Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ADevWithAnIdea's commentslogin

Right now I'm focusing specifically on the M4 Mac Mini and Neo, I just don't own any M4 Pro or Max hardware. My guess is that most of the drivers will just work on the other platforms, but we'll have to test.

> concealing that he is a former Apple engineer with direct contacts to the people involved in Apple Silicon development

This is false. I am a former Apple engineer. I did not conceal it (it's the top item of my resume and my LinkedIn and I made my PR from my public Github with my name attached, as opposed to a pseudonym which is expressly allowed by Asahi policy). I also had no exposure, at all, to any internal information or code about macOS, SPTM, or Apple Silicon during my time there.

I also don't have connections to people involved in Apple Silicon development (and I'd add that this does not mean someone cannot contribute, the question is were they exposed to tainted information, which is absolutely not true in my case). I have many friends who work for Apple (I'm a Stanford alum) but none in Apple Silicon directly.

I disagree with the phrasing of this entire thing, but this statement is demonstrably false.


Everything that you say can be true, and yet Asahi project may want to avoid needing to prove what you say in a courtroom.

"We don't want to take on the risk of working with a former Apple employee, who could potentially leak trade secrets and expose us to unwanted liability" is a very different statement than asserting that they were banned for deception. The post you're replying to is responding to accusations against their character and behaviour. Clearing those up is an entirely different matter than saying anything about whether former employees should be allowed to contribute to the project.

At least according to your own accounts on the Asahi IRC rooms, you were very aware of SPTM (which is part of the AS platform) and knew the people working on it: https://oftc.catirclogs.org/asahi-dev/2026-06-04#35383763

The friend I am referring to I met at Stanford around April of 2026 in a dorm event. We've spoken in person exactly once (I use "friend" loosely to describe anyone I've spoken to who I'm not on bad terms with) and at no point did we discuss anything detailed about Apple Silicon. For further context, I left Apple in June of 2025.

Isn't that chat log from 2024?

If you read the page it says 2026-06-04.

Ah. I read the post, but only saw "2024-07-16 04:52 ChanServ changed [...]"

On mobile I didn't see the full URL, and zoomed before I saw the calendar. My bad.


am i crazy or is the date stamp not literally in the link?

> <StanfordAppliedCyber[m]> one of my friends is a very senior engineer who lead a lot of the sptm work and controls a lot of boot, may talk to him about it (obviously he hasn't told me anything that isn't public)

For the lazy.


Spend enough time in tech and you'll know lots of people who know both technical and business secrets and are under various levels of NDAs. The message you link to explicitly mentions only public info was exchanged. Just talking to someone is not an indication of infringement in any way.

I think this comment is missing the forest for the trees. Obviously, ephemeral interaction is going to happen.

The author’s blogpost is sloppy and has some signs of being AI written. This kind of bleeds into the main point I’m going to make.

Asahi Linux folks are clearly more conservative and erring on the side of caution, so, this means that the glibness with which the author is treating any of this is probably sufficient cause to refuse his entries. It is unclear if LLMs should be considered a toxic waste dump in terms of trying to maintain a clean room. We have not established a standard. It is clear the author doesn’t think this is a big deal, so that’s one conflict. The other conflict is that it is not clear what their exact interactions with Apple Silicon folks is and their glibness of it doesn’t clarify anything.

If you take a group that is trying to be very careful about the potential legal landmines a still nascent technology has and you get someone that espouses a general glibness about those concerns wanting to merge code…why on earth would you expect that group to accept them as a contributor?

This is not to say this isn’t really cool and a neat use of LLMs, but it is totally understandable why Asahi Linux won’t accept the fruits of this kind of development. If it turns out that Apple can identify its non-OSS code in this, it’ll be a mess.


You are accusing someone by twisting their own words about their own self disclosed identity against them from a throwaway account created 5 hours ago.

And they say irony is dead.

I say this from an anonymous account but at least it isn't a throwaway. And at least I have the good taste to feel a little shame for my hypocrisy.


Do you work for Apple?

Probably not. Clean room RE is serious business, projects like Dolphin have to carefully vet contributors to remain legal.

Ah, don't worry about those guys. This is very cool! I love the technical write up -- so interesting: )

Would you consider taking all of your learnings and translate them into a concrete specification and publish it on your website, so that we can all do our own clean-room from-spec-only implementation?

I'm sure Omarchy will appreciate the effort, even if you're snubbed by Asahi -- being able to run Linux flawlessly on Apple Silicon is going to be awesome.

I wouldn't expect "flawless" support for those chips in the next decade, even with AI. The earliest-supported Asahi chips still have missing power management and dark silicon.

The only way to get flawless Linux support is to buy hardware from an OEM that supports Linux well.


FFS Linux kernel have tons of patches with "Asahi Lina" specified as "author" even though commiters are real people:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...

Just call yourself "Idea Llmina" or whatever and let someone else commit it.


TL;DR:

1. We want to guarantee our work is not a "derivative work" of anything Apple wrote.

2. If we look at any Apple binaries, there's no way prove that our code didn't borrow from Apple.

3. Since we didn't look at any Apple binaries, then there's no way our work can be a derivative work-- we didn't even look at their stuff.


Wouldn't using OpenAI break the cleanroom?

That is the debate. And it is hotly contested.

The legal framework around all this is way too immature to make a definitive statement one way or the other. Anyone who says otherwise is speculating.

The only way to clarity will be legislation or court cases, because it really could go either way.


Did Apple share their code with OpenAI ?

Why would it? Unless you think OpenAI is training on Apple’s proprietary code?


For the kernel driver it's literally just: run the hypervisor, wait for the kick, save the UAT state, replay the whole thing, make sure the output pages change, then just follow the pointer to initdata until you've built the whole tree from scratch. LLM handles the rest.

Thanks for the post and answering here, but for someone to follow in your steps there really need to be more information: how did you handle physical hardware? Did it got stuck / frozen / whatever? How did you managed reset / etc? What is your actual step-by-step process other then just telling codex / claude code "do X"? What else had to be solved along the way?

I just think one good part of Marcan's work is that they streamed a lot of their workflow with all kind of problems occured along the way and you could see how to solve them.

And please so not let anti-llm crowd discourage you. People like me who want to use good hardware and already choose to pay for Apple one just need drivers that work good and feature complete - code purity and "quality" is secondary.


I detail most of the development process in part 1:

https://codyho.dev/blog/hypervisor-macbook-neo/

tl;dr you reboot the device with `macvdmtool`, you install m1n1 as the boot object, you talk to the m1n1 proxy over a python shell. I'm documenting the process as I go also (see: the blog posts, also my github repos) both so others can do it and as record of the clean room nature, but this really is just GPT go brrrrr


> but this really is just GPT go brrrrr

I guess its a good reason to try it with M6 mac mini or Vision Pro then (yeah I know AVP has locked bootloader). Thanks.


Great observation, two things:

- During my time at Apple I never saw any of the macOS source code, at all, even for userspace components. I had not even heard of things like SPTM.

- I have not worked there since June 2025

I don't believe that there's any risk due to my former Apple employment. As another example, WINE does not ban all former Microsoft employees, they just ban anyone who has ever looked at the Windows source code. If I felt there was even a chance that my employment at Apple may have exposed me to relevant internal secrets, I would refrain from contributing to community projects.


Great job for bringing up new apple's silicon chip , m4 a18 to linux . I hope the project keep alive and maintained , and if you can't mainline it , remmber many other project do out-of-tree version well maintained [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] .

[1]: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux Rust for Linux

[2]: https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/common/ Android OS linux kernel

[3]: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs OpenZFS kernel module

[4]: https://github.com/awemorris/linux-pc98 Linux pc98 / 32 bit x86

[5]: https://github.com/OpenDingux/linux Linux on retro gaming device

[6]: https://github.com/AsahiLinux/linux Linux on older apple silicon M1/M2/M3 chip

[7]: https://github.com/microsoft/wsl2-linux-kernel Linux on Windows


At least according to your own accounts on the Asahi IRC rooms, you were very aware of SPTM (which is part of the AS platform) and knew the people working on it: https://oftc.catirclogs.org/asahi-dev/2026-06-04#35383763

All of this was public knowledge, and there is nothing damning about knowing someone who worked on something.

And if I'm connected on Linkedin with half of silicon valley, and know a lot of people from different companies I not allowed to contribute anywhere?

Have you consulted this with a lawyer, or is it what you simply think/believe.

I guess it's none of our business.

Traditional hardware RE centers around heroics by a small number of very smart people, see: marcan, Alyssa Rosenzweig, Asahi Lina, etc. What they did is insanely impressive, and given how hard it was with LLMs I'm sure I would not personally be able to do this work without LLMs. That said, I'm looking forward to a world where the staring at hexdumps and traces can be delegated to LLMs and talented humans can spend their time building as opposed to head banging.

Yeah I think it's a shame how much time and effort gets put into understanding things simply because other people want to keep them proprietary.

Can't disagree more, but my experiences are my own.

I still can't quite believe it either!

:) I think we have a surprise in store here. Asahi don't have a monopoly over Linux for Apple Silicon, and upstream Linux absolutely does *NOT* ban LLMs.

i install proprietary modules for nvidia all the time, i'm not going to care if i have to do it for something else that i own

Nvidia's kernel module is open source these days, it's the usermode stack that's still closed.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: