Re: Are chips more vulnerable to witchcraft than transisters?

Paul wrote:
> When the things they do, are closer to being software
> subroutines (adhoc state machines and so on), it's a lot
> easier to make mistakes. One chip had 4096 registers in
> the interface, and we would make a software program to
> "watch" the register contents. There were some "defined"
> parts of the registers, we could understand what those
> were doing. But you would see some other addresses where
> the detail of the chip was "undefined" and these were observation
> points and stuff was flashing on and off. That's what the
> more "random" functions look like. The people at the other
> company who made the chip, knew what they did, but they
> don't have to document those observation points for other
> to use. It took about four tries,

You made a grand spelling error in that sentence. It should say, "for 
others to use." What I see is that you are irresponsible and probably 
going to electrocute yourself to death. Don't play with electricity. Bad 
juju all around.

-- 
We eat the night, we drink the time
Make our dreams come true
And hungry eyes are passing by
On streets we call the zoo