An open hardware platform would not solve the issue. This is not some super secret crap hidden deeply within the silicon, it's actually a documented feature of the CPU, for everyone to plainly see. And since it's hardware, there isn't much anyone could do to patch it because, well, getting so small soldering irons to manipulate the die are hard to come by.
Even if you somehow magically managed to manipulate the hardware in such a way that it works again, how many do you think have the skill and equipment to reproduce it, because you'd have to do it again and again for every single CPU, it's not like you can press a button and the hardware changes.
And, well, if it can be patched in microcode, then there isn't much of a difference either because as stated above, the documentation is there.
It was different in my country, with "Angel-maker" being an euphemistic name for the women who offered that "service". It was by no means a clandestine trade, everyone knew what was going on and nobody really gave a shit. Including the state. Mostly because, well, it's nobody's business, really.
What I claimed is that the internet IS a bad neighborhood, and that many people don't realize that. It's, funny enough, part of my job to raise awareness for this, and no, I don't think anyone "deserves" getting swindled, conned or tricked out of their money. But I do think that everyone deserves the information that this is a problem and I also think that everyone should be aware that this is a problem and behave accordingly.
When I read about people losing thousands of dollars to Nigerian-Prince scams or other burglary-by-email con artists I sway between anger and frustration. We keep telling people to not fall for those bullshit tricks and people are still motivated mostly by greed, fear and greed.
The only problem I could see here is that the market itself will only grow based on the currency itself. There is no value added aside of the speculation that the value will rise.
With a real currency you could buy options to buy or sell in the future, eliminating the risk (or, more precisely, shifting it onto someone else who will get paid by you for taking your risk).
Sorry to say it, but "deserving" it does not enter the equation. Welcome to reality, it has one quality: It isn't fair. What you "deserve" means diddly squat.
Maybe it's a language thing. Then again, "believing" is just as ambiguous in my native language.
As is faith.
I try to avoid ambiguous language as good as I can. Doesn't work as often as I'd want to, but I try. Human communication is already flawed enough as it is, we needn't make it any less clear.
It's a neighborhood problem. If you live in a bad neighborhood, you lock your doors and make sure your windows are closed, make sure you have quality locks on the door AND the windows. Because in such a neighborhood, the next burglar could be standing right in front of your door in a minute.
And on the internet, you ARE in a bad neighborhood. Always. And ALL the burglars are standing in front of your door ALL the time.
Wow. Ok, that's something I never heard of. Actually I'd guess it's outright illegal in most parts of Europe with that "reasonable expectation" clause in the consumer protection laws.
Oh, and when I buy a product on Amazon, I'm more or less guaranteed the actual product, not the "Walmart version" of the product
"AmazonBasics" might ring a bell?
Sure, you can get the real deal. But it ain't like Amazon doesn't make its own knockoffs of "everyday" items where brand names don't matter much to users, like network cables.
Because words are often twisted around to fit a rhetoric that was not intended.
"Believing" very often means "accepting as true without evidence". Or even against all evidence of the contrary. That last part, the evidence, is very important when it comes to "accepting as true", at least for me. Some kind of proof that what is claimed is actually rooted in reality rather than some fantasy.
Accepting as true without verification is exactly what makes fake news and their spread possible.
But right now it's easy to show that it's just an attempt to make a quick buck with gullible and desperate people. You can point to the ingredients, show that they cost about a hundredth of what the stuff is then sold by the quacks and immediately the "the pharma industry just wants to sell you expensive crap" is out the window with a simple pot and kettle comparison.
With that whole 3D setup, you get to hear "but muh superspecialawesome machines!"
Slashdot Mirror
Is there a tl;dr version of that tl;dr version?
An open hardware platform would not solve the issue. This is not some super secret crap hidden deeply within the silicon, it's actually a documented feature of the CPU, for everyone to plainly see. And since it's hardware, there isn't much anyone could do to patch it because, well, getting so small soldering irons to manipulate the die are hard to come by.
Even if you somehow magically managed to manipulate the hardware in such a way that it works again, how many do you think have the skill and equipment to reproduce it, because you'd have to do it again and again for every single CPU, it's not like you can press a button and the hardware changes.
And, well, if it can be patched in microcode, then there isn't much of a difference either because as stated above, the documentation is there.
It was different in my country, with "Angel-maker" being an euphemistic name for the women who offered that "service". It was by no means a clandestine trade, everyone knew what was going on and nobody really gave a shit. Including the state. Mostly because, well, it's nobody's business, really.
Making it legal was only the logical next step.
You replied to me and I did not claim that.
What I claimed is that the internet IS a bad neighborhood, and that many people don't realize that. It's, funny enough, part of my job to raise awareness for this, and no, I don't think anyone "deserves" getting swindled, conned or tricked out of their money. But I do think that everyone deserves the information that this is a problem and I also think that everyone should be aware that this is a problem and behave accordingly.
When I read about people losing thousands of dollars to Nigerian-Prince scams or other burglary-by-email con artists I sway between anger and frustration. We keep telling people to not fall for those bullshit tricks and people are still motivated mostly by greed, fear and greed.
The only problem I could see here is that the market itself will only grow based on the currency itself. There is no value added aside of the speculation that the value will rise.
That's not sustainable.
Umm... what disruption?
Says you. But I can vouch that it can cure all sorts of ailments. Especially consciousness.
Much like bitcoins.
Apparently they either don't think so, or they think that it hasn't reached its low before the eventual rise again.
With a real currency you could buy options to buy or sell in the future, eliminating the risk (or, more precisely, shifting it onto someone else who will get paid by you for taking your risk).
Does something like that exist for Bitcoins?
Sorry to say it, but "deserving" it does not enter the equation. Welcome to reality, it has one quality: It isn't fair. What you "deserve" means diddly squat.
Have you ever seen an Italian who does not need both hands to talk?
Florida? I'm waiting for Texas!
Maybe it's a language thing. Then again, "believing" is just as ambiguous in my native language.
As is faith.
I try to avoid ambiguous language as good as I can. Doesn't work as often as I'd want to, but I try. Human communication is already flawed enough as it is, we needn't make it any less clear.
It's a neighborhood problem. If you live in a bad neighborhood, you lock your doors and make sure your windows are closed, make sure you have quality locks on the door AND the windows. Because in such a neighborhood, the next burglar could be standing right in front of your door in a minute.
And on the internet, you ARE in a bad neighborhood. Always. And ALL the burglars are standing in front of your door ALL the time.
Wow. Ok, that's something I never heard of. Actually I'd guess it's outright illegal in most parts of Europe with that "reasonable expectation" clause in the consumer protection laws.
Have you ever seen a rich person not bitching and moaning when he was supposed to pay a nickel extra?
In Italy they forbid drivers to talk during the ride. They need their hands on the wheel!
Need I say more?
If you can't afford to put away 10 bucks a month, you most certainly cannot afford paying 12 bucks a month.
Oh, and when I buy a product on Amazon, I'm more or less guaranteed the actual product, not the "Walmart version" of the product
"AmazonBasics" might ring a bell?
Sure, you can get the real deal. But it ain't like Amazon doesn't make its own knockoffs of "everyday" items where brand names don't matter much to users, like network cables.
Or an average user on a smart phone.
No, wait, I think that would be the opposite.
Because words are often twisted around to fit a rhetoric that was not intended.
"Believing" very often means "accepting as true without evidence". Or even against all evidence of the contrary. That last part, the evidence, is very important when it comes to "accepting as true", at least for me. Some kind of proof that what is claimed is actually rooted in reality rather than some fantasy.
Accepting as true without verification is exactly what makes fake news and their spread possible.
Magnets, always with the magnets.
But right now it's easy to show that it's just an attempt to make a quick buck with gullible and desperate people. You can point to the ingredients, show that they cost about a hundredth of what the stuff is then sold by the quacks and immediately the "the pharma industry just wants to sell you expensive crap" is out the window with a simple pot and kettle comparison.
With that whole 3D setup, you get to hear "but muh superspecialawesome machines!"
Provided the precursors are available, it is fairly easy. At least easier than LSD-25.