While the BL808 (what the Ox64 uses) can nominally run Linux, it doesn't really work for that in practice because of design issues in the chip (or to put it differently: it was never designed for that purpose - the C906 core was included to be used as a DSP. The MMU etc. is just incidential.). Almost all peripheral interrupts (such as the the SD controller, Ethernet MAC, etc.) are routed to the E907 core (which is more comparable to a Cortex-M "microcontroller" core in the ARM world). Thus, doing anything useful with it with Linux requires ugly IRQ forwarding hacks. The community is working on that, but it's always going to be a Rube Goldberg thing that I'm not sure upstream will ever accept. I really hope the chip manufacturer realizes what they are sitting on and adds the ability to mux the IRQ lines in a later design.
The documentation on the CV1800B is still pretty light, but what I've seen suggests it does not suffer from the same issue, so that alone makes this board much more interesting than the Ox64.
I missed that development, thanks! As I understand it, it's not strictly muxing per se - you're basically siphoning off the interrupts from the M0 core using a hardware mechanism instead of firmware + IPC, so any firmware you might want to run on the M0 core still needs to be careful not to mess this up. But it's still an improvement.
Yes, but pine64 shipping is a serious pain point for many regions. I used to buy lots of cheap stuff from them with "EU standard shipping" to Poland that cost like 10eur. This shipping method has disappeared to Poland and many other EU countries last year. Last time I checked they wanted 35eur for shipping.
Yes, I was shocked when I finally decided to try a pinetab and got all the way to checkout before discovering a $60 shipping charge for my $160 tablet. Disappointed, "remove from cart," guess I'll buy some android tablet instead.
There's something severely screwy with their shipping. To my rural US location, it'd cost $12 for the cheapest shipping for just one Ox64. I've shipped 15lb/7kg, microwave-oven-sized packages more than a thousand miles for that price. It just should not cost that much. A USPS priority flat rate box costs less than that even for your average non-commercial human individual.
Very much so. Also anyone pointing it out in their forums gets ignored. On discord all you get as an answer is "shipping is hard". I got really pissed off once, because I invested a lot of time into developing for their products(soquartz boards, other quartz64 products). So I genuinely wanted to help them resolve this shipping (at least to Eu, as that's the logistics market I know). What I got back, was essentially being accused of being rude by trying to get to the bottom of it why is it so hard for them, in addition to repeatedly being assured "they work as hard as they can, and they have very competent people so need no help" as well as "they're having problems with customs and stuff".
Still, 6 months later they haven't figured it out. From a private conversation with one person "in the know" they claimed its difficult because there are various tax systems in the EU (so what, there are only 27 countries, figure one a month, also it is way more unified now that few years ago when it somehow worked fine for them), that they even have problems shipping to their EU store, that they ship from HongKong and Singapore, despite most of their boards being made in China and that makes it difficult, that their owner "is not China based so they can't use Aliexpress (they could use an intermediary, even with a 20% cut it would still be twice cheaper to ship like this)", that some people in Czech Republic would order cheap boards, then when they were asked to pay few bucks for the lack of EU VAT handling by the seller, declined and Pine had to foot the bill(we're literally talking about $5 bucks), and so and so on.
Eventually I decided I'm 50% convinced they do it on purpose to "help" their EU store, and the other 50% is they simply don't care enough. They just cover the biggest markets and population centers, like shipping to Germany in EU was still available for 12EUR last time I checked. So, no, I'm not buying their risc V board. Id rather get Sipeed's board that I can pay $11 for, but get it shipped for few bucks from China. The whole design is open too.
USPS or FedEx Ground via EasyPost, whichever's cheaper on a given day for a given package. I just punched in the numbers and a 6x6" padded envelope weighing a half a pound would cost us $4.12. I just shipped a 22x16x17" package weighing 34lbs for $21.65. And we're a small rural shirt shop, most people are ordering shirts for family reunions and sorts teams. Most days we don't ship anything, so we have very little volume.
Nice, I've used USPS a lot in the past buying vintage(very heavy) ham radio and electronics test equipment shipping from USA to Poland. The prices were really good. For really heavy stuff there are specialised "cheap" shipping services. Like Polonez on my route, no doubt others for other countries.
Funny story, USPS lost one of my packages (containing a pretty rare device). I filled in the "lost property form" and I supplied lots of pictures, the serial number etc(from the ebay auction). 2 years later it arrives unexpectedly. :-D
So, the morale of this story is: USPS lost package forms are a real thing and there is actually a chance they'll find it!
Oh unfortunately there's no interesting tales in a rural area like this lol. I needed a job, stumbled on this listing, sent off an email, got told to swing by the shop some time. Most people here wear at least a little of everyone else's hats. I emulse and burn screens, weed out lots of vinyl, cut and grommet banners, help cover graphic design, and as far as actually making shirts and hats I'm mainly just on the heat presses with the vinyls and transfer films.
And there is, sorta. While our shipping goes through EasyPost, we rarely interact directly with it. Instead our shop uses a web app called Printavo to manage orders. After feeding it the package details it interfaces with EasyPost (very helpfully autofilling the customer's details from the invoice) and displays all available shipping options from USPS, UPS, and FedEx along with prices for all of them. Sometimes the cheapest shipping varies box by box, but in my experience it's always either USPS Priority Mail or (more often) FedEx Ground. And never, ever anything UPS.
Kinda confusingly, I've never seen any of that info on EasyPost itself, just Printavo's wrapper around it.
I ordered two boards when a bunch of friends made a group order "in bulk" from them. We split up the shipping costs to 5 so it was $6 shipping per person.
The EU store has considerably more expensive stock, I assume they have to make sone product guarantees to comply with stricter laws. A Pinecil I bought was almost two times as expensive, though it came without additional shipping costs, from Poland I think.
I have not heard about them in quite some time, but was hoping they eventually reach the point, of offering a usable device. I guess they are still not there?
Define "usable". I have both Pinephone and Pinephone Pro, though I use them mostly to tinker with them (hah, I'm in the middle of compiling a new custom system image for the OG).
Pro's hardware is definitely better than the original, but the software part is still very alpha. Many driver is still not mainlined, and are very buggy (especially the 4G modem/GPS...) If you ask me, the main issue is that everyone is trying to create a desktop OS for the devices, with the same flaws. Most applications are simply not optimized for mobile. And of course half of the services are Python - which is fine on desktop and server, but on a battery powered embedded device you want to save those expensive cycles... but I start to rant.
PinePhones are fun (and affordable) toys if this is your thing, but it stops there.
And of course the developer community likes new stuff. Pine64 just released a small mountain of new tablets, everyone is flocking in that direction.
Well, by "usable" I mean a phone, that I can use as a phone.
So thanks, you explained very well, that it is still a tinker toy.
I seriously could do with not optimized software, I also don't mind fixing some things. But if the drivers are still buggy, then I still just see no base to consider it as a phone or something that can become a usable phone in the near future. A shame.
Regarding a mobile first OS I find this project super interesting.
Not finished but it shows one approach to use NuttX and LVGL and explains it in detail.
Not sure what you mean about 4G modem/GPS - neither does really have a driver on Pinephone. It's just a normal USB modem device you can also buy and use separately in a PC.
GPS just sends some NMEA data over virtual serial port, there's nothing about it that can have a buggy driver. It works just like any other GPS device that can't get assistance data. It's slow to lock on and doesn't work inside.
Right, regarding the modem, saying the driver is buggy is inaccurate. The firmware is what unusable. I tried all available versions, including the closed source ones and biktor's many hacked versions too. The only difference is the time it takes to crash. Some versions just crash every 4 minutes. The best ones only crash anytime between 4 minutes and 6 hours. (It reboots automatically, which takes around 20s + PIN code + network registration..)
One thing none of them does is to work reliably for any period of time.
And of course, it gets too hot to touch, sometimes to the point when I rather literally remove the battery for a few minutes in fear of heat damage. I really wonder what was the rationale using the same modem in PPP also...
Then we have the Wifi/BT driver, which actually works once one finds the binary blob required, but they can't be turned on/off independently. But this is the smallest bug. At least tethering works, as long as one turns off all power saving features (and as long the modem doesn't crash).
On a personal level, I wonder if the camera drivers can be even made mainline compatible, with the "2 physical sensor with 1 sensor interface" solution, which kind of requires a custom tailored application also to work...
I really find Pinephones a lot of fun, but only as a hacking playground. I take one of my Pinephones with me all the time, but I also keep a phone that I know I can rely on.
This is no problem for media API. sun6i-csi driver for the sensor interface just forces the userspace to select only one sensor at a time. The API is made for this. All camera solutions on phone require custom tailored solutions to work. That's just a difference compared to dekstop USB webcam space.
People try to abstract the details in a library (eg. libcamera) or just hardcode it in their app. API for ISP and all required data are just not introspectable, so it has to be hardcoded somewhere in userspace. That's the nature of mainline API.
> WIFI/BT
BT/Wifi should be controllable independently using software, no? Like on other phones. At least I never noticed any issues in this direction.
> Modem crashes.
Sounds terrible. Not sure what's that about. I've never experienced any modem crashes, but I don't have a typical setup. I don't use eg25-manager, but my own kernel driver to manage modem power and my own test software to control the modem over AT interface for SMS/calls. I also don't use mobile data.
Maybe I should try to stress-test the modem a bit more.
Thermal management is lacking, for sure. There are several heat sources in the phone, and there needs to be some software that actively throttles down parts of the phone based on total knowledge of phone activity, and not just simple localized decision-making based on current temperature of individual part. (User on call or using a lot of mobile data, throttle down the main SoC CPU heavily, disable charging or limit severely, etc.)
I know of none. Of course I heard many people online claiming that they do. But I cannot have something as a daily driver, if I cannot reliable know, if I can make a call, or not. (not even speaking about battery life)
The page mentions 128Mb (megabit) a few times, but I don't believe there's any version with 128MB (megabyte) of ram. Please share a link if you think other wise...
If my conversions are correct, the price (￥35) is more like US$5.
There's some documentation (https://milkv.io/docs/duo). It's a pity there isn't more explanation in some parts. The sales page says "Support Asymmetric multiprocessing" with mention of a RTOS, but unclear what that is exactly.
Also, is that mainline Linux or are we going down the hacked kernel route of the ARM boards where someone is going to have to pick through the source to get the patches otherwise it will remain on an ancient unsupported kernel?
> Also, is that mainline Linux or are we going down the hacked kernel route of the ARM boards where someone is going to have to pick through the source to get the patches otherwise it will remain on an ancient unsupported kernel?
I think getting the full sources alone is sufficient. It might not be desirable for the Linux team to accept patches for every standalone piece of hardware. As long as the patches for the actual ISA are mainlined I consider that a win.
[1] Maybe there are, I didn't look too closely at the repo, but it looks to me that it's all source code.
I own a small mountain of SBCs and I rather disagree. 5.10 is old as-is, and often times the patches aren't submitted upstream due to quality. I've made it a new rule to only buy boards where there is a recent fork of u-boot, and plans to upstream u-boot/linux patches. Life is short and I'm tired of doing work for companies pushing this stuff out. I can't back this up, but I believe mainlining prevents e-waste by keeping boards serviceable and relevant longer.
Ah, the obligatory "WhAt If No InTeRnet" comment that happens every time someone complains software support for board is shit.
For one, to not have to keep ancient dev environments around when you need to make small change. Also when you decide to repurpose it for something else, which is far more likely for hobbyist board like this.
> For most embedded stuff, your choices are leave it in the field or recall.
Sure if you want to get fired. "Sir, you need to pack the $200k worth, 300kg CNC and send it to us so we can upgrade your firmware".
The "we can fly one of our field techs to you to upgrade your firmware" option seems to still be somewhat popular in industrial settings. Though I guess that strongly depends on the specific industry.
Of course but poster above talked about "recall or throw away" which is two worst possible outcomes for both sides.
And for technician to be able to do that you need someone that develops the fixes anyway, and it's far cheaper in the long term if you don't need to get the software versions from 10 years ago just to run a compile...
> Ah, the obligatory "WhAt If No InTeRnet" comment that happens every time someone complains software support for board is shit.
There's no what-if - internet is not on that board. Sure, available as a add-on board, but if you use that standard then everything has internet via an add-on i2c/USB device.
> Sure if you want to get fired.
I don't think you work in the field.
> "Sir, you need to pack the $200k worth, 300kg CNC and send it to us so we can upgrade your firmware".
You honestly think that every single factory has every single automation controller internet-connected?
I mean, I dunno what else that snark was supposed to mean, but I can assure you that factories don't let their equipment talk to the internet. Anything that the equipment needs will get shipped out to the deployment.
You aren't working in this field, that much is clear.
> You honestly think that every single factory has every single automation controller internet-connected?
It's not about being internet connected, the point you seem to consistently miss or ignore on purpose and that I already commented on. Learn to read before you start flailing nonsense at keyboard, I wrote ONLY about software stack problems.
It's about having software stack to continue developing without wasting time keeping some legacy crap just so you can compile a code change. But I already wrote it in previous comment. I wrote nothing about internet connectivity aside from criticizing people like you that use it as a logic-bankrupt argument to excuse shit software stack
> I mean, I dunno what else that snark was supposed to mean, but I can assure you that factories don't let their equipment talk to the internet. Anything that the equipment needs will get shipped out to the deployment.
Multiple failures of people accessing SCADA enabled unsecured control systems over internet prove your baseless assumptions wrong.
>You aren't working in this field, that much is clear.
You seem like a guy that needs 6 followups to explain to him how to set up electronic torque wrench then still breaks the bolt so I'm glad I'm not.
See, if you were working in the field (any field, really) you'd know that the software stack is usually certified for that particular field.
For EMV, for example, it actually doesn't matter if you have an internet-connected device; you aren't loading a new kernel that hasn't been certified onto the device, and considering that the cost of recertification can sometimes be more than simply moving the customer to new hardware, it's very rarely done.
So, yeah, for hobbyists, having updates is important.
For industry, once something is certified they aren't going to want to eat the cost of recertification unless there's a really good reason.
PS. You shouldn't be this arrogant in an area where you yourself claim to have no expertise. I actually am an expert experienced in large-scale deployments of devices, and I'm keeping my tone as level as possible. You should do the same as well.
There's lots of reasons you may need updates anyway. We've seen components which die after an internal counter overflows some amount of days. (Was that SSDs?) Customers will find issues you didn't know about. You'll need to get extra metrics out of remote systems. And many others.
Shipping hardware is costly in transport and worker-hours. Being able to update things on site is way better, even if it's "put this on a USB drive, plug in, restart".
> Just to point out, the sales page for this board says in big letters that it can do 10/100 ethernet with an add-on board.
So? If we lower the bar to "can do internet with an add-on" then everything can be internet connected, because there's a network addon (interface card/module, i2c, USB) that can be used by almost every single device out there.
It's different when a SoC comes with network - that's obviously targeting always-connected devices.
But I think GP does have a good point about ease of serviceability allowing for longer product life, even if it would be on something that you do not expect to require updates.
All of things can be affected by a kernel bug though.
So my revision 1.2 of the product has an updated kernel, because it is supported, and I can do this without requiring a full rework of the hardware because it is only a software update.
Updates can be applied prior to shipping the hardware. You seem to be advocating that the hardware gets no support because you can't think how things can be updated, which is a strange position to take.
> It might not be desirable for the Linux team to accept patches for every standalone piece of hardware.
I believe this may warrant an “extended mainline” kernel project that has all those extra modules and that works to consolidate them into the least amount of different variants as possible, all the while providing some continuous hardware testing. It could be maintained in part by the manufacturers themselves who’d need to provide hardware and high quality code at the very least to be able to claim support from this extended mainline.
Sounds like my second business idea for the day. I’d love if someone would run with it.
I have a non-thinkpad laptop, and it seems nearly every kernel release there is some regression. Touchpad not working.. Then GPU driver not working... Then suspend to disk broken... Regressions that, for a regular non-technical user would be a big headache.
I would like to 'lend' hardware to someone to prevent this. I'd happily leave my laptop/desktop/SBC overnight compiling a kernel, rebooting into it, running tests, and hopefully finding regressions before they get into a release.
Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any project to make this easy. I'd like to just "apt install volunteer-my-hardware-for-overnight-testing". A few thousand people doing that would soon find issues that only affect rare hardware.
For this kind of testing, you frequently want a 'watchdog' - which is hardware that can auto-reboot a computer if the software locks up or malfunctions. The way it works is that software 'pets' the watchdog every few minutes, and if the software malfunctions, then it doesn't pet the watchdog, and the system gets hard reset and boots a known good kernel.
Unfortunately, while nearly all computer hardware has a watchdog, frequently the linux kernel doesn't implement support for it. That in turn means that testing buggy kernels on real hardware automatically frequently ends up with the hardware getting stuck and a human needs to reset stuff manually.
Unless it's so bad as it becomes unbootable and no safe boot option exists that can be engaged via, say, the serial console, being able to power cycle the board should be more or less enough. If the bootloader can be controlled via a serial console, then it can be automated.
Taobao has several stores selling it at around 68rmb which is a bit more than $9 at current FX. I'm quite curious about it and just ordered one, should get it in a couple days.
I wish they included a proper spec sheet for their cpu: SOPHGO CV1800B
I've spent few minutes searching and I don't know, can I use this for machine vision applications? Does it support serial cameras (Csi)? Does it have hardware support for h264(h265 or even better vp9) encoding/decoding? What is the number of Tops of its "vector accelerator"?
I suspect they don't put info like this out front is that it probably is lower than established rockchip chips.
The price is significantly lower too, but for when I need to run embedded Linux I also need video/camera acceleration etc. For devices that don't need a camera/voice interface like a Smart switch, a weather station etc this is massive overkill.
So it is a case risc v being cool, but there is still no clear winning niche for it that I know of.
Reading the datasheet, it looks like there is one C906 cpu with 700 Mhz without the the vector extension and one C906 cpu at 1Ghz with rvv 0.7.1. The C906 design has been opensourced and is available here: https://github.com/T-head-Semi/openc906
The C906 supports rv64gc with optional rvv 0.7.1 with a vlen of 128, but a 256 wide ALU.
They list H.264/H.265 support, but I don't think it's a standardized extension.
Would a spec sheet really help? For the use cases you are talking about, I wouldn't want to touch anything that doesn't come with actual datasheets and application notes, unless you're just doing it for fun. (i.e. the lack of spec sheet isn't really the obstacle here)
$9, when my first three PCs, each with lower spec that this board, costed around 1500 euros when doing escudos to euros conversion, with inflation into account, it would have been 2 900 euros for each one in 2023.
I think this is trying to fill a niche that has already been plenty filled.
The 64 MB of RAM seems to limit this to applications comparable to Allwinner F1C200s that came out ages and ages ago, which is an SiP that integrates RAM and can do video processing (h264). It doesn't look like the SOPHGO CV1800B inside this even has proper graphics acceleration.
For making proper "intelligent" things, you would want a much more powerful chip. Something like the Rockchip RK3588 is state of the art with 4x A76 + 4x A55. Even at the lower end in terms of cost, NXP's i.MX 8M Nano has 4x A52 at only $15 ish from digikey. Their i.MX 6 line is even more affordable.
You can argue that this is a modern version of the extreme low end, but at this point why not also consider more powerful MCU options like STM32H7 or RT1170?
This is my understanding -
- A powerful alternative to Rpi-Zero/Rpi-pico.
- When we don't need wireless i/f, it makes even more sense.
- Compared to Rpi-pico, where we can't run OS, here we can.
- Compared to Rpi-zero, Duo has lesser price, hence makes more
economic sense.
- (Yes, Milk-V Duo does not have a wireless i/f)
- Physical LAN needs an i/f board.
They have one core that implements rvv 0.7.1, which is the pre ratification spec that doesn't get software support. I managed to get an old toolchain working, but don't expect any code not written by your self to tale advantage of it.
That being said, the vector engine is really powerful in my experience. I'm currently working on a benchmarking library, so you might see a post about that in the future.
This is just something I have been wondering this product brought to mind; how can something be 40P GPIO if it has 40 physical pins and 8 of those are all just ground?
I think this might just be an unfortunate abuse of terminology. I've seen plenty of people similarly refer to the Raspberry Pi as having a "40-pin GPIO header", even though only a subset of those 40 pins actually have GPIO functionality.
> What's the selling point of 64MB of RAM with a 1GHz CPU?
Well, the first server I ran had 64MB of RAM and, IIRC, a 0.6GHz CPU. Ran slackware with apache and my software was written in C as CGI scripts (generated charts on page visits using, IIRC, libgd).
You can do a lot.
You won't do it in JS or Python or Ruby or C# or Java, and you won't produce AAA games or ML or cryptocurrency or similar, but you can write you useful software that runs snappily on a 64MB/1GHz machine.
TBH, I can't think of much that a 64MB/1GHz machine cannot do.
People got a lot done in the Pentium II / III era of computing. Dell shipped 32 and 64MB of RAM as the basic standard on their lines that also offered 1Ghz CPUs at the time[1].
I think it's easy to be unaware of how vastly speed outpaced memory density at some points. It's kind of what we saw a few years ago with core counts and limitations on DDR3 and early DDR4.
It can achieve > 90 percent of the computing tasks on the planet, outside of datacenters, smartphones, and PCs.
But IMHO the price is the sticking point because nearly the same can be said of an a esp32-s2 (riscV) and it has better peripherals, built in WiFi and Bluetooth, and sells for <$2 soldered on a dev board.
I think the fit here is for edge-AI. The asynchronous multiprocessing might actually be a winner here, since you could run your time-unpredictable algorithms on the Linux core and run your real-time needs on an ratos or bare metal on the other core… so kinda like a 2 in one device? Still not sure if that tracks for most cases though since a discrete RTOS/Bare metal core is about 0.5usd to solder next to your application processor.
I think something around this price point with a strong TPU integrated might make sense, especially since it seems to compare favourably with the kendryte k210 which has proven very popular in edge-AI image processing. The question here is whether or not the vector unit will compare well with the NPU on the K210 or not, and whether the power budget is good enough for battery powered devices.
First, the esp32-s2 is not a RISC-V chip, it's a Tensilica Xtensa ISA. Second, the S2 doesn't have an MMU and therefore cannot run Linux natively, only RTOS.
On the Linux side, possibly some network service or IoT device running a OpenWRT like OS that does the bare minimum. Although in my opinion advertising this device as a Linux board isn't the best selling point, they do that also because today due to chips shortage and bumped prices everyone is looking for RPi alternatives, but to me it rather appears a really good board for a RTOS, in which case the available resources would be plenty. H264/5 video encoding makes it very interesting though, but I would put it behind a firewall anyway, if not because it's a unknown CPU and network stack from a unknown manufacturer.
Only those 2 specs ? Home routers, don't need much more to pass thru a gigabit of traffic with some firewall/NAT in place.
On board that only have 100Mbit ethernet? Much less useful but you could make a sound processor (effects etc), but then pinout doesn't show any I2S....
I guess you could do some image processing but RAM will be limit on that
The moment you run linux on it, it gets a bit scarce. These MMU enabled chips are pretty complicated and its really difficult to run them bare metal like ESP32. MCUs and MPUs are fundamentally different, despite what companies like NXP are trying to do with their "crossover" chips like RT1060 to RT1170
It is RV64 or RV32? I cannot get the info from the official page (or I did try hard enough).
Because if the SOC has a USB device hardware block, than many GPIOs, and is a real RV64 core (unfortunately, it is not the case for the pine64), this is kind of "definitive" for this board major use cases.
To some extent I agree with you, but I don't think this is a good example.
These types of "computers" are pretty simple electronics. All the complexity lives inside the "System on chip" - the engineer then picks a few supporting chips and makes sure the signal routing is matched. I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing is based on a reference design from the SoC designer.
In this case, the west basically already competes - this is pretty similar to the raspberry pi zero. There's plenty of Western designed SoCs - which is where the complexity and IP lie.
All those SBCs are copying the Raspberry Pi range. But they go all in on hardware and tend to be lacking on the software and documentation sides compared to the various Pi.
For example, the Pi Pico comes with nice SDKs, comprehensive documentation, and can be flashed with a simple file drag and drop as they made it show as an USB drive.
I don't think there is enough of a desire in the west to waste time pumping out non-innovative low spec trash. They follow the manta of "I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been." For everything else, there is China after all.
Dang, is your response directed at me or the original poster, because it looks like you are singling just me out and not the poster about this selectively;
If that is the case, you need to take a hard look and rewrite your guidelines so they don't conflict and are consistent, as well as stop providing the advice you yourself have personally given as that too conflicts, and rules must be consistent for them to be fair and followed.
These are excerpts directly from an email you sent me many months ago when I had seen enough of false propaganda just oozing onto your platform that I finally complained about those propaganda statements being made and other issues to you directly. Here is your response.
"We don't moderate accounts for being wrong. The community has to sort this out, for a bunch of reasons."
...
"We've always operated HN on the assumption that readers are smart enough to make up their own minds; "
...
end excerpt>
So, if you are warning me for this, and only allow one side as it seems you are doing now, what you told me previously in writing, is just flat out false, and most importantly here we aren't talking about ideology or even politics in a normative fashion, we are talking about economics and systems of government that have real impact on survival over longer periods of time and the elements of such. Its definite, not opinion, and most importantly I'm addressing false statements made, and resources where one could learn more of the truth to critically think about these problems.
To me, it looks like you are doing the exact opposite of what you said you would do and how you said the site is run. I'd appreciate further clarification.
In either case, if your platform is going to be a one-way propaganda platform where you and other moderators do actually moderate arbitrarily for only one side of a conversation despite saying the opposite.
I'd want no part in it, that's not why I came here, and I certainly don't need to stay. I don't visit for the purpose of being bombarded by false statements and being prevented from setting those false statements straight while at the same time have systems that have actually worked be disparaged without any ability to combat falseness. This is intolerable to any rational thinking person as intelligent thought is the main difference between us and animals.
Credibility is important to me, and if you are applying rules to me arbitrarily for this, you have inconsistent rules, and no one can follow inconsistent rules because its arbitrary, it changes at every conflict.
Technically, they aren't even rules at that point they are heuristics matched to the people who moderate and based on their hidden state of natural biases and however they feel that day. Any person would need to be a mindreader with future sight to have any action not be non-sequitur. This obviously isn't possible, and the outcome of any action becomes indeterminate with regards to the compliance of said 'rules'.
If you need further time to respond, please feel free to instead send the response by email. I'll be looking for a platform that values free and open discussion and allows people the ability to fairly combat falseness.
I have no intention of being a victim of the principle outlined by Sapir-Whorf with regards to thought reform, and the appearance or outcome of ignoring false statements is universally recognized as consent that you agree with them (John Locke and beyond).
You posted a bunch of really long generic ideological flamewar comments in this thread. That's not what we want here. It has nothing to do with your specific views—we don't track the comments for those, nor care what they are. We just don't want that type of discussion.
If you think someone else was also doing that and didn't get a proper scolding, I'd be happy to take a look at links.
You flagged my response here, please review the person I responded to (one level up, and one level down).
Anyone making false statements like that is going to be corrected. To do nothing is to accept it by consent and all that entails (Sapir-Whorf). I flagged it, no action was taken. Falsehoods were found in both.
As I said, its intolerable being forced to accept falseness and be punished or prevented from being able to do anything about it.
I'll leave if it becomes clear that's what this is and be glad to do so as I'm sure any reasonable and intelligent person would.
Ideology is normative, I kept strictly to addressing deceptions, and falseness which were not normative. You clearly read it as ideological. Many people confound and conflate the two because people who use deception and deceit often intentionally corrupt language for the purpose of dual meanings. This dissembling is pernicious, even when talking about systems clearly, communication can become impossible because many deceitful people try to make it about ideology which this is not that.
Psychopolitics first addressed this form of dissembling in the literature early 50s iirc. Also, this duality of tokens makes it impossible to filter effectively because it breaks determinism, a required property for computation. So this is strictly up to the mods to police at scale.
If there is to be none of one, there should be none of either. I'm fine with that as long as you moderate and censor people like the person I responded to equally.
Though that would be in opposition of what you have previously said about who moderates what and how the site is run (hence the request for clarification). It would be better to have clear rules than addressing conflicts like this adhoc and after the fact (in terms of your time, and my time).
TL:DR
I would not have said anything, if they had not made a false statement, the same goes for the follow-on response. There is no criteria by which you can determine the post meets the referenced rule before a response is made, and its normative based on the mods. A poster will always have violated the rule before they knew they violated it simply by responding as one must do.
You do not let false statements stand unless you agree with the statement. This is core to any communication as any number of professionals who have degrees in legal, communications, or philosophy will confirm.
Someone claims its ideology, and me communicating that's not what this is about doesn't make what I'm communicating about ideology, or more accurately normative or value-based.
I get it, if the rules need to be revised appropriately, that's fine. It just needs to be clear so we can follow them, and as a reader, hopefully not have to deal with coercive or subversive narratives or communications always blasting in my face when I just want to read the news, reporting it, and then being told the mods allow it and then holding me to a different double standard when I follow the advice given. That's how it looks.
Incidentally, anyone reporting this to you should also be equally censured for wasting your time and more importantly not reporting the other person. To me this seriously is starting to look more and more now that I think about it; like a malicious compliance effort to get you to jump in and by extension threaten your credibility and HN news credibility, while promoting a false narrative by extension of outcome.
If I was in your position, I'd be upset because your rules say nothing about how you deal with intentionally false reports either, and its hard to say this isn't that considering I was reported, but the others involved conveniently were not and I'm not the instigator I was simply responding so it looks targeted.
To me it looks like someone wound you up taking advantage of inconsistencies in your rules and set you loose on me to promote a false narrative and silence a critic.
Since we've previously spoken and you seemed fair and honest in our previous communications, I have to wonder if that's what's actually going on here now that I've had some time to think, its far more likely someone is manipulating you than you'd try to burn your credibility and service down for no perceived benefit (Occam's Razer).
Edit: Looks like the posts are 36377821, as well as 36378754. Those were the two posts I flagged and responded to address the false statements or false context being put forth after no action appeared to be forthcoming.
The responses were civil, and high quality as I did not attack, I easily could have as I am quite knowledge in the subject area but nothing changes when people get defensive so I generally choose to err on the side of not being antagonistic; and just correcting the lies. Although it can be hard to do that when the outcome being promoted inevitably (over time) ends in slavery, and some would argue extinction.
I even included recommendations for books that credibly address history and the subjects involved for historic support. I did this despite these people dissembling as I previously mentioned.
While, I briefly mention beliefs that are false and limiting, and that being a great evil. The statement itself is strictly constructive and indicates this specific statement as normative. Beliefs have to be taken on faith, and we were talking about systems and statements of fact and history, as I tried to make clear so any readers would not be confused. Instead you ended up warning a number of others with possible bans for breaking the rules, for what seemed to me to be sybil attack type behavior, and I also received a warning for doing the right thing. Which is why I requested clarification, I also took a 5 point drop for doing the right thing in protecting myself and others. The same structural issues as I previously mentioned in that email several months ago.
If I cannot respond to false statements without fear of punishment, this clearly isn't the place for me; and isn't a place of discussion in any sense of the definition.
Thank you for making that clear. Those comments were also was not ideological. In any case I wish you the best, I will not be around further.
Edit: you've repeatedly been posting unsubstantive comments as well as breaking the site guidelines badly in some cases (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35120315). We ban accounts that do that. I don't want to ban you, so if you'd please review the rules and stick to them, we'd appreciate it.
Edit: you've been posting so many unsubstantive and flamebait comments that I've banned the account. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
They also have a $6 model with only 16 MB SRAM version, but that one, unline the 64 MB, can't run linux.
https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/Ox64