to get its tyres changed, we literally switch out the tags on the beach when nesting females return, replacing them with freshly charged tags by using a quick-release base plate.

Alasdair Davies on Twitter

About 6 days left now until the first tagged nesting green sea #turtles return using our latest “pit-stop” removeable / replaceable tag method. Counting down the days @arribada_i @institute_irnas

To implement the system we first epoxy the base plate to the turtle, which minimises any possible stress to the turtles as the method is quick. Once the epoxy has dried we attach the tag. When the turtle has completed its nesting cycle (they visit the beach to lay eggs three to four times in a single season, every 10–14 days on average), we simply remove the base plate to complete the field work.

Green Sea Turtle Alasdair Davies Raspberry Pi
Green Sea Turtle Alasdair Davies Raspberry Pi

If you’d like to watch more wonderful videos of the green sea turtles’ adventures, there’s an entire YouTube playlist available here. And to keep up to date with the initiative, be sure to follow Arribada and Alasdair on Twitter.

The post Journeying with green sea turtles and the Arribada Initiative appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Backing Up More Effective and Less Costly than Data Recovery in NBC News Story

Post Syndicated from Roderick Bauer original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/data-recovery-vs-cloud-backup/

Gleb Budman on NBC Bay Area

David Platt thought that his computer was adequately backed up, but when his hard drive crashed, he was forced to turn to a data recovery company to get back specific files and emails he needed.

When the company recovered some data — but not the files and emails he wanted — and David was charged $383 anyway, he turned to NBC Bay Area Responds, the consumer action group at the San Francisco Bay area NBC TV affiliate.

Their investigation showed that even though the firm hadn’t recovered the data he needed, David was obliged to pay them the full data recovery cost anyway. If David had wanted the recovery done in a hurry, his cost could have been as high as $999, and he still wouldn’t have gotten back the files he needed.

NBC Bay Area Responds contacted 33 data recovery companies around the country and discovered that 24 of the 33 also charge full price even if they only recover one file from the drive — any file.

Gleb Budman, Backblaze CEO, who was interviewed for the story, advised viewers that it’s far more effective, and less expensive, to be fully backed up with a backup solution like Backblaze. Backblaze backs up everything on your computer, even the files and folders you might not think you need, but might contain valuable data, such as in David’s case. A 3-2-1 backup policy (three copies of your data, two locally, and one in the cloud), is a good policy to follow.

“On average, one out of every two people lose data every year,” said Gleb Budman, CEO of Backblaze, a San Mateo company that aims to prevent lost files. “In the case of Backblaze, it’s $5 a month and we back up all of the data,” Budman said. “Then… it’s a bummer if your hard drive dies, but you don’t lose any data.”

David Platt now uses Backblaze and has a full backup of his hard drive stored in the cloud. Every file is there.

“We’ve kinda upped the game of backing up of our personal data,” he said.

You can view the full story at NBC KNTV, Man’s Data Recovery Dilemma Costs Hundreds, or watch the video below.

Note:  Video contains pre-roll advertisement.

The post Backing Up More Effective and Less Costly than Data Recovery in NBC News Story appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

FCC Repeals U.S. Net Neutrality Rules

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/fcc-repeals-u-s-net-neutrality-rules-171214/

In recent months, millions of people have protested the FCC’s plan to repeal U.S. net neutrality rules, which were put in place by the Obama administration.

However, an outpouring public outrage, critique from major tech companies, and even warnings from pioneers of the Internet, had no effect.

Today the FCC voted to repeal the old rules, effectively ending net neutrality.

Under the net neutrality rules that have been in effect during recent years, ISPs were specifically prohibited from blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization of “lawful” traffic. In addition, Internet providers could be regulated as carriers under Title II.

Now that these rules have been repealed, Internet providers have more freedom to experiment with paid prioritization. Under the new guidelines, they can charge customers extra for access to some online services, or throttle certain types of traffic.

Most critics of the repeal fear that, now that the old net neutrality rules are in the trash, ‘fast lanes’ for some services, and throttling for others, will become commonplace in the U.S.

This could also mean that BitTorrent traffic becomes a target once again. After all, it was Comcast’s ‘secretive’ BitTorrent throttling that started the broader net neutrality debate, now ten years ago.

Comcast’s throttling history is a sensitive issue, also for the company itself.

Before the Obama-era net neutrality rules, the ISP vowed that it would no longer discriminate against specific traffic classes. Ahead of the FCC vote yesterday, it doubled down on this promise.

“Despite repeated distortions and biased information, as well as misguided, inaccurate attacks from detractors, our Internet service is not going to change,” writes David Cohen, Comcast’s Chief Diversity Officer.

“We have repeatedly stated, and reiterate today, that we do not and will not block, throttle, or discriminate against lawful content.”

It’s worth highlighting the term “lawful” in the last sentence. It is by no means a promise that pirate sites won’t be blocked.

As we’ve highlighted in the past, blocking pirate sites was already an option under the now-repealed rules. The massive copyright loophole made sure of that. Targeting all torrent traffic is even an option, in theory.

That said, today’s FCC vote certainly makes it easier for ISPs to block or throttle BitTorrent traffic across the entire network. For the time being, however, there are no signs that any ISPs plan to do so.

If they do, we will know soon enough. The FCC requires all ISPs to be transparent under the new plan. They have to disclose network management practices, blocking efforts, commercial prioritization, and the like.

And with the current focus on net neutrality, ISPs are likely to tread carefully, or else they might just face an exodus of customers.

Finally, it’s worth highlighting that today’s vote is not the end of the road yet. Net neutrality supporters are planning to convince Congress to overturn the repeal. In addition, there are is also talk of taking the matter to court.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Movie Company Has No Right to Sue, Accused Pirate Argues

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/movie-company-has-no-right-to-sue-accused-pirate-argues-171208/

In recent years, a group of select companies have pressured hundreds of thousands of alleged pirates to pay significant settlement fees, or face legal repercussions.

These so-called “copyright trolling” efforts have also been a common occurrence in the United States for more than half a decade, and still are today.

While copyright holders should be able to take legitimate piracy claims to court, not all cases are as strong as they first appear. Many defendants have brought up flaws, often in relation to the IP-address evidence, but an accused pirate in Oregon takes things up a notch.

Lingfu Zhang, represented by attorney David Madden, has turned the tables on the makers of the film Fathers & Daughters. The man denies having downloaded the movie but also points out that the filmmakers have signed away their online distribution rights.

The issue was brought up in previous months, but the relevant findings were only unsealed this week. They show that the movie company (F&D), through a sales agent, sold the online distribution rights to a third party.

While this is not uncommon in the movie business, it means that they no longer have the right to distribute the movie online, a right Zhang was accused of violating. This is also what his attorney pointed out to the court, asking for a judgment in favor of his client.

“ZHANG denies downloading the movie but Defendant’s current motion for summary judgment challenges a different portion of F&D’s case: Defendant argues that F&D has alienated all of the relevant rights necessary to sue for infringement under the Copyright Act,” Madden writes.

The filmmakers opposed the request and pointed out that they still had some rights. However, this is irrelevant according to the defense, since the distribution rights are not owned by them, but by a company that’s not part of the lawsuit.

“Plaintiff claims, for example, that it still owns the right to exploit the movie on airlines and oceangoing vessels. That may or may not be true – Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence on the question – but ZHANG is not accused of showing the movie on an airplane or a cruise ship.

“He is accused of downloading it over the Internet, which is an infringement that affects only an exclusive right owned by non-party DISTRIBUTOR 2,” Madden adds.

Interestingly, an undated addendum to the licensing agreement, allegedly created after the lawsuit was started, states that the filmmakers would keep their “anti-piracy” rights, as can be seen below.

Anti-Piracy rights?

This doesn’t save the filmmaker, according to the defense. The “licensor” who keeps these anti-piracy and enforcement rights refers to the sales agent, not the filmmaker, Madden writes. In addition, the case is about copyright infringement, and despite the addendum, the filmmakers don’t have the exclusive rights that apply here.

“Plaintiff represented to this Court that it was the ‘proprietor of all copyrights and interests need to bring suit’ […] notwithstanding that it had – years earlier – transferred away all its exclusive rights under Section 106 of the Copyright Act,” the defense lawyer concludes.

“Even viewing all Plaintiff’s agreements in the light most favorable to it, Plaintiff holds nothing more than a bare right to sue, which is not a cognizable right that may be exercised in the courts of this Circuit.”

While the court has yet to decide on the motion, this case could turn into a disaster for the makers of Fathers & Daughters.

If the court agrees that they don’t have the proper rights, defendants in other cases may argue the same. It’s easy to see how their entire trolling scheme would then collapse.

The original memorandum in support of the motion for summary judgment is available here (pdf) and a copy of the reply brief can be found here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Steal This Show S03E11: The Nerd Reich

Post Syndicated from J.J. King original https://torrentfreak.com/steal-show-s03e11-nerd-reich/

stslogo180If you enjoy this episode, consider becoming a patron and getting involved with the show. Check out Steal This Show’s Patreon campaign: support us and get all kinds of fantastic benefits!

In this episode, we meet Vinay Gupta: software engineer, disaster consultant, global resilience guru, and visionary.

Vinay served as Release Co-ordinator for the Ethereum project and is now CEO of Mattereum, ‘the first Internet of Agreements infrastructure project, bringing legally-enforceable smart contracts to the internet.’

We discuss: the idea of a ‘nerd Reich’ that has either usurped power from or merged with global governmental power; how and why we now live in a market-driven version of Orwell’s 1984; and Vinay’s concept of de-governance, and why the modern nation-state is the wrong platform to solve the problems that face us today.

Steal This Show aims to release bi-weekly episodes featuring insiders discussing copyright and file-sharing news. It complements our regular reporting by adding more room for opinion, commentary, and analysis.

The guests for our news discussions will vary, and we’ll aim to introduce voices from different backgrounds and persuasions. In addition to news, STS will also produce features interviewing some of the great innovators and minds.

Host: Jamie King

Guest: Vinay Gupta

Produced by Jamie King
Edited & Mixed by Riley Byrne
Original Music by David Triana
Web Production by Siraje Amarniss

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Supreme Court Will Decide if ISP Can Charge Money to Expose Pirates

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/supreme-court-to-decide-if-isp-can-charge-money-to-expose-pirates-171124/

Movie studio Voltage Pictures is no stranger to suing BitTorrent users.

The company has filed numerous lawsuits against alleged pirates in the United States, Europe, Canada and Australia, and is estimated to have made a lot of money doing so.

Voltage and other copyright holders who initiate these cases generally rely on IP addresses as evidence. This information is collected from BitTorrent swarms and linked to an ISP using an IP-database.

With this information in hand, they then ask the courts to direct Internet providers to hand over the personal details of the associated account holders, in order to go after the alleged pirates.

In Canada, this so-called copyright trolling practice hasn’t been without controversy.

Last year Voltage Pictures launched a “reverse class action” to demand damages from an unspecified number of Internet users whom they accuse of sharing films, including The Cobbler, Pay the Ghost, Good Kill, Fathers and Daughters, and American Heist.

The application of a reverse class action in a copyright case was unprecedented in itself. In a single swoop, many of Internet subscribers were at risk of having their personal details exposed. However, Internet provider Rogers was not willing to hand over this information freely.

Instead, Rogers demanded compensation for every IP-address lookup, as is permitted by copyright law. The provider asked for $100 per hour of work, plus taxes, to link the addresses to subscriber accounts.

The Federal Court agreed that the charges were permitted under the Copyright Act. However, when Voltage Pictures appealed the decision, this was reversed. The Appeals Court noted that there’s currently no fixed maximum charge defined by law. As long as this is the case, ISPs can charge no fees at all, the argument was.

In addition, the court stressed that it’s important for copyright holders to be able to protect their rights in the digital era.

“The internet must not become a collection of safe houses from which pirates, with impunity, can pilfer the products of others’ dedication, creativity and industry,” the appeal court Justice David Stratas wrote.

Not happy with the decision, Rogers decided to take the matter to the Supreme Court, which just decided that it will hear the case.

The Supreme Court hasn’t given an explanation for its decision to take the case. For the accused BitTorrent pirates in Canada, it’s certainly one to watch though.

The case will in large part determine how profitable the copyright trolling scheme is in Canada. When ISPs can charge a substantial fee for the IP-address lookups the efforts might not bring in enough money through settlements, making them less likely to continue.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

The Pirate Bay & 1337x Must Be Blocked, Austrian Supreme Court Rules

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-1337x-must-be-blocked-austrian-supreme-court-rules-171014/

Following a long-running case, in 2015 Austrian ISPs were ordered by the Commercial Court to block The Pirate Bay and other “structurally-infringing” sites including 1337x.to, isohunt.to, and h33t.to.

The decision was welcomed by the music industry, which looked forward to having more sites blocked in due course.

Soon after, local music rights group LSG sent its lawyers after several other large ISPs urging them to follow suit, or else. However, the ISPs dug in and a year later, in May 2016, things began to unravel. The Vienna Higher Regional Court overruled the earlier decision of the Commercial Court, meaning that local ISPs were free to unblock the previously blocked sites.

The Court concluded that ISP blocks are only warranted if copyright holders have exhausted all their options to take action against those actually carrying out the infringement. This decision was welcomed by the Internet Service Providers Austria (ISPA), which described the decision as an important milestone.

The ISPs argued that only torrent files, not the content itself, was available on the portals. They also had a problem with the restriction of access to legitimate content.

“A problem in this context is that the offending pages also have legal content and it is no longer possible to access that if barriers are put in place,” said ISPA Secretary General Maximilian Schubert.

Taking the case to its ultimate conclusion, the music companies appealed to the Supreme Court. Another year on and its decision has just been published and for the rightsholders, who represent 3,000 artists including The Beatles, Justin Bieber, Eric Clapton, Coldplay, David Guetta, Iggy Azalea, Michael Jackson, Lady Gaga, Metallica, George Michael, One Direction, Katy Perry, and Queen, to name a few, it was worth the effort.

The Court looked at whether “the provision and operation of a BitTorrent platform with the purpose of online file sharing [of non-public domain works]” represents a “communication to the public” under the EU Copyright Directive. Citing the now-familiar BREIN v Filmspeler and BREIN v Ziggo and XS4All cases that both received European Court of Justice rulings earlier this year, the Supreme Court concluded it was.

Citing another Dutch case, in which Playboy publisher Sanoma took on the blog GeenStijl.nl, the Court noted that linking to copyrighted content hosted elsewhere also amounted to a “communication to the public”, a situation mirrored on torrent sites like The Pirate Bay.

“The similarity of the technical procedure in this case when compared to BitTorrent platforms lies in the fact that in both cases the operators of the website did not provide any copyrighted works themselves, but merely provided further information on sites where the protected works were available,” the Court notes in its ruling.

In respect of the potential for blocking legitimate content as well as that infringing copyright, the Court turned the ISPs’ own arguments against them somewhat.

The ISPs had previously argued that blocking The Pirate Bay and other sites was pointless since the torrents they host would still be available elsewhere. The Court noted that point and also found that people can easily upload their torrents to sites that aren’t blocked, since there’s plenty of choice.

The ISPA criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling, noting that in future ISPs will still find themselves being held responsible for decisions concerning blocking.

“We do not support illegal content on the Internet in any way, but consider it extremely questionable that the decision on what is illegal and what is not falls to ISPs, instead of a court,” said ISPA Secretary General Maximilian.

“Although we find it positive that a court of last resort has taken the decision, the assessment of the website in the first instance continues to be left to the Internet provider. The Supreme Court’s expansion of the circle of sites that be potentially blocked further complicates this task for the operator and furthers the privatization of law enforcement.

“It is extremely unpleasant that even after more than 10 years of fierce discussion, there is still no compelling legal basis for a court decision on Internet blocking, which puts providers in the role of both judge and hangman.”

Also of interest is ISPA’s stance on how blocking of content fails to solve the underlying issue. When content is blocked, rather than removed, it simply displaces the problem, leaving others to pick up the pieces, the Internet body argues.

“Illegal content is permanently removed from the network by deletion. Everything else is a placebo with extremely dangerous side effects, which can easily be bypassed by both providers and consumers. The only thing that remains is a blocking infrastructure that can be misused for many purposes and, unfortunately, will be used in many places,” Schubert says.

“The current situation, where providers have to block the rightsholders quasi on the spot, if they do not want to engage in a time-consuming and cost-intensive litigation, is really not sustainable so we issue a call to action to the legislature.”

The domains that were listed in the case, many of which are already defunct, are: thepiratebay.se, thepiratebay.gd, thepiratebay.la, thepiratebay.mn, thepiratebay.mu, thepiratebay.sh, thepiratebay.tw, thepiratebay.fm, thepiratebay.ms, thepiratebay.vg, isohunt.to, 1337x.to and h33t.to.

Whether it will be added later is unclear, but the only domain currently used by The Pirate Bay (thepiratebay.org) is not included in the list.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Dallas Buyers Club Loses Piracy Lawsuit, IP-Address is Not Enough

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/dallas-buyers-club-loses-piracy-lawsuit-ip-address-is-not-enough-171110/

In recent years, BitTorrent users around the world have been targeted with threats. They can either pay a significant settlement fee, or face far worse in court.

The scheme started in Germany years ago, and copyright holders later went after alleged pirates in Australia, Denmark, Finland, the UK, US, and elsewhere.

This summer, the copyright holders behind the movie Dallas Buyers Club added Spain to the mix, going after dozens of alleged pirates in Bilbao and San Sebastian. The ‘filmmakers’ are part of a tight group of so-called copyright trolls which are constantly expanding their business to other countries.

While they have had some success, mainly by sending out settlement letters, in Spain the first court case brought bad news.

The Commercial Court of Donostia dismissed the claim against an alleged file-sharer due to a lack of evidence. Dallas Buyers Club identified the infringer through an IP-address, but according to Judge Pedro José Malagón Ruiz, this is not good enough.

“The ruling says that there is no way to know whether the defendant was the P2P user or not, because an IP address only identifies the person who subscribed to the Internet connection, not the user who made use of the connection at a certain moment,” copyright lawyer David Bravo tells TorrentFreak.

“A relative or a guest could have been using the network, or even someone accessing the wifi if it was open,” he adds.

In addition, the Judge agreed with the defense that there is no evidence that the defendant actively made the movie available. This generally requires a form of intent. However, BitTorrent clients automatically share files with others, whether it’s the intention of the user or not.

“The upload of the data from the P2P programs occurs automatically by the program configuration itself. […] This occurs by default without requiring the knowledge or intention of the user,” Judge Malagón Ruiz writes in his verdict, quoted by Genbeta.

In other words, these BitTorrent transfers are not necessarily an act of public communication, therefore, they are not infringing any copyrights.

The case provides hope for other accused file-sharers who are looking to have their cases dismissed as well. Not in the last place because the defense was coordinated online, without active involvement of a lawyer.

Bravo, together with two colleague lawyers, offered self-help forms to accused file-sharers free of charge. Defendants could use these to mount a proper defense, which paid off in this case.

“This ruling sets a precedent,” Bravo tells TorrentFreak, noting that it’s a clear setback for the copyright holders who are involved in these mass file-sharing lawsuits.

While the lawyer cautions that other courts may come to a different conclusion, it appears that Dallas Buyers Club and other copyright trolls will meet some fierce ‘p2p coordinated’ resistance in Spain.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

piwheels: making “pip install” fast

Post Syndicated from Ben Nuttall original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/piwheels/

TL;DR pip install numpy used to take ages, and now it’s super fast thanks to piwheels.

The Python Package Index (PyPI) is a package repository for Python modules. Members of the Python community publish software and libraries in it as an easy method of distribution. If you’ve ever used pip install, PyPI is the service that hosts the software you installed. You may have noticed that some installations can take a long time on the Raspberry Pi. That usually happens when modules have been implemented in C and require compilation.

XKCD comic of two people sword-fighting on office chairs while their code is compiling

No more slacking off! pip install numpy takes just a few seconds now \o/

Wheels for Python packages

A general solution to this problem exists: Python wheels are a standard for distributing pre-built versions of packages, saving users from having to build from source. However, when C code is compiled, it’s compiled for a particular architecture, so package maintainers usually publish wheels for 32-bit and 64-bit Windows, macOS, and Linux. Although Raspberry Pi runs Linux, its architecture is ARM, so Linux wheels are not compatible.

A comic of snakes biting their own tails to roll down a sand dune like wheels

What Python wheels are not

Pip works by browsing PyPI for a wheel matching the user’s architecture — and if it doesn’t find one, it falls back to the source distribution (usually a tarball or zip of the source code). Then the user has to build it themselves, which can take a long time, or may require certain dependencies. And if pip can’t find a source distribution, the installation fails.

Developing piwheels

In order to solve this problem, I decided to build wheels of every package on PyPI. I wrote some tooling for automating the process and used a postgres database to monitor the status of builds and log the output. Using a Pi 3 in my living room, I attempted to build wheels of the latest version of all 100 000 packages on PyPI and to host them on a web server on the Pi. This took a total of ten days, and my proof-of-concept seemed to show that it generally worked and was likely to be useful! You could install packages directly from the server, and installations were really fast.

A Raspberry Pi 3 sitting atop a Pi 2 on cloth

This Pi 3 was the piwheels beta server, sitting atop my SSH gateway Pi 2 at home

I proceeded to plan for version 2, which would attempt to build every version of every package — about 750 000 versions in total. I estimated this would take 75 days for one Pi, but I intended to scale it up to use multiple Pis. Our web hosts Mythic Beasts provide dedicated Pi 3 hosting, so I fired up 20 of them to share the load. With some help from Dave Jones, who created an efficient queuing system for the builders, we were able make this run like clockwork. In under two weeks, it was complete! Read ALL about the first build run drama on my blog.

A list of the mythic beasts cloud Pis

ALL the cloud Pis

Improving piwheels

We analysed the failures, made some tweaks, installed some key dependencies, and ran the build again to raise our success rate from 76% to 83%. We also rebuilt packages for Python 3.5 (the new default in Raspbian Stretch). The wheels we build are tagged ‘armv7l’, but because our Raspbian image is compatible with all Pi models, they’re really ARMv6, so they’re compatible with Pi 3, Pi 2, Pi 1 and Pi Zero. This means the ‘armv6l’-tagged wheels we provide are really just the ARMv7 wheels renamed.

The piwheels monitor interface created by Dave Jones

The wonderful piwheels monitor interface created by Dave

Now, you might be thinking “Why didn’t you just cross-compile?” I really wanted to have full compatibility, and building natively on Pis seemed to be the best way to achieve that. I had easy access to the Pis, and it really didn’t take all that long. Plus, you know, I wanted to eat my own dog food.

You might also be thinking “Why don’t you just apt install python3-numpy?” It’s true that some Python packages are distributed via the Raspbian/Debian archives too. However, if you’re in a virtual environment, or you need a more recent version than the one packaged for Debian, you need pip.

How it works

Now that the piwheels package repository is running as a service, hosted on a Pi 3 in the Mythic Beasts data centre in London. The pip package in Raspbian Stretch is configured to use piwheels as an additional index, so it falls back to PyPI if we’re missing a package. Just run sudo apt upgrade to get the configuration change. You’ll find that pip installs are much faster now! If you want to use piwheels on Raspbian Jessie, that’s possible too — find the instructions in our FAQs. And now, every time you pip install something, your files come from a web server running on a Raspberry Pi (that capable little machine)!

Try it for yourself in a virtual environment:

sudo apt install virtualenv python3-virtualenv -y
virtualenv -p /usr/bin/python3 testpip
source testpip/bin/activate
pip install numpy

This takes about 20 minutes on a Pi 3, 2.5 hours on a Pi 1, or just a few seconds on either if you use piwheels.

If you’re interested to see the details, try pip install numpy -v for verbose output. You’ll see that pip discovers two indexes to search:

2 location(s) to search for versions of numpy:
  * https://pypi.python.org/simple/numpy/
  * https://www.piwheels.hostedpi.com/simple/numpy/

Then it searches both indexes for available files. From this list of files, it determines the latest version available. Next it looks for a Python version and architecture match, and then opts for a wheel over a source distribution. If a new package or version is released, piwheels will automatically pick it up and add it to the build queue.

A flowchart of how piwheels works

How piwheels works

For the users unfamiliar with virtual environments I should mention that doing this isn’t a requirement — just an easy way of testing installations in a sandbox. Most pip usage will require sudo pip3 install {package}, which installs at a system level.

If you come across any issues with any packages from piwheels, please let us know in a GitHub issue.

Taking piwheels further

We currently provide over 670 000 wheels for more than 96 000 packages, all compiled natively on Raspberry Pi hardware. Moreover, we’ll keep building new packages as they are released.

Note that, at present, we have built wheels for Python 3.4 and 3.5 — we’re planning to add support for Python 3.6 and 2.7. The fact that piwheels is currently missing Python 2 wheels does not affect users: until we rebuild for Python 2, PyPI will be used as normal, it’ll just take longer than installing a Python 3 package for which we have a wheel. But remember, Python 2 end-of-life is less than three years away!

Many thanks to Dave Jones for his contributions to the project, and to Mythic Beasts for providing the excellent hosted Pi service.

Screenshot of the mythic beasts Raspberry Pi 3 server service website

Related/unrelated, check out my poster from the PyCon UK poster session:

A poster about Python and Raspberry Pi

Click to download the PDF!

The post piwheels: making “pip install” fast appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Steal This Show S03E10: The Battle Of The Bots

Post Syndicated from J.J. King original https://torrentfreak.com/steal-show-s03e10-battle-bots/

stslogo180If you enjoy this episode, consider becoming a patron and getting involved with the show. Check out Steal This Show’s Patreon campaign: support us and get all kinds of fantastic benefits!

It seems everyone’s getting in on the “fake news” game today, from far-right parties in Germany to critics of Catalan separatism — but none more concertedly than the Russian state itself.

In this episode we meet Ben Nimmo, Fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, to talk us through the latest patterns and trends in online disinformation and hybrid warfare. ‘People who really want to cause trouble can make up just about anything,’ explains Ben, ‘and the fakes are getting more and more complex. It’s really quite alarming.’

After cluing us in on the state of information warfare today, we discuss evidence that the Russians are deploying a fully-funded ‘Troll Factory’ across dominant social networks whose intent is to distort reality and sway the political conversation in favour of its masters.

We dig deep into the present history of the ‘Battle Of The Bots’, looking specifically at the activities of the fake Twitter account @TEN_GOP, whose misinformation has reached all the way to the highest tier of American government. Can we control or counter these rogue informational entities? What’s the best way to do so? Do we need ‘Asimov Laws’ for a new generation of purely online, but completely real, information entities?

Steal This Show aims to release bi-weekly episodes featuring insiders discussing copyright and file-sharing news. It complements our regular reporting by adding more room for opinion, commentary, and analysis.

The guests for our news discussions will vary, and we’ll aim to introduce voices from different backgrounds and persuasions. In addition to news, STS will also produce features interviewing some of the great innovators and minds.

Host: Jamie King

Guest: Ben Nimmo

Produced by Jamie King
Edited & Mixed by Riley Byrne
Original Music by David Triana
Web Production by Siraje Amarniss

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

US Court Disarms Canada’s Global Site Blocking Order Against Google

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/us-court-disarms-canadas-global-site-blocking-order-against-google-171103/

Google regularly removes infringing websites from its search results, but the company is also wary of abuse.

When the Canadian company Equustek Solutions requested the company to remove websites that offered unlawful and competing products, it refused to do so globally.

This resulted in a legal battle that came to a climax in June, when the Supreme Court of Canada ordered Google to remove a company’s websites from its search results. Not just in Canada, but all over the world.

With options to appeal exhausted in Canada, Google took the case to a federal court in the US. The search engine requested an injunction to disarm the Canadian order, arguing that a worldwide blocking order violates the First Amendment.

Surprisingly, Equustek decided not to defend itself and without opposition, a California District Court sided with Google yesterday.

During a hearing, Google attorney Margaret Caruso stressed that it should not be possible for foreign countries to implement measures that run contrary to core values of the United States.

The search engine argued that the Canadian order violated Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which immunizes Internet services from liability for content created by third parties. With this law, Congress specifically chose not to deter harmful online speech by imposing liability on Internet services.

In an order, signed shortly after the hearing, District Judge Edward Davila concludes that Google qualifies for Section 230 immunity in this case. As such, he rules that the Canadian Supreme Court’s global blocking order goes too far.

“Google is harmed because the Canadian order restricts activity that Section 230 protects. In addition, the balance of equities favors Google because the injunction would deprive it of the benefits of U.S. federal law,” Davila writes.

Rendering the order unenforceable is not just in the interest of Google, the District Court writes. It’s also best for the general public as free speech is clearly at stake here.

“Congress recognized that free speech on the internet would be severely restricted if websites were to face tort liability for hosting user-generated content. It responded by enacting Section 230, which grants broad immunity to online intermediaries,” Judge Davila writes.

“The Canadian order would eliminate Section 230 immunity for service providers that link to third-party websites. By forcing intermediaries to remove links to third-party material, the Canadian order undermines the policy goals of Section 230 and threatens free speech on the global internet.”

The preliminary injunction

The Court signed a preliminary injunction which prevents Equustek enforcing the Canadian order in the United States, which is exactly what Google was after. Since the Canadian company chose not to represent itself in the US case, this will likely stand.

The ruling is important in the broader scheme. If foreign courts are allowed to grant worldwide blockades, free speech could be severely hampered. Today it’s a relatively unknown Canadian company, but what if the Chinese Government asked Google to block the websites of VPN providers?

A copy of the full order is available here (pdf).

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

‘Pirating’ Mainstream Media Outlets Haunted by Photographers in Court

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirating-mainstream-media-outlets-haunted-by-photographers-in-court-171028/

When piracy hits the mainstream news, it’s often in relation to books, games, music, TV-shows and movies.

These industries grab headlines because of the major players that are involved, but they are not the only ones dealing with piracy.

In fact, photos are arguably the most commonly infringed works online. Not just by random users on Facebook, Twitter, and blogs, but also by major mainstream media outlets.

While most photographers spend little time battling piracy, more and more are willing to take the matter to federal court. This trend started two years ago by the Liebowitz Law Firm is paying off.

The lawsuits in question, filed on behalf of several independent photographers, are fairly straightforward.

A news site or other media outlet uses a photo to spice up an article but fails to pay the photographer. This is fairly common, even for major publications. The photographer then files a lawsuit demanding compensation.

However, before the case goes to trial both parties usually resolve their issues in a private settlement. Just this year alone, the Liebowitz Law Firm closed over 200 cases for its clients.

ABC, AOL, CBS Broadcasting, NBCUniversal, NPR, Time, Viacom, Warner Bros, Yahoo and Ziff Davis are just a few of the companies that have signed settlements recently.

One of the many settlements

While the court records don’t point out any winners, it’s safe to assume that many of these cases end favorably for the firm’s clients. Otherwise, they wouldn’t continue to file new ones.

TorrentFreak reached out to Richard Liebowitz, lead counsel in many of these cases. Unfortunately, he can’t share exact details as the settlements themselves are confidential.

The photographers don’t make millions through this scheme, but it appears to be an effective way to get paid a few thousand dollars. If one repeats that often enough, it should provide a decent income. And indeed, several have already filed over a dozen cases.

The practice is reminiscent of copyright trolling cases, with the exception that the accused are major companies instead of random citizens. And unlike the lawsuits movie companies file against BitTorrent users in the US, the evidence the photographers have is rock solid.

The evidence..

When a random copyright troll sues BitTorrent users, hoping to extract a settlement, they rely on indirect IP-addresses and geo-location evidence. The photographers, however, can show an actual screenshot of the infringing work in the mainstream news outlet.

That’s hard to ignore, to say the least, and based on the number of settlements it’s safe to argue that the media outlets prefer to settle instead of litigating the issue. It’s probably cheaper and avoids bad PR.

For the record, all photos used for this article are properly licensed or part of court documents, which are public domain.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Bringing Datacenter-Scale Hardware-Software Co-design to the Cloud with FireSim and Amazon EC2 F1 Instances

Post Syndicated from Mia Champion original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/compute/bringing-datacenter-scale-hardware-software-co-design-to-the-cloud-with-firesim-and-amazon-ec2-f1-instances/

The recent addition of Xilinx FPGAs to AWS Cloud compute offerings is one way that AWS is enabling global growth in the areas of advanced analytics, deep learning and AI. The customized F1 servers use pooled accelerators, enabling interconnectivity of up to 8 FPGAs, each one including 64 GiB DDR4 ECC protected memory, with a dedicated PCIe x16 connection. That makes this a powerful engine with the capacity to process advanced analytical applications at scale, at a significantly faster rate. For example, AWS commercial partner Edico Genome is able to achieve an approximately 30X speedup in analyzing whole genome sequencing datasets using their DRAGEN platform powered with F1 instances.

While the availability of FPGA F1 compute on-demand provides clear accessibility and cost advantages, many mainstream users are still finding that the “threshold to entry” in developing or running FPGA-accelerated simulations is too high. Researchers at the UC Berkeley RISE Lab have developed “FireSim”, powered by Amazon FPGA F1 instances as an open-source resource, FireSim lowers that entry bar and makes it easier for everyone to leverage the power of an FPGA-accelerated compute environment. Whether you are part of a small start-up development team or working at a large datacenter scale, hardware-software co-design enables faster time-to-deployment, lower costs, and more predictable performance. We are excited to feature FireSim in this post from Sagar Karandikar and his colleagues at UC-Berkeley.

―Mia Champion, Sr. Data Scientist, AWS

Mapping an 8-node FireSim cluster simulation to Amazon EC2 F1

As traditional hardware scaling nears its end, the data centers of tomorrow are trending towards heterogeneity, employing custom hardware accelerators and increasingly high-performance interconnects. Prototyping new hardware at scale has traditionally been either extremely expensive, or very slow. In this post, I introduce FireSim, a new hardware simulation platform under development in the computer architecture research group at UC Berkeley that enables fast, scalable hardware simulation using Amazon EC2 F1 instances.

FireSim benefits both hardware and software developers working on new rack-scale systems: software developers can use the simulated nodes with new hardware features as they would use a real machine, while hardware developers have full control over the hardware being simulated and can run real software stacks while hardware is still under development. In conjunction with this post, we’re releasing the first public demo of FireSim, which lets you deploy your own 8-node simulated cluster on an F1 Instance and run benchmarks against it. This demo simulates a pre-built “vanilla” cluster, but demonstrates FireSim’s high performance and usability.

Why FireSim + F1?

FPGA-accelerated hardware simulation is by no means a new concept. However, previous attempts to use FPGAs for simulation have been fraught with usability, scalability, and cost issues. FireSim takes advantage of EC2 F1 and open-source hardware to address the traditional problems with FPGA-accelerated simulation:
Problem #1: FPGA-based simulations have traditionally been expensive, difficult to deploy, and difficult to reproduce.
FireSim uses public-cloud infrastructure like F1, which means no upfront cost to purchase and deploy FPGAs. Developers and researchers can distribute pre-built AMIs and AFIs, as in this public demo (more details later in this post), to make experiments easy to reproduce. FireSim also automates most of the work involved in deploying an FPGA simulation, essentially enabling one-click conversion from new RTL to deploying on an FPGA cluster.

Problem #2: FPGA-based simulations have traditionally been difficult (and expensive) to scale.
Because FireSim uses F1, users can scale out experiments by spinning up additional EC2 instances, rather than spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on large FPGA clusters.

Problem #3: Finding open hardware to simulate has traditionally been difficult. Finding open hardware that can run real software stacks is even harder.
FireSim simulates RocketChip, an open, silicon-proven, RISC-V-based processor platform, and adds peripherals like a NIC and disk device to build up a realistic system. Processors that implement RISC-V automatically support real operating systems (such as Linux) and even support applications like Apache and Memcached. We provide a custom Buildroot-based FireSim Linux distribution that runs on our simulated nodes and includes many popular developer tools.

Problem #4: Writing hardware in traditional HDLs is time-consuming.
Both FireSim and RocketChip use the Chisel HDL, which brings modern programming paradigms to hardware description languages. Chisel greatly simplifies the process of building large, highly parameterized hardware components.

How to use FireSim for hardware/software co-design

FireSim drastically improves the process of co-designing hardware and software by acting as a push-button interface for collaboration between hardware developers and systems software developers. The following diagram describes the workflows that hardware and software developers use when working with FireSim.

Figure 2. The FireSim custom hardware development workflow.

The hardware developer’s view:

  1. Write custom RTL for your accelerator, peripheral, or processor modification in a productive language like Chisel.
  2. Run a software simulation of your hardware design in standard gate-level simulation tools for early-stage debugging.
  3. Run FireSim build scripts, which automatically build your simulation, run it through the Vivado toolchain/AWS shell scripts, and publish an AFI.
  4. Deploy your simulation on EC2 F1 using the generated simulation driver and AFI
  5. Run real software builds released by software developers to benchmark your hardware

The software developer’s view:

  1. Deploy the AMI/AFI generated by the hardware developer on an F1 instance to simulate a cluster of nodes (or scale out to many F1 nodes for larger simulated core-counts).
  2. Connect using SSH into the simulated nodes in the cluster and boot the Linux distribution included with FireSim. This distribution is easy to customize, and already supports many standard software packages.
  3. Directly prototype your software using the same exact interfaces that the software will see when deployed on the real future system you’re prototyping, with the same performance characteristics as observed from software, even at scale.

FireSim demo v1.0

Figure 3. Cluster topology simulated by FireSim demo v1.0.

This first public demo of FireSim focuses on the aforementioned “software-developer’s view” of the custom hardware development cycle. The demo simulates a cluster of 1 to 8 RocketChip-based nodes, interconnected by a functional network simulation. The simulated nodes work just like “real” machines:  they boot Linux, you can connect to them using SSH, and you can run real applications on top. The nodes can see each other (and the EC2 F1 instance on which they’re deployed) on the network and communicate with one another. While the demo currently simulates a pre-built “vanilla” cluster, the entire hardware configuration of these simulated nodes can be modified after FireSim is open-sourced.

In this post, I walk through bringing up a single-node FireSim simulation for experienced EC2 F1 users. For more detailed instructions for new users and instructions for running a larger 8-node simulation, see FireSim Demo v1.0 on Amazon EC2 F1. Both demos walk you through setting up an instance from a demo AMI/AFI and booting Linux on the simulated nodes. The full demo instructions also walk you through an example workload, running Memcached on the simulated nodes, with YCSB as a load generator to demonstrate network functionality.

Deploying the demo on F1

In this release, we provide pre-built binaries for driving simulation from the host and a pre-built AFI that contains the FPGA infrastructure necessary to simulate a RocketChip-based node.

Starting your F1 instances

First, launch an instance using the free FireSim Demo v1.0 product available on the AWS Marketplace on an f1.2xlarge instance. After your instance has booted, log in using the user name centos. On the first login, you should see the message “FireSim network config completed.” This sets up the necessary tap interfaces and bridge on the EC2 instance to enable communicating with the simulated nodes.

AMI contents

The AMI contains a variety of tools to help you run simulations and build software for RISC-V systems, including the riscv64 toolchain, a Buildroot-based Linux distribution that runs on the simulated nodes, and the simulation driver program. For more details, see the AMI Contents section on the FireSim website.

Single-node demo

First, you need to flash the FPGA with the FireSim AFI. To do so, run:

[[email protected]_ADDR ~]$ sudo fpga-load-local-image -S 0 -I agfi-00a74c2d615134b21

To start a simulation, run the following at the command line:

[[email protected]_ADDR ~]$ boot-firesim-singlenode

This automatically calls the simulation driver, telling it to load the Linux kernel image and root filesystem for the Linux distro. This produces output similar to the following:

Simulations Started. You can use the UART console of each simulated node by attaching to the following screens:

There is a screen on:

2492.fsim0      (Detached)

1 Socket in /var/run/screen/S-centos.

You could connect to the simulated UART console by connecting to this screen, but instead opt to use SSH to access the node instead.

First, ping the node to make sure it has come online. This is currently required because nodes may get stuck at Linux boot if the NIC does not receive any network traffic. For more information, see Troubleshooting/Errata. The node is always assigned the IP address 192.168.1.10:

[[email protected]_ADDR ~]$ ping 192.168.1.10

This should eventually produce the following output:

PING 192.168.1.10 (192.168.1.10) 56(84) bytes of data.

From 192.168.1.1 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable

64 bytes from 192.168.1.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=2017 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.1.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1018 ms

64 bytes from 192.168.1.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=19.0 ms

At this point, you know that the simulated node is online. You can connect to it using SSH with the user name root and password firesim. It is also convenient to make sure that your TERM variable is set correctly. In this case, the simulation expects TERM=linux, so provide that:

[[email protected]_ADDR ~]$ TERM=linux ssh [email protected]

The authenticity of host ‘192.168.1.10 (192.168.1.10)’ can’t be established.

ECDSA key fingerprint is 63:e9:66:d0:5c:06:2c:1d:5c:95:33:c8:36:92:30:49.

Are you sure you want to continue connecting (yes/no)? yes

Warning: Permanently added ‘192.168.1.10’ (ECDSA) to the list of known hosts.

[email protected]’s password:

#

At this point, you’re connected to the simulated node. Run uname -a as an example. You should see the following output, indicating that you’re connected to a RISC-V system:

# uname -a

Linux buildroot 4.12.0-rc2 #1 Fri Aug 4 03:44:55 UTC 2017 riscv64 GNU/Linux

Now you can run programs on the simulated node, as you would with a real machine. For an example workload (running YCSB against Memcached on the simulated node) or to run a larger 8-node simulation, see the full FireSim Demo v1.0 on Amazon EC2 F1 demo instructions.

Finally, when you are finished, you can shut down the simulated node by running the following command from within the simulated node:

# poweroff

You can confirm that the simulation has ended by running screen -ls, which should now report that there are no detached screens.

Future plans

At Berkeley, we’re planning to keep improving the FireSim platform to enable our own research in future data center architectures, like FireBox. The FireSim platform will eventually support more sophisticated processors, custom accelerators (such as Hwacha), network models, and peripherals, in addition to scaling to larger numbers of FPGAs. In the future, we’ll open source the entire platform, including Midas, the tool used to transform RTL into FPGA simulators, allowing users to modify any part of the hardware/software stack. Follow @firesimproject on Twitter to stay tuned to future FireSim updates.

Acknowledgements

FireSim is the joint work of many students and faculty at Berkeley: Sagar Karandikar, Donggyu Kim, Howard Mao, David Biancolin, Jack Koenig, Jonathan Bachrach, and Krste Asanović. This work is partially funded by AWS through the RISE Lab, by the Intel Science and Technology Center for Agile HW Design, and by ASPIRE Lab sponsors and affiliates Intel, Google, HPE, Huawei, NVIDIA, and SK hynix.