Is my understanding not correct? I thought that these vulnerabilities were due to processors not applying memory access controls during speculative execution. For me personally, I was very surprised to find out that memory access controls could be bypassed at all. Isn't it just a matter of always applying memory access controls? Isn't that why the access control is in the hardware?
actually. no.
Please find 1 - just one - study that claimed that the polar ice was going to increase. What you will find is that study after study explains why what has already happened does not match what was predicted.
Plain and simple - find the "om the good news side" part of the study. The weather is better in some plain in Chile. Some small part of Africa gets better... But you won't find it. All worse everywhere. All the time. Oh - those record hurricanes, both in frequency and size... well, actually now the models predict decreased hurricanes.....
1) "compelling" - well, maybe, probably
2) "evidence" - not proof or anything
3) "contributing" - might be some part of it
4) "factor" - however small
Don't discount me as a denier... I just don't like seeing "compelling evidence of a contributing factor". You can say that about anything and not be wrong....
I am quite puzzled (no surprise) by some of the comments regarding money owed to Novel.
Let's say it went down like this...
I own property (Mr Jones), and I enter into a contract with Mr. Smith to let out that property. Mr. Jones gets all of the money, then pays Mr Smith a management fee.
Mr. Smith, outside of the contract, then sells some of the property claiming that it is his to sell and Mr. Jones doesn't get a dime. After three years of court proceedings, the court rules for Mr. Jones, and oh, BTW, Mr. Smith is now bankrupt.
So,
1) Mr. Smith broke the contract 3 years ago. Clearly, Mr. Smith is entitled to relief.
2) Whoever bought the property doesn't get to keep it. Get whatever money you can from the bankruptcy proceedings.
3) The property reverts to Mr. Jones. If you still want to buy it, then talk to him.
So SCO entered into an agreement that they had no authority (or did they?) to enter into with MS and Sun?
If they did have authority, but didn't pay the owner, is the deal valid?
Can Novel say, "We don't want a dime (and won't get one anyway), so these deals are off."?
SCO sold you a pig in a poke, go after them yourselves?
That seems much more reasonable to me....
Slashdot Mirror
Is my understanding not correct? I thought that these vulnerabilities were due to processors not applying memory access controls during speculative execution. For me personally, I was very surprised to find out that memory access controls could be bypassed at all. Isn't it just a matter of always applying memory access controls? Isn't that why the access control is in the hardware?
Chief Keef is thumbing his nose at authority. This can not be tolerated.
Don't we already know the average temperature of the planet to better than a tenth of a degree back to the 1890's?
That would have been the i860.... Ah, the days....
actually. no. Please find 1 - just one - study that claimed that the polar ice was going to increase. What you will find is that study after study explains why what has already happened does not match what was predicted. Plain and simple - find the "om the good news side" part of the study. The weather is better in some plain in Chile. Some small part of Africa gets better... But you won't find it. All worse everywhere. All the time. Oh - those record hurricanes, both in frequency and size... well, actually now the models predict decreased hurricanes .....
1) "compelling" - well, maybe, probably 2) "evidence" - not proof or anything 3) "contributing" - might be some part of it 4) "factor" - however small Don't discount me as a denier... I just don't like seeing "compelling evidence of a contributing factor". You can say that about anything and not be wrong....
back tomorrow
I am quite puzzled (no surprise) by some of the comments regarding money owed to Novel. Let's say it went down like this... I own property (Mr Jones), and I enter into a contract with Mr. Smith to let out that property. Mr. Jones gets all of the money, then pays Mr Smith a management fee. Mr. Smith, outside of the contract, then sells some of the property claiming that it is his to sell and Mr. Jones doesn't get a dime. After three years of court proceedings, the court rules for Mr. Jones, and oh, BTW, Mr. Smith is now bankrupt. So, 1) Mr. Smith broke the contract 3 years ago. Clearly, Mr. Smith is entitled to relief. 2) Whoever bought the property doesn't get to keep it. Get whatever money you can from the bankruptcy proceedings. 3) The property reverts to Mr. Jones. If you still want to buy it, then talk to him. So SCO entered into an agreement that they had no authority (or did they?) to enter into with MS and Sun? If they did have authority, but didn't pay the owner, is the deal valid? Can Novel say, "We don't want a dime (and won't get one anyway), so these deals are off."? SCO sold you a pig in a poke, go after them yourselves? That seems much more reasonable to me....