With ready availability of single board computers, displays, keyboards, power packs, and other hardware, a home-made laptop is now a project within most people’s reach. Some laptop projects definitely veer towards being cyberdecks while others take a more conventional path, but we’ve rarely seen one as professional looking as [Byran Huang]’s anyon_e open source laptop. It really takes the art to the next level.

The quality is immediately apparent in the custom CNC-machined anodised aluminium case, and upon opening it up the curious user could be forgiven for thinking they had a stylish commercial machine in their hands. There’s a slimline mechanical keyboard and a glass trackpad, and that display is an OLED. In fact the whole thing had been built from scratch, and inside is an RK3588 SoC on a module sitting on a custom-designed motherboard. It required some effort for it to drive the display, a process we’ve seen cause pain to other designers, but otherwise it runs Debian. The batteries are slimline pouch cells, with a custom controller board driven by an ESP32.

This must have cost quite a bit to build, but it’s something anyone can have a go at for themselves as everything is in a GitHub repository. Purists might ask for open source silicon at its heart to make it truly open source, but considering what he’s done we’ll take this. It’s not the first high quality laptop project we’ve seen by any means, but it may be the first that wouldn’t raise any eyebrows in the boardroom. Take a look at the video below the break.

youtube.com/embed/fks3PBodyiE?…

byran.ee/posts/creation/

hackaday.com/2025/01/23/this-h…

Si terrà a Firenze l’evento Voci nella cura – esperienza e scienza nella terapia psichedelica promosso da SIMEPSI Società Italiana di Medicina Psichedelica, in collaborazione con Centro Culturale The Square, Associazione Luca Coscioni e Psychedelicare.

L’appuntamento è per Sabato 1 febbraio alle ore 18:00, presso il Teatro del Centro Culturale The Square, a Firenze, in Via Domenico Cirillo, 1/r, 50133 Firenze FI.

Sarà l’occasione per firmare per l’appello italiano al parlamento e per l’ICE Psychedelicarepresso il banchetto della Cellula Coscioni Firenze.

è possibile visualizzare la locandina completa a questo link.

L'articolo A Firenze l’iniziativa “Voci nella cura – esperienza e scienza nella terapia psichedelica” proviene da Associazione Luca Coscioni.

Il recente cessate il fuoco ha permesso l’ingresso di aiuti umanitari essenziali attraverso il valico di Rafah per sostenere la popolazione locale. Tuttavia, la situazione non è certamente risolta e la ricostruzione del sistema sanitario di Gaza, e di tutto il resto, rappresenta una sfida immensa.

L’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità (OMS) ha lanciato un appello alla comunità internazionale per ottenere supporto finanziario urgente, stimando che i costi per la ricostruzione del sistema sanitario potrebbero raggiungere i 10 miliardi di dollari nei prossimi sei-sette anni.

Inoltre, la devastazione causata da 15 mesi di bombardamenti indiscriminati ha lasciato due terzi della popolazione senza una casa e ha distrutto gran parte delle infrastrutture, inclusi ospedali e sistemi idrici. La rimozione delle macerie, stimata in 50,8 milioni di tonnellate, potrebbe richiedere fino a 14 anni.

Il governo italiano ha un ruolo, in tutto questo: innanzitutto è fondamentale rispettare gli impegni presi e intensificare gli sforzi per garantire che gli aiuti umanitari raggiungano efficacemente la popolazione di Gaza. Come è fondamentale che l’Italia, insieme alla comunità internazionale, contribuisca attivamente alla ricostruzione del sistema sanitario e al ripristino delle condizioni di vita dignitose per le persone colpite dagli effetti di 15 mesi di genocidio.
Allo stesso modo, è importante agire per costruire la pace a partire da questa fragile tregua. L’Italia ha il dovere di riconoscere e rispettare le sentenze della Corte Penale Internazionale e della Corte Internazionale di Giustizia, interrompendo tutte le azioni dirette e indirette che supportano l’occupazione illegale israeliana dei territori Palestinesi, facilitando il lavoro e l’accesso di giornaliste e giornalisti a Gaza e nella Cisgiordania.

Non si può rimanere a guardare. Il ritorno allo status quo, fatto di oppressione e apartheid, è intollerabile.

L'articolo Il “cessate il fuoco” a Gaza non significa che l’emergenza è finita proviene da Possibile.

If hacking on consumer hardware is about figuring out what it can do, and pushing it in directions that the manufacturer never dared to dream, then this is a very fine hack indeed. [Portasynthica3] takes on the Yamaha PSR-E433, a cheap beginner keyboard, discovers a shell baked into it, and takes it from there.

[Portasynthinca3] reverse engineered the firmware, wrote shellcode for the device, embedded the escape in a MIDI note stream, and even ended up writing some simple LCD driver software totally decent refresh rate on the dot-matrix display, all to support the lofty goal of displaying arbitrary graphics on the keyboard’s dot-matrix character display.

Now, we want you to be prepared for a low-res video extravaganza here. You might have to squint a bit to make out what’s going on in the video, but keep in mind that it’s being sent over a music data protocol from the 1980s, running at 31.25 kbps, displayed in the custom character RAM of an LCD.

As always, the hack starts with research. Identifying the microcontroller CPU lead to JTAG and OpenOCD. (We love the technique of looking at the draw on a bench power meter to determine if the chip is responding to pause commands.) Dumping the code and tossing it into Ghidra lead to the unexpected discovery that Yamaha had put a live shell in the device that communicates over MIDI, presumably for testing and development purposes. This shell had PEEK and POKE, which meant that OpenOCD could go sit back on the shelf. Poking “Hello World” into some free RAM space over MIDI sysex was the first proof-of-concept.

The final hack to get video up and running was to dig deep into the custom character-generation RAM, write some code to disable the normal character display, and then fool the CPU into calling this code instead of the shell, in order to increase the update rate. All of this for a thin slice of Bad Apple over MIDI, but more importantly, for the glory. And this hack is glorious! Go check it out in full.

MIDI is entirely hacker friendly, and it’s likely you can hack together a musical controller that would wow your audience just with stuff in your junk box. If you’re at all into music, and you’ve never built your own MIDI devices, you have your weekend project.

youtube.com/embed/u6sukVMijBg?…

Thanks [James] for the gonzo tip!

hackaday.com/2025/01/23/shellc…

THIS IS ANOTHER BONUS EDITION of Digital Politics. I'm Mark Scott, and I've been scratching my head about the United Kingdom's stance on tech — ever since the new government, under the Labour Party's Keir Starmer, took over in July, 2024.

I'll be unpacking that and a whole bunch more on Jan 30 when Ben Whitelaw (from the Everything in Moderation newsletter), Georgia Iacovou (and her Horrific/Terrific newsletter) and I host a discussion/drinks in central London.

If that sounds like your cup of tea (see what I did there?), please RSVP here.

What's clear is that London is taking a 'cake and eat it' approach to everything from platform governance to artificial intelligence oversight. That's not a strategy that will stand the country in good stead in the years to come.

Click here for my take on France and here for my views on Germany. I'll be in Washington in March, so expect another postcard from the Beltway then.

Let's get started:

What does the UK government want from tech?

EVEN THOUGH I LIVE IN LONDON, I feel like an outsider when it comes to UK tech policy. In truth, much of what has happened in the country — from its Online Safety Actto its Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act to its attempt to rewrite the UK's General Data Protection Regulation — has been overshadowed by developments in both the European Union and the United States. That's no shade on what London wants to do on tech. It's just the realpolitik for a country no longer viewed as part of the top geopolitical tier.

The new(ish) Labour government has now been in power for seven months. Its priorities, above all, are to turn around a sluggish domestic economy to meet local politicians' pledge to make it the fastest growing of any G7 country. A stuttering national health service – still on its knees in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic — and an increasingly polarized electorate — spurred on, to a degree, by Elon Musk — have captured much of Westminster's attention. In short, tech, and tech policy, has barely resonated.

That's starting to change. Earlier this month, the UK government unveiled an "AI Opportunities Action Plan" aimed at harnessing the emerging technology to bolster the country's economy and well-being. That included plans to double down on domestic technical infrastructure; open up public datasets for commercial use (cue: heckles about data protection abuses); and train a new generation of scientists to commercialize these new-founded "AI opportunities."

Thanks for reading Digital Politics. If you've been forwarded this newsletter (and like what you've read), please sign up here. For those already subscribed, reach out on digitalpolitics@protonmail.com

I read these statements and couldn't help but ask: what is the UK trying to achieve? I've covered global tech policy for more than a decade, and I have always viewed the country's approach to digital very much similar to that of Israel. And that is, above all, to direct as much foreign direct investment into the local tech industry — still one of the largest globally, see charts below — as possible.

Questions around the need for further regulation, online safety provisions and digital competition safeguards often capture the public's (and politicians') imagination. But I've never understood what is the guiding principle for London when it comes to tackling these often complex and thorny issues. This goes beyond domestic partisan politics. I would say the same for the previous Conservative Party-led government as I would for the new Labour one.

In short: what is the UK trying to achieve when it comes to digital policymaking?

The UK remains Europe's largest tech player

Source: DealRoom

A country without a vision

On that question, I hold up my hands and say 'I don't know.' London has passed some of the most progressive digital rules across the West, especially when it comes to digital competition. But just as you think there's a groundswell of political buy-in to do something innovative and forward-looking, the UK government shifts gears in ways that undermine what it has already achieved.

Let's take the country's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), or local competition regulator. On Jan 14, the agency started an investigation into Google under new powers that allow it to give certain tech giants a so-called "strategic markets status designation." If a company is deemed to meet such a threshold (basically, confirming it holds a dominant position), then the CMA can subsequently develop a bespoke ex ante oversight regime — in this case, for Google — to ensure the search giant doesn't subsequently abuse its existing powers.

It's a middle ground between the EU's one-size-fits-all approach, under the bloc's Digital Markets Act, and the let-the-courts-decide strategy in the US. For me, it's a smart way to tackle a difficult policy area. If done well, it could position the UK as a global regulatory leader and incentivize other countries to follow suit.

But then, only days later, the agency announced it had appointed Doug Gurr, a former Amazon executive, as its interim chair with a mandate to "support growth for the UK." I don't know Gurr personally — he was previously the tech giant's UK country manager and one-time president of Amazon China. But his appointment came after Rachel Reeves, the UK's finance minister, or Chancellor, suggested Gurr's predecessor, Marcus Bokkerink, did not share "the strategic direction this government is taking."

Translation: the CMA's previous leadership was not signed up to boosting economic growth, above all. Time will now tell if a former Amazon executive is willing to use all the powers available to the agency, under the UK's new digital competition regime, to stop digital anticompetitive practices.

The list goes on. The country's newly-minted AI Safety Institute — the first of its kind, and aimed at providing quantifiable oversight to the most advanced foundation models — was met with great fanfare when it was announced during the UK's AI Safety Summit in 2023. With an initial multi-million dollar budget, the agency had great hopes of testing the latest wares of the likes of Google's Deepmind, OpenAI and others before they were released to the public.

Yet a mixture of limited actual powers (few AI companies signed up for oversight); a shifting political landscape (which moved from AI safety to AI innovation); and no clear legislative agenda to pass AI-related rules has left the UK's AI Safety Institute in a difficult position. It hired world-leading experts — and is still hiring now. But it's mostly beholden to its US namesake whose ability to bring the biggest American AI companies to the table is just not something its British counterpart has any power to do.

UK's Online Safety Act: what comes next

Source: Ofcom

What London should do on digital policy

WHEN I TALK TO OFFICIALS, POLITICIANS and others within the UK's tech policy scene, there remains a disconnect between the short-term policy objectives around the country's litany of new digital rules and the lack of a long-term strategy about what the actual point of these efforts are. There are a lot of well-meaning policymakers beavering away. But there's no political leadership to frame the UK's ambitions on tech.

My fear, given the shifting geopolitical winds and London's traditional willingness to bend to whatever Washington's agenda may be, is that the country's new generation of digital rules — borne out of a desire to offer greater online protections, akin to those of the EU, but with greater Anglo-Saxon flexibility — are sacrificed on the altar of transatlantic relations.

But here's the thing. There is a way forward. One that could potentially position the UK as a leader in practical — and replicable — digital regulation that marries a principles-based approach to greater oversight with regulatory certainty that boosts Britain's world-leading tech industry. It would allow the country to mirror what the EU is attempting, via its alphabet soup of new digital rules, but in a way that is more market-friendly and more flexible.

Dare I say it: it would be a potential opportunity to benefit from Brexit by forging a middle way that combines Europe-style online protections with American-style market economics.

So what would that look like? First, the Labour government should double down on existing digital rules as part of what the UK has to offer, both to its citizens and the wider world. The likes of the Online Safety Act and Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act could be gold-standards to be copied by other countries. To do that, they need to be implemented in a way that demonstrates benefits to both people and UK Inc.

Sign up for Digital Politics

Thanks for getting this far. Enjoyed what you've read? Why not receive weekly updates on how the worlds of technology and politics are colliding like never before.

Subscribe
Email sent! Check your inbox to complete your signup.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

If done well, such rules could position the country as a "RegTech" superpower by demonstrating the benefits of what well-designed, principles-based online oversight can accomplish. That could include turning the country into a "sand box" to allow firms to test out their new digital services/products within a digital regulatory regime open to such innovation. To date, no one is offering that globally.

Second, the UK has what few in the world can boast of: a vibrant domestic tech sector — and not just an outsourced call center for US tech giants (sorry, Ireland!). Make use of it via greater public sector funding and commercial incentives for pension funds and other long-term investors to invest in homegrown companies. The country's financial services industry, including the FTSE100, also needs to do a better job at keeping these UK tech companies within the country, and not see them scamper off to the US whenever they want to go public.

Third, don't give up on digital rules. Regulation isn't there just for the sake of it. The UK has crafted some of the most innovative efforts to corral online abuses, even if such legislation developed without a meaningful long-term plan. British leaders shouldn't now give up on that, just because of shifting geopolitical winds. If greater online safety, privacy and competition protections were a worthwhile aim a few years ago, what has changed now to potentially roll back on that agenda? London, be confident in your approach to digital policymaking.

Alas, I don't see a game plan for any of this coming from the UK's Labour government. That is a shame. And not because I'm a cheerleader for the country where I live. But because a British alternative on tech policy — compared to those offered by the EU, US and China — makes others, elsewhere, up their game in the global crucible of ideas around platform governance, digital competition and artificial intelligence.

For now, London is missing a trick by failing to outline, clearly, what it wants to achieve on digital. That is a disservice, both to the UK and its allies worldwide.

digitalpolitics.co/newsletter0…

Carlo Gentili: “Una vittoria importante dell’Associazione Luca Coscioni per la rimozione di ogni forma di discriminazione nei confronti delle persone con disabilità”

Filomena Gallo e Marco Cappato commentano: “Il Governo Meloni renda possibile la sottoscrizione di liste e candidature attraverso la piattaforma già attiva per firmare i referendum”

La Corte costituzionale ha deciso: è possibile sottoscrivere la presentazione di liste elettorali anche con la firma digitale, non consentirlo è discriminatorio nei confronti delle persone con disabilità grave come il ricorrente Carlo Gentili, paralizzato a causa della SLA.

A seguito dell’udienza del 10 dicembre scorso, la Consulta ha dichiarato incostituzionali le attuali norme “nella parte in cui non prevedono per l’elettore, che non sia in grado di apporre una firma autografa per certificata impossibilità derivante da un grave impedimento fisico o perché si trova nelle condizioni per esercitare il voto domiciliare, la possibilità di sottoscrivere una lista di candidati per le elezioni”.

La questione di legittimità costituzionale è stata sollevata ad aprile 2024 dal Tribunale di Civitavecchia in merito al ricorso di Carlo Gentili, fratello del Co-presidente dell’Associazione Luca Coscioni, Marco, anche lui affetto da sclerosi laterale amiotrofica di tipo II.

Gentili, completamente paralizzato, aveva fatto ricorso tramite l’avvocato Giuliano Fonderico, e con il sostegno dell’Associazione Luca Coscioni, perché fisicamente impossibilitato ad apporre la firma autografa e che, in occasione delle elezioni per la Regione Lazio del 2023, avrebbe voluto presentare la lista elettorale Referendum e Democrazia tramite firma digitale, cosa non prevista dalla normativa. In Corte costituzionale la lista elettorale Referendum e Democrazia, assistita dall’avvocata Filomena Gallo e dall’avvocata professoressa Marilisa D’Amico, ha ribadito che il quadro normativo in materia di partecipazione politica già consente l’utilizzo della firma qualificata e il momento della presentazione della lista politica fa parte della partecipazione alla vita politica che completa il momento del voto.

Carlo Gentili dichiara:

Sono felice della decisione della Corte, è una vittoria importante che abbiamo ottenuto con l’Associazione Luca Coscioni verso la rimozione di ogni forma di discriminazione per le persone con disabilità.

Marco Cappato e Filomena Gallo commentano: “La decisione della Consulta assume ulteriore importanza in ragione del fatto che, da luglio 2024, è entrata in funzione la piattaforma pubblica per le sottoscrizioni digitali di referendum e proposte di legge di iniziativa popolare, uno strumento che facilmente potrebbe ora essere utilizzato anche per la raccolta delle firme per la presentazione di liste e candidature alle elezioni.

Questa decisione, una vera e propria riforma a sostegno della transizione digitale per la democrazia e la partecipazione civica, deve adesso essere estesa a chiunque. Per questi motivi rilanciamo l’appello al Governo del nostro co-presidente Marco Gentili che chiede che la piattaforma sia definitivamente aperta alle sottoscrizioni online di liste elettorali a chi ne ha diritto e, in onore degli auspici del Presidente della Repubblica, se ne preveda l’utilizzo anche per strumenti di democrazia diretta a livello municipale e regionale”.

Approfondimento: Come si è arrivati alla firma digitale in Italia

Dal 25 luglio 2024 in Italia esiste una piattaforma pubblica e gratuita per firmare referendum e proposte di legge di iniziativa popolare. Si tratta di una riforma frutto di anni di iniziative politiche e legali promosse dall’Associazione Luca Coscioni.

Iniziative che hanno voluto dare seguito fattivo al caso Staderini-De Lucia v. Italy, con cui nel 2019 le Nazioni Unite, condannarono l’Italia per aver violato il Patto Internazionale sui Diritti Civili e Politici.

La risposta istituzionale prevista dall’Onu era quella di rimuovere gli “irragionevoli” ostacoli alla raccolta delle firme per strumenti di democrazia diretta contenuti nella legge del 1970. Le decisioni governative che dal 2020 hanno ampliato la platea di chi può autenticare le sottoscrizioni e la possibilità della firma digitale resero possibile la straordinaria mobilitazione popolare dei referendum eutanasia e cannabis del 2021 sottoscritti da quasi due milioni di persone, metà della quali online.

La possibilità di sottoscrivere i referendum online fu resa possibile a seguito dell’intervento del Comitato ONU sui diritti sociali ed economici sul caso Staderini/ De Lucia con la proposta poi di una deroga alla legge (con un emendamento di Riccardo Magi, +Europa) dell’entrata in vigore della piattaforma online che ne anticipò l’operatività purché i costi fossero a carico del comitato promotore.

Nell’estate del 2022, Marco Cappato, Marco Perduca e altri dirigenti e militanti dell’Associazione Luca Coscioni e Eumans lanciarono la Lista Referendum e Democrazia per chiedere che la possibilità di sottoscrizione digitale potesse essere ampliata anche alle candidature e la presentazione di liste elettorali in occasione delle politiche del settembre 2022. In pochissimi giorni furono raccolte oltre 40.000 sottoscrizioni che consentirono la presentazione di liste in una dozzina di circoscrizioni. Le firme furono accettate ma le corti d’appello non le ritennero valide, ne seguirono altrettanti ricorsi, alcuni ancora pendenti. In occasione delle elezioni Regionali per il Lazio l’iniziativa fu ripetuta ma il ricorso di Carlo Gentili fu ritenuto degno di una decisione della Corte Costituzionale dal tribunale di Civitavecchia.

La piattaforma pubblica entrata in funzione a fine luglio 2024 è gratuita, accessibile e ha consentito di superare altri irragionevoli ostacoli individuati dall’Onu nel 2019 (resta irrisolto quello relativo alla pienezza dell’informazione da parte del servizio pubblico) garantendo un accesso paritario alla democrazia partecipativa.

L'articolo Firma digitale: la Corte costituzionale ha accolto il nostro ricorso proviene da Associazione Luca Coscioni.

Every Thursday of the week, Bastian’s Night is broadcast from 21:30 CET (new time).

Bastian’s Night is a live talk show in German with lots of music, a weekly round-up of news from around the world, and a glimpse into the host’s crazy week in the pirate movement aka Cabinet of Curiosities.

It will also be a bit Christmassy.

If you want to read more about @BastianBB: –> This way

piratesonair.net/bastians-nigh…