That's mostly how I understand it; it's just not practical yet to pick and choose. Better to cover all cases now and figure it out when we have time.
From my understanding, it's not even incompetence that brought this about in the first place. Lack of foresight more than anything else. No one imagined trying an exploit like these until recently. Unless they have, but have been keeping it quiet, much like the Allies kept the cracking of Enigma quiet...
The only commercially available chips susceptible to Meltdown are Intel chips. Why is a Meltdown patch being pused to AMD systems? They aren't affected.
He wants a replacement processor which almost certainly is never going to happen. Basically he's asking for every processor produced in the last 20 years to be replaced for free. If you think that's realistic I've got a bridge to sell you.
How is this different (aside from magnitude/number of units sold) from Takata's airbag recall? I wasn't affected by an exploding airbag, but I still get new airbags in my Dodge. Interestingly, it's apparently still going on
I suspect a recall this large would bankrupt Intel, much like the airbag recall is bankrupting Takata. We've seen our automakers get bailed out because they were deemed "too big to fail", but maybe Intel failing could be a good thing (though I don't know of anyone that can simply step up to replace them).
Then there is the issue of censorship. Is it right for Facebook to ban posts? Should Facebook mark posts as possible fake news and put it far down in its curated list of posts?
Facebook is not a government entity, so is not subject to such things as the 1st amendment, therefore censorship is available to it; that said, the answer to these specific questions depend very much on the type of community that Facebook wants to foster. It doesn't make the questions any easier, but does put them into context towards an answer.
Myself, I got tired of it all, so I quit visiting. I check about once a week to see if anything has changed...it hasn't. (not-so-interestingly, the people that really want to get hold of me have adapted to getting hold of me other ways)
I wish more people would think critically.
I believe the true answers to your questions will never be fully realized, they simply can't be, for the exact reasons you outlined.
Admittedly, it doesn't. I'm just stating and supporting the parent post's claim that for most people, the truth of it doesn't matter (at least that's how I interpreted it).
I'm sure Russians did work to influence our election. I'm also sure they've been doing this for longer than I've been alive, and that we do the same. And other nations and other elections, and all directions. It's nothing new.
Are you just stirring the shit, or did you really do that?..."What kind of person would deliberately emulate the boy who cried 'Wolf!'?"
I had a theory (people tend to believe the first thing (accusation) they hear)
I set up an experiment (falsely accuse a friend of stealing my coat in front of someone)
I ran the experiment.
I analyzed the results. (One result is not definitive, but does provide food for thought.)
It's called the scientific method. Perhaps you've heard of it.
As to the rest of your post: nonsensical trite that doesn't apply.
I did a test on this in high school, because I recognized the phenomenon, though didn't know the word for it. I demanded my friend give me back my coat (his coat that he was wearing) in front of the teacher: "Hey, give me back my coat!". Despite my friend's claim that it was his coat, and without anything more from me, the teacher made him give me his coat. I explained later and returned his coat.
One test does not prove anything, but one needn't look far to see more examples.
I refuse to use self-checkout unless they provide me a 15% discount for doing their job for them.
Want shorter lines? Do like you did, and don't shop there. Unfortunately, WalMart surely doesn't see that. Get two shopping carts full of perishables. Stand in the long line. Give up and walk out of the store. Now they have a direct loss that they can attribute to their long lines.
Of course, in the event of long but fast lines, make sure you're willing to buy those groceries. Don't just randomly abandon carts near the lines.
Until then, their long lines don't cost them money. I guarantee you they know exactly how many (few) cashiers they can get away with at every hour of the day on every day of the year before they start seeing meaningful reduction in business. This is exactly the type of process simulation/optimizing I do (not for WalMart, though)
Ok, let's say that you're the White House and you want to update something. Do they have technology from the 60s? There's no reason for downtime. When Google wants to update their website, they don't shut down for a month, they do it in the background and then update in an instant.
That's a fair point, but you seem to have overlooked one quite large point: Google is competent.
I had no trouble closing a retirement account to cover the down payment for a house over the telephone. Zero authentication, no date of birth, no last 4 of SSN, no verification of account number, nothing...it might help that I went to school with the receptionist, and I'm sure they had caller ID to verify my phone number...but still...
Do money managers really move millions around based on an unauthenticated email?? The mind boggles at the abject stupidity implied....
I know someone who was handling the estate of a deceased parent. She was executor of the will. There were numerous financial accounts in various forms: checking, savings, stocks, bonds...when transferring the money to dole out the inheritance to her other siblings per the will, she had very little trouble with accounts with balances >$100,000, but the smaller accounts provided the most difficulty in terms of verifying authorization.
500 thousand dollars? Yea, no problem.
5 thousand dollars? We're going to need to see the notarized birth certificate, current I-9, special power of attorney signed by the owning party in the last 30 days, blood sample, and aqueous humor sample.
"Unfortunately, while all our measures helped Yahoo successfully defend against the barrage of attacks by both private and state-sponsored hackers, Russian agents intruded on our systems and stole our users' data."
So, while they were successful, they weren't? Or are these supposed "Russian agents" somehow not private or state-sponsored?
Like they're not real addons...but it's a Wired article, what do you expect? If they can't even decide on calling them addons or "so-called addons" then why do you expect they'd be able to differentiate the platform?
As far a Slashdot...well, this is what the users have chosen in the Firehose.
So it's OK for the US to audit Kaspersky's source code for hidden backdoors (and Kaspersky is highly regarded for offering it), but it's not OK for Russia to audit McAfee's source code for hidden backdoors.
Slashdot Mirror
That's mostly how I understand it; it's just not practical yet to pick and choose. Better to cover all cases now and figure it out when we have time.
From my understanding, it's not even incompetence that brought this about in the first place. Lack of foresight more than anything else. No one imagined trying an exploit like these until recently. Unless they have, but have been keeping it quiet, much like the Allies kept the cracking of Enigma quiet...
This has got to be the most reasonable argument I've heard for disabling encryption by default.
That's how I'm reading it. I'll double up on my encryption right now! Can't let the public be unsafe!
The only commercially available chips susceptible to Meltdown are Intel chips. Why is a Meltdown patch being pused to AMD systems? They aren't affected.
Incompetence.
Yea, I thought of that right after I clicked "Submit"...
I was sure I was reading something from Wired magazine...the web is dying, so let's fix it by building the web...but somehow this isn't theirs...
He wants a replacement processor which almost certainly is never going to happen. Basically he's asking for every processor produced in the last 20 years to be replaced for free. If you think that's realistic I've got a bridge to sell you.
How is this different (aside from magnitude/number of units sold) from Takata's airbag recall? I wasn't affected by an exploding airbag, but I still get new airbags in my Dodge. Interestingly, it's apparently still going on
I suspect a recall this large would bankrupt Intel, much like the airbag recall is bankrupting Takata. We've seen our automakers get bailed out because they were deemed "too big to fail", but maybe Intel failing could be a good thing (though I don't know of anyone that can simply step up to replace them).
All my users are above average.
Dammit, that means all mine must be below. That means more work for me...
Is that contagious?
Then there is the issue of censorship. Is it right for Facebook to ban posts? Should Facebook mark posts as possible fake news and put it far down in its curated list of posts?
Facebook is not a government entity, so is not subject to such things as the 1st amendment, therefore censorship is available to it; that said, the answer to these specific questions depend very much on the type of community that Facebook wants to foster. It doesn't make the questions any easier, but does put them into context towards an answer.
Myself, I got tired of it all, so I quit visiting. I check about once a week to see if anything has changed...it hasn't. (not-so-interestingly, the people that really want to get hold of me have adapted to getting hold of me other ways)
I wish more people would think critically.
I believe the true answers to your questions will never be fully realized, they simply can't be, for the exact reasons you outlined.
Admittedly, it doesn't. I'm just stating and supporting the parent post's claim that for most people, the truth of it doesn't matter (at least that's how I interpreted it).
I'm sure Russians did work to influence our election. I'm also sure they've been doing this for longer than I've been alive, and that we do the same. And other nations and other elections, and all directions. It's nothing new.
Are you just stirring the shit, or did you really do that?..."What kind of person would deliberately emulate the boy who cried 'Wolf!'?"
I had a theory (people tend to believe the first thing (accusation) they hear)
I set up an experiment (falsely accuse a friend of stealing my coat in front of someone)
I ran the experiment.
I analyzed the results. (One result is not definitive, but does provide food for thought.)
It's called the scientific method. Perhaps you've heard of it.
As to the rest of your post: nonsensical trite that doesn't apply.
Accusations are today's proof of guilt.
Prima facie rules our collective perception.
I did a test on this in high school, because I recognized the phenomenon, though didn't know the word for it. I demanded my friend give me back my coat (his coat that he was wearing) in front of the teacher: "Hey, give me back my coat!". Despite my friend's claim that it was his coat, and without anything more from me, the teacher made him give me his coat. I explained later and returned his coat.
One test does not prove anything, but one needn't look far to see more examples.
I think my company hired those 1%....so don't worry, they're still gainfully employed!
I refuse to use self-checkout unless they provide me a 15% discount for doing their job for them.
Want shorter lines? Do like you did, and don't shop there. Unfortunately, WalMart surely doesn't see that. Get two shopping carts full of perishables. Stand in the long line. Give up and walk out of the store. Now they have a direct loss that they can attribute to their long lines.
Of course, in the event of long but fast lines, make sure you're willing to buy those groceries. Don't just randomly abandon carts near the lines.
Until then, their long lines don't cost them money. I guarantee you they know exactly how many (few) cashiers they can get away with at every hour of the day on every day of the year before they start seeing meaningful reduction in business. This is exactly the type of process simulation/optimizing I do (not for WalMart, though)
Ok, let's say that you're the White House and you want to update something. Do they have technology from the 60s? There's no reason for downtime. When Google wants to update their website, they don't shut down for a month, they do it in the background and then update in an instant.
That's a fair point, but you seem to have overlooked one quite large point: Google is competent.
I had no trouble closing a retirement account to cover the down payment for a house over the telephone. Zero authentication, no date of birth, no last 4 of SSN, no verification of account number, nothing...it might help that I went to school with the receptionist, and I'm sure they had caller ID to verify my phone number...but still...
Do money managers really move millions around based on an unauthenticated email?? The mind boggles at the abject stupidity implied....
I know someone who was handling the estate of a deceased parent. She was executor of the will. There were numerous financial accounts in various forms: checking, savings, stocks, bonds...when transferring the money to dole out the inheritance to her other siblings per the will, she had very little trouble with accounts with balances >$100,000, but the smaller accounts provided the most difficulty in terms of verifying authorization.
500 thousand dollars? Yea, no problem.
5 thousand dollars? We're going to need to see the notarized birth certificate, current I-9, special power of attorney signed by the owning party in the last 30 days, blood sample, and aqueous humor sample.
57.6 kilowatt hours per day
57.6 KJ/s * 3600 s/h * 24h/day = 49,000 MJ/day ? I always mess up kilowatt-hours.
Google and Facebook don't even need a deal.
Who is going to sign up for an Internet plan in which Google and Facebook don't work well?
Oh, this one's $10 less and Facebook doesn't work well [all else being equal]? Sign me up!
"Unfortunately, while all our measures helped Yahoo successfully defend against the barrage of attacks by both private and state-sponsored hackers, Russian agents intruded on our systems and stole our users' data."
So, while they were successful, they weren't? Or are these supposed "Russian agents" somehow not private or state-sponsored?
So.....60 years?
If you're not speeding, then you've got nothing to hide!
so-called addons
Like they're not real addons...but it's a Wired article, what do you expect? If they can't even decide on calling them addons or "so-called addons" then why do you expect they'd be able to differentiate the platform?
As far a Slashdot...well, this is what the users have chosen in the Firehose.
So it's OK for the US to audit Kaspersky's source code for hidden backdoors (and Kaspersky is highly regarded for offering it), but it's not OK for Russia to audit McAfee's source code for hidden backdoors.
Because Russia.
Did I get that right?