Posted by bschne 1 day ago
Circuit designers use these tools basically daily for two reasons - the first is Layout Versus Schematic. We want to make sure that the physical layout matches the schematic, so the tool turns the layout GDS into a netlist and compares that to the netlist created from the schematic (basically a diff, but more complicated). The second is so we can run simulations that take into account the "parasitic" resistances and capacitances of the wires and metal shapes in the physical layout. It's basically the same procedure as LVS with an extra step that analyzes the metal shapes to determine said R's and C's.
Theoretically Yes, as an ion-beam-mill and electron-microscope combination machine can slice up semiconductors layer-by-layer. Given these machines can often also give precise x-ray analysis material data, the exact makeup of the chip can be extracted by competitors given enough time. =3
You may not even need anything as fancy as that - many microchips can be delayered by a skilled operator using mechanical polishing processes.
Or maybe some kind of hybrid of x-ray microtomography and spectroscopic analysis all in one.
But, maybe the energies involved would be about the same destructive power as some microtome slicing technique...
These things can definitely erode the targets. Tomography experiments have to think carefully to optimize the set exposure angles used during a session, because the target degrades more with each shot.
https://www.chu.berkeley.edu/modern-semiconductor-devices-fo...
LLMs have already been shown to cause cognitive/skill performance losses in some users. =3
Fable needs no advertising. It was more important than the printing press. Code singularity.
But it's old news, Fable is no longer my favorite LLM. I mostly use Kimi k3 now. It's also more competent than you are in general.
The primary point you're avoiding is that programming is not a job for professional humans anymore. At least not humans with any dignity or self respect or economic value.
I'm sure you at least agree with this point, like every other reasonable person does now too.
Sorry to interrupt your smugness, but have you actually read that study? It's basically tautological: people remained mostly unfamiliar with code they did not write, and remained mostly unfamiliar with a library they did not use. That's kind of the whole point to begin with! https://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rni/papers/realprg.html
Unless you want to argue that anyone who cannot code is brain damaged, I'd say it's a bit difficult to suggest that this would amount to any kind of clinically relevant cognitive impairment, much to the contrary of the masses desperately hoping and asserting so. Losing a skill you don't use / want / need is very normal cognitive function.
It'd be generally awesome if the last bastions of humanity actually demonstrated any of the values they're championing so hard at all.
Have a wonderful day =3
but reminds me how we're going to find out on an industrial level when the Saudis give China some nvidia chips they were grifted
they've cloned lots of chips before but nothing that advanced
They weren't trying to steal IBM's design, they already had one of their own, what they wanted to know was "is there any as yet unannounced functionality in the IBM VGA chip?" they didn't want to be caught out when some unknown registers popped up. Of course it turned out there was as yet unannounced functionality - but not by IBM's design, more because of the orthogonality of the design - MODE-X was discovered and became the basis for DOOM's speed, anyone who didn't support it lost out