@awg Intel has bugs in their for decades. It's not really surprising tbh.

@awg *in their CPUs

@matrix intel cpus are massively complicated black boxes. the code snippet is like a first year uni homework question, and the output can be trivially verified. it's really embarrassing.

@awg Yeah, but that's also the reason why no one bothers to check. Since it simple, you assume no one would make a mistake.

@matrix I'm legit surprised more people haven't died as a side-effect of coding mistakes.

@awg @matrix we're in that awkward limbo where just some tech have a bit of real-world consequences

if:
-all tech has no real-world consequences: tech recognized as a circlejerk and valuations won't be as retarded and bubbled
-all tech has real-world consequences: barrier to entry will be higher and pajeets would be shut out of the industry

instead we have 99% of "oh i broke the entire thing nbd" and 1% of 737max-level disasters

@hakui @awg @matrix usually it's very clear when the software has real life safety concerns, I've worked on that kind of stuff and it mostly meant holding quality and testing to higher standards and never accepting tradeoffs that could cause any safety issues