Slashdot Mirror

I own one of the affected VWs and have been keeping tabs on this in owners forums. The inside scoop came out within just a few months of the scandal breaking. Basically Winterkorn didn't want to pay licensing fees to Mercedes for its DEF technology. So he instructed his engineers to get the TDI engines to meet emissions standards without DEF while maintaining power output, or else. When the engineers determined it was impossible, they did the only thing they could to keep their jobs - they cheated.

The VW engineers actually came remarkably close to succeeding. Here are the NOx emissions for the TDI vehicles before and after the fix. The pre-fix NOx emissions for the 2015 TDI engines are actually compliant with EPA limits (0.2 g/mi), and just barely above CARB's limit (0.04 g/mi). (The pre-2015 TDIs remain above CARB's limit after the fix. CARB covers this in their FAQ.)

Why? Because it is NOT installed in place of DRAM... The article states DIMM not DRAM
DRAM is installed on the motherboard Optane rulers (which at 32TB apiece, provide a PetaByte of data storage i a 1U server) via the PCIe bus.

Big Tobacco successfully kept evidence of their cancer causing product out of the public Academia until the 1990's. Big Oil hired researchers to discredit researchers who found evidence that leaded gasoline was harmful. Big RF is the new hotness, and far more wealthy than any other industry. Do you believe that lead and cigarettes are perfectly healthy too?

If you care, then you have to dig into environmental impact studies. Look up Barrie Trower, he's got countless research documentation by military and telcos proving increased risks of all sorts of aliments. But you won't see this info on news sponsored by Big Pharma since nebulous sicknesses it creates are opportunity to sell you medicine you don't need...

FOIA Request in 1996 PARTIALLY disclosed Bioeffects of Selected Non Lethal Energy Weapons. Includes use of microwave (among others) as weapons, for PSYOPs and psychological warfare. The document is only talking about a few "selected" energy weapons -- specifically non-lethal ones... There are others, such as the "black weapon" of CIA. Remember the Cuban Embassy directed energy attack? It's not sonic weaponry, the "grinding" heard is an effect called "Microwave Auditory Effect." I say this to mention that government funded academia may not be the best place to look for evidence that the technologies their top secret weaponry depends on causes cancer. Protip: It would be too easy to detect covert use of microwave weaponry if we weren't all bathed in such EMF in lower doses already (the secret use wouldn't remain so secret).

Don't be a dummy. Do some research yourself. Otherwise, keep smoking and putting lead in everything and pretend it can't hurt you because Academic papers from the 50's say it's OK. It's still the 50's with regard to public awareness about RF exposure risks. Why? Because you live in a Surveillance State and Radio = Radar = Surveillance. Look up "passive radar".

TL;DR: Invest in Infrared wireless coms, since they don't cause cancer or damage to ovum & sperm DNA and embryos, like Micrwave/WIFI is known to, and are more secure against snooping...

And new Itanium processors are still being sold by Intel

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/285012-farewell-godspeed-itanic-intel-to-discontinue-the-itanium-family

Although Intel plans to discontinue the processor by 2021, I'm hoping that they change their mind.

The effort to reach the moon drove way more tech and for less than the military...

The Vietnam war cost $168BN, in 1975 dollars:

https://thevietnamwar.info/how...

The Apollo space program cost $170BN:

https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

Or did you mean all military spending since 1775?

Yeah, sure. USB-C solved the 'plugs in wrong way' problem.

In return, any given USB-C system may or may not support fast charging. Audio may or may not be supported. Cables are frequently proprietary to specific devices. You say USB-C is faster, but that faster speed is also optional. Low quality USB-C cables abound. Even the name has gone off the rails, with USB 3.2 Gen 2 Revision 5 Update 7 Amendment 9 Subchapter 16. Real consumer friendly there!

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/276820-2-years-after-apple-killed-the-headphone-jack-usb-c-audio-is-a-disaster
https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/239142-caveat-emptor-usb-c-cable-compatibility-safety-turning-nightmare

The theory of USB-C is great, but the reality is far less grand. USB is supposed to be Plug and Play, but it has turned into Plug and Pray with USB-C. No thanks, not until they get their sh*t together. And it has been long enough to do that yet it still hasn't happened.

Yeah, sure. USB-C solved the 'plugs in wrong way' problem.

In return, any given USB-C system may or may not support fast charging. Audio may or may not be supported. Cables are frequently proprietary to specific devices. You say USB-C is faster, but that faster speed is also optional. Low quality USB-C cables abound. Even the name has gone off the rails, with USB 3.2 Gen 2 Revision 5 Update 7 Amendment 9 Subchapter 16. Real consumer friendly there!

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/276820-2-years-after-apple-killed-the-headphone-jack-usb-c-audio-is-a-disaster
https://www.extremetech.com/electronics/239142-caveat-emptor-usb-c-cable-compatibility-safety-turning-nightmare

The theory of USB-C is great, but the reality is far less grand. USB is supposed to be Plug and Play, but it has turned into Plug and Pray with USB-C. No thanks, not until they get their sh*t together. And it has been long enough to do that yet it still hasn't happened.

What's wrong with the butterfly keyboard? As long as you hoover out the breadcrumbs once in a while (or blow them out with compressed air) the thing works fine.

Many people claim that they were not able to fix stuck keys.

Not to mention should a $1,300 - $2,800 laptop really require you to carry a can of compressed air with you in case your keyboard keys get stuck?

but the later generations are fine.

Apparently dust is still an issue with the newer designs

You're right, it's an obscure phrase that people only used briefly on obscure websites years ago.

https://www.theverge.com/2013/...
https://techcrunch.com/2018/07...
https://mashable.com/article/f...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...
https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/...
https://arstechnica.com/inform...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/sc...
https://gizmodo.com/dark-patte...
https://phys.org/news/2018-04-...
https://www.extremetech.com/in...
https://venturebeat.com/2018/0...
https://sdtimes.com/addiction/...
https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/15...

that SJW controversy was mostly cooked up by the Youtube outrage engine looking for something to complain about

No, it wasn't. DICE themselves told people not to buy the game instead of addressing the criticism properly.

People just took that advice to heart and fucked off.

"Navi" should be the new one, presumably on 7nm and GDDR6. Why not now?

Because the Navi team is working on PS5. When that's done, they'll work on the PC Navi hardware.

Also related: Everyone talking about Ray tracing are playing right into NVidia's hands; they would want any talking points regarding AMD to include "but where's the ray tracing?" even though it's a vendor specific thing that not everyone will use, even if they have the hardware, because using it drops your frame rate.

Meanwhile, the game developers are going to primarily target AMD based GPUs for most of their work, because Playstation and XBox contain AMD chips.

Adding RTX support to their games as well will incur more development and maintenance cost, to support a subset of the PC gaming market that's going RTX off anyway due to frame rates. Why bother doing that extra work for nothing?

They are shipping US origin products to Iran.

This.

But this (and the ZTE embargo) will just motivate China to roll their own version of 5G and fab their own chips. Back when 3G was on the drawing board, China was considering developing their own protocols. US chip makers went to our government and begged them not to. It doesn't look like they (China) got strong enough concessions in return for giving up their own R&D. This time may be different.

What about these ads?

They are not. I've already pointed out as an example, for just my small city, 8 different broadband providers, and I'm using two of them on a regular basis.

Thank you for sharing that anecdote.

But more than 30% of the country only have access to one broadband provider.

https://www.extremetech.com/in...

So let's stipulate the actual legal definition of monopoly: Now do you want to tell us how the fuck that's not a monopoly?

Glass is 31% slower, not a rounding error. Speed of light through air is much closer to matching your description. While this article from 2013 talks about using air-based conduits, I don't think it's reached full deployment yet.

Epyc supports 2TB per chip. WTF is up with Intel?

50k in a quarter is a very solid number for a sedan in the US. 100k would be amazing - better than Camry sales. Dunno about OP, but I certainly would have bought more.

That's an extreme form of gambling. You would be betting on Tesla becoming a powerhouse of the car industry. Let's look at some company-wide numbers:

"Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. said vehicle deliveries in the U.S. fell 2 percent to 223,055 in August, which had the same number of selling days in 2017."

That's over 200,000 in one month.

Now let's look at a comparison of market capitalization in this article from one year ago:

"The top automakers, their market caps as of this week (June 19), and 2016 worldwide sales are:

1. Toyota, $155.88 billion market cap, 10.1 million sales
2. Daimler, (Mercedes-Benz), $70.35 billion, 3 million sales
3. Volkswagen, $67.24 billion, 10.3 million sales
4. Tesla, $60.28 billion, 76,230 sales
5. BMW, $54.77 billion, 2.4 million sales
6. GM, $51.45 billion, 9.6 million sales
7. Ford, $44.65 billion, 6.7 million sales"

Is it possible Tesla can eventually achieve numbers that justify their market cap? Yes. But missing in that price is the very real risk that they won't.

...is that Apple has no hesitation in dumping Intel as a supplier.

Apple announced that Intel modems would not be used after the current generation of iPhones.

Apple will also move away from x86 towards their own desktop/laptop ARM processors.

Is Apple dumping Intel because they broke Qualcomm's NDA? Or is it the 10nm debacle? Or both?

Or because they have perfected their own MODEM.

Remember, they now have produced in-house Bluetooth chips (at least 2 generations thereof); so they obviously have enough in-house RF Engineering talent to take on a WiFi MODEM.

Intel and Qualcomm are both just stopgaps.

...is that Apple has no hesitation in dumping Intel as a supplier.

Apple announced that Intel modems would not be used after the current generation of iPhones.

Apple will also move away from x86 towards their own desktop/laptop ARM processors.

Is Apple dumping Intel because they broke Qualcomm's NDA? Or is it the 10nm debacle? Or both?

From wikipedia: Intel stated in 2015 that the pace of advancement has slowed, starting at the 22 nm feature width around 2012, and continuing at 14 nm. Brian Krzanich, the former CEO of Intel, announced, "Our cadence today is closer to two and a half years than two." Intel is expected to reach the 10 nm node in 2018, a three-year cadence.

So Moore's Law is slowing from 2 to 3 years.

Which slipped to 4Q2019, with little prospects of an (Intel-scale) 7 nm process following on any reasonable timescale.

3 years my hiney... the hockey stick of development time versus feature scale went to 4 years and it's not stopping there...

They might get there eventually, but early reports show a number of limitations.

Clearly not. So what the hell are they going to get a patent for?

No, he's not.
https://www.extremetech.com/co...

E

(Apologies) Video of Arizona incident here: https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

Just waiting for the Ryzen+ version to pull the trigger on my first PC upgrade since 2009. Gonna go future proof for the next ten years with a 16 or 24-core Threadripper2

Why not 32?

No it isn't. The point is that this is something where things like nuclear propulsion should work; there's no fundamental physics barrier (unlike say with an FTL system or any other made-up technology).

A dyson sphere (which you brought up) is a fictional technology. We have NO existing technology that would allow us to visit other star systems therefore everything in your argument is de-facto made up technology even by your own description. We have little more than a few thought experiments about how to visit other star systems and we can barely get into low Earth orbit economically. When we actually have a significant manned presence and sustainable economy in space then we can start talking about way out there ideas like visiting other star systems. Your claim that there is "no fundamental physics barrier" is an argument from ignorance by claiming that because something hasn't been proven definitively impossible that it must be possible.

I'm not sure what your point is here. The point that "If X exists, we should see Y. We don't see Y. So this reduces our credence in X" should be straightforward.

We have barely searched a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the universe for life. It is WAY too early to start drawing serious conclusions about what we should see based on what we've already seen since we've barely seen anything. Your argument is kind of similar to saying "we've looked at the other 7 planets in our solar system and haven't seen anything so we should conclude that life in the rest of the trillions of other galaxies is unlikely". I understand what you are saying but I think you are making a hasty generalization.

We shouldn't necessarily see them. But if any sort of megastructures are doable,the incentive for an advanced civilization to try and make them will be high.

You could make the same argument about an FTL drive but that doesn't mean it's possible under the actual laws of physics of our universe. Just because you can imagine something doesn't mean it's feasible to accomplish. Lightsabers are cool but good luck actually making one. And even if something is technically possible it isn't always economically realistic. We can and have sent men to the moon but we haven't figured out a way to do so that is economically sustainable so we don't do it anymore. Being an advanced civilization doesn't require the building of structures that are in all likelihood impossible to build.

Moreover, the swarm variants of Dyson spheres and ring worlds don't require intrinsically advanced materials, and don't require that much material.

I get that you really like the idea of Dyson spheres and I'll agree it's a really cool idea. But there is no evidence that any version of them is feasible outside of a science fiction book. It is a thought experiment and in all likelihood nothing more. Lots of really bright people have given the notion a lot of thought and there is no evidence that it is actually possible in the real world. And yes it would require a lot of advanced materials, even for the less resource intensive versions like the swarm. Do you have ANY idea how large even a modest sized star like our Sun is? The circumference of our Earth's orbit around the Sun is nearly a billion kilometers. Where do you expect to get enough materials for even the most modest of habitable rings to exist on that sort of scale? Forget what it would need to be made of, first you have to even find that much raw material. Good luck with that.

We do have superconducting power lines, trials have been operating for years, they work well and pay for themselves. Just need to extend them further.

/sarcasm Chipzilla would never resort to benchmarking shenanigans ... Oh wait.

A minimum of two cameras are needed to capture 3D images. Two will work, but you can end up with shadows. Three reduces the amount of shadowing. I suspect the optimal balance of reduced shadowing and minimizing camera expense is e cameras (2.718). So three is a better match than two.

I was hopeful the light field camera was going to be the solution. It basically turns every point on the lens into a separate camera for the purposes of capturing 3D info. But development (and interest) seems to have stagnated. Perhaps what we really need first is some means of displaying 3D images (that doesn't require wearing dorky glasses). But that's a chicken and egg problem. Regardless if whichever one comes first, either a light field or multi-camera system isnecessary if the dream of capturing holographic images is ever to become a reality.

But yeah, it seems silly to progress with this while going backwards in terms of SD slots, removable batteries, and headphone jacks. An unfortunate side-effect of high brand-loyalty resulting in the primary driving force being customer lock-in, rather than features which help the customer.

Wow. I remember hearing about that quite a while back and thought it was real.

You are correct.

Okay.. well then how about something more concrete.

Drivers and cell phones

Like the one who pulled in front of me and other oncoming traffic then braked to a dead stop when she panicked and realize what she'd done.

and the many thousands of similar dumb things humans do every year, not a few times a year.

https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

http://www.mandatory.com/fun/1...

My point being that dumb humans do dumb things that cause accidents.

But you are correct about the specific example I gave. That was dumb of me too. :-)

It goes back decades to 1997. Back then, all the big workstations companies were making their own 64-bit processors; Intel, DEC (the DEC Alpha chip), Sun (SPARC) and MIPS.

DEC and Intel got into a lawsuit, and settled for $700 million. DEC was eventually split in into bits, neither of which kept the original designers.
https://www.wired.com/1997/10/...
https://www.extremetech.com/co...
https://www.pcworld.idg.com.au...

DEC and ARM also cross-licensed each others patents, signed before the Intel lawsuit.
Plus many of the designs are based on the original paper by Tomasulo:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Most carmakers are switching to EV and Hybrid options,

Literally every volume automaker, in fact, and many of the smaller ones.

while Toyota still thinks hydrogen is going to be the next big thing, for some reason.

Toyota, Honda, and GM are all banking on the USA MIC's adoption of hydrogen (for "clean" war machines, which are also quiet and which produce clean drinking water which is of immense value in desert warfare, hint hint) to make hydrogen viable for passenger vehicles — at least in certain specific markets which include the United States and Japan. However, as you probably know, it remains barely viable even in the primary test market, and I don't actually accept the premise (but it's what I took away from some web show, probably Autoline, where they spoke with someone from GM about the Colorado ZH2.)

Why not believe that military use of H2 will leak down (up?) to the consumer, so to speak? Because it will be made on-demand. It's not like gasoline and diesel fuel, which require massive refineries to do efficiently and relatively safely — and there are refinery failures of varying severity on a frequent basis. It can be done on basically any scale, but what it can't be is efficient when done by electrolysis. Many have claimed to have discovered ways to get water to separate more cheaply, and none of those ways have panned out. The military doesn't tend to care how much of our money they spend, and they also feel free to use nuclear reactors, so they can produce basically as much H2 as they want. The rest of us are not so lucky.

"For the first time, the U.S. government has publicly acknowledged the existence in Washington of what appear to be rogue devices that foreign spies and criminal could be using to track individual cellphones and intercept calls and messages"

The only people using Stingrays are the Washington police and the state security apparatus.

Stingray, the fake cell phone tower cops and carriers use to track your every move

Stingray I/II Ground Based Geo-Location (Vehicular)

The NSA have been collecting web cam images for years from Yahoo Messenger cam users no warrants.

https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

Seriously, do you even read news?

Renault thought to be cheating at emissions tests for 25 years. (use google translate, German article) https://www.auto-motor-und-spo...

Nissan, too: (use google translate, German article) https://www1.wdr.de/wissen/tec...

Ford accused of cheating: http://www.thedrive.com/sheetm...

Fiat/Chrysler accused of cheating: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...

Mercedes emissions cheating: (they already had recalls) https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

BMW emissions cheating: (they already have recalls for affected cars - those had Renault engines due to a cooperation, which makes the Renault claims above more valid) https://cleantechnica.com/2017...

You can find articles like this for pretty much EVERY car manufacturer, if you simply google. Funnily, in recent testing, VW Diesels had among the lowest emissions results. Seems they fixed their stuff on newer models after the scandal.

You're right of course. I certainly don't think they can actually STOP people from coding whatever they want. But we've already demonstrated what the implications of a "we must monitor all our citizens - for their own safety, of course" mentality lead to. And it's not even nearly as bad as it COULD get.

I have no doubt that someday true AI will "pop up", but don't underestimate how far we have to go still until we can replicate the computational requirements in a meaningful way. It's really all about that computational threshold - as you say, it's not magic, it's just capacity. A back-of-the-envelope calculation based on this article shows something like 100 million modern processors (adjusted for modern speed increases) are currently required to simulate the human brain in real time. That can be significantly reduced with specially designed hardware, but it shows that we've got a ways to go before we reach that threshold in any practical manner.

Perhaps I just prefer to save my worry for when the situation looks remotely feasible. And even then, I don't think having some true AI is going to be nearly as disastrous or disruptive as people think it will be, because even when AI becomes somewhat feasible by a mega-corp and it's resources, it's going to take many decades more before computational power makes it practical for use on small scales, which is when it might start automating specific types of jobs that require true, flexible intelligence.

I'm starting to think that Geekbench scores for the iPhone are bullshit. The A11 Bionic has 2 high performance cores, but somehow out performs chips with 4 high performance cores. Yet iPhones don't appear to be any faster than Android phones, and in fact they are often quite a bit slower in real world use due to having only 2GB of RAM.

Many have criticized the Geekbench processor benchmarks, unbelievably, even Linus Torvalds. But he relented with version 4.0, saying it looks much better. Version 4.2's GPU test fixes put it in line with OpenCL and CUDA results. I don't see any problem.

I've not tried either the SD845 nor the A11 Bionic processors. If you have, you're a better geek than me, which isn't saying very much. I'm sure you're right about the 2GB bottleneck. As I look over their different specs, there are two other things that stand out in the SD845's favor: the GPU, and the core\cache organization.

1) Snapdragon 845's has modest CPU improvements over the SD835, but the GPU upgrade is 32%-40% better, depending on the graphics test. And it beats the A11 in all but two of those tests.

2) The A11 does have a better CPU performance than the SD845, hands down, but there may be more to it than that. The A11 can use all six cores simultaneously, and has AI hardware called a "Neural Engine" that can perform 600 billion operations per second. Some or all of this may help explain why it's a speed demon at multi-core tasks. But not so much at single-core tasks. Just guessing, but maybe that's because it has discrete core clusters and caches. In contrast, the SD845 uses ARM's DynamiQ CPU cluster organization, letting different cores be hosted within the same cluster and cache hierarchy.

That's all I got, except the links below.

http://bgr.com/2017/09/14/iphone-x-vs-iphone-8-a11-bionic-benchmarks-macbook-pro/

https://www.neowin.net/news/qualcomms-snapdragon-845-benchmarks-show-massive-gains

https://www.anandtech.com/show/12420/snapdragon-845-performance-preview

https://www.geekbench.com/blog/2017/11/geekbench-42/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geekbench

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/263774-qualcomms-snapdragon-845-strong-gpu-performance-less-cpu-improvement-advertised

https://www.extremetech.com/wp...

https://www.extremetech.com/co...

I was able to find the above link, and it talks about some changes made for arm versions of the kernel as well as the x86, but I'm not seeing references to a specific bug in ARM, or any kind of analysis being reported. And I don't know enough about ARM architecture to comment (or even understand what the release notes are talking about)

Look at the uses for high-temperature alloys like Inconel and Hastelloy. Everything from cryogenic conditions to rocket engine parts and nuclear reactors. Just the things you would want from a UFO

https://www.hpalloy.com/Alloys...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

But rocket motors are already beyond alloys. They also require ceramics and other materials based on silica
https://www.extremetech.com/ex...
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/...

Furthermore if x86 dies, there will now be room for both a new bios/firmware/boot environment as well as new cross-platform operating systems.

The way things are going that would be UEFI. Which is, you know, mostly locked down on non Intel platforms. Especially ARM ones -

https://www.extremetech.com/co...

If you haven't been following this fracas since it first started to emerge last year, it's all to do with UEFI - a long overdue replacement for BIOS - and a feature called Secure Boot. In essence, Secure Boot stops a computer from loading an operating system that hasn't been signed by the publisher (in this case, Microsoft or an OEM), and its signature added to the computer's firmware. On an x86 Windows 8 computer, you'll be able to sign your own operating systems (custom builds for Linux, for example), or disable Secure Boot entirely. On Windows 8 ARM computers, neither of these options will be available: You'll have official builds of Windows 8, and that's it.

"ME is turning into a colossal dumpster fire."

Or maybe the equivalent of a billion dollar ad campaign against Intel.

Customers don't want spyware. It seems that, if Intel continues to try to force spyware on customers, Intel will eventually go bankrupt. That would be a very, very bad conclusion to the very, very bad management by Intel.

It is EXTREMELY important for the entire world, in my opinion, that Intel stay healthy. (The world needs AMD to stay healthy, also.)

Did the present Intel managers lack the social ability to understand that providing hidden access for hidden invaders would damage Intel's reputation? Apparently Intel needs a new CEO. Maybe other Intel managers should be replaced, also. Most of the technology development parts of Intel has seemed healthy to me; it's the business management that is failing, apparently.

The world was told more than 3 years ago about the hidden control: Secret of Intel Management Engine by Igor Skochinsky. (Mar 12, 2014)

Intel was told that there would be problems: Intel's Management Engine is a security hazard, and users need a way to disable it. (May 8, 2017)

Did the present managers lack the social ability to understand that it was likely that hackers would find defects in the Intel Management Engine? One article: Intel Patches Major Flaws in the Intel Management Engine. (Nov 22, 2017) Intel's reaction: Intel Management Engine Critical Firmware Update (Intel-SA-00086). (Dec 5, 2017)

Do you have any evidence that anything even remotely close this has ever happened? Or is this just paranoia talking?

Since we seem to be incapable of differentiating between a company and a government these days, I'm curious why the same level of fear does not govern the rest of your purchases? I mean: That fancy phone you have? The Chinese are after you! Your Nintendo? The Japanese are watching. Your BMW/Mercedes? The Germans are coming! The Germans are coming! That cheese you bought? It could have been poisoned by french spies!

Can't trust anyone! Food must be grown everyone, and aluminium hats must be smelted personally or they too cannot be trusted.

There has been a claim to this effect by Israeli intelligence, i.e. that Kaspersky is a front for the FSB and they use it as a search engine to look for documents containing certain code words. They even claim to have hacked Russian systems and watched their Russian colleagues use Kaspersky's systems to run search jobs in real time:

https://www.extremetech.com/in...

I don't know if this is true but it sounds plausible. If you wanted to search millions of documents on millions of computers world wide for certain code words can you imagine a better way to do that than modifying an existing anti-virus program already widely installed on many computers world wide that scans every file on your hard disk searching for viruses with your explicit permission? Modifying a virus program to do this would be about as hard as bolting a trailer hook to the back of your car. Also the Defense Intelligence Agency has been flagging Kaspersky as a potential security threat for a few years now.

Here's one thing the Apple TV can do that a game console cannot:
https://www.extremetech.com/wp...

we don't really have any counter data to show them other than what we think will happen

I'm calling bullshit on your claim. Here's the data. Here's more.

Some of us remember things longer than four years.

in 2014 Netflix was paying Comcast because its traffic was being deprioritized
Verizon was slowing down Netflix in 2014 as well and asking for money

https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...
https://www.extremetech.com/co...

Intel's ICC compiler doing a better job of optimizing for Intel CPUs

Um, yeah, optimizing , that's what we'll call it. Optimizing , I like the sound of that.

Yah, too many have forgotten about those little shenanigans from Chipzilla

Intel's ICC compiler doing a better job of optimizing for Intel CPUs

Um, yeah, optimizing , that's what we'll call it. Optimizing , I like the sound of that.

Side step the corroded copper!

https://www.extremetech.com/ex...

https://hackaday.com/2017/04/1...

https://thenewstack.io/laser-r...