I find it humorous how many people apparently want the jack for high end headphones. Phone DAC/amps suck! If you don’t have your own external DAC/amp you don’t get to complain about sound quality.
Having a perimeter to protect the machines within suggests that they need protecting. Either they do and resources should be focused on fixing them, or they don’t and no perimiter is needed - like servers on the open internet.
Came here to say the same. I wouldn’t stand up a server on the internet that didn’t require authentication and authorization so why would I do so on an enterprise network? Even then trust must be limited since malware happens.
Came here to say the same. It makes sense for the leader to keep their core customers happy and thus not switching to the underdog, but it seems win-win for AMD.
It’s entirely possible to create something that’s as easy to access and use as Facebook but that isn’t centralized or controlled by a corporation. People are getting increasingly concerned about privacy and they don’t need to be particularly tech savvy to change what apps they’re spending their time in. All they need to do is decide to use an alternative, when a decent one arrives, en masse.
The internet is a drop in the bucket of human history; there’s a lot more to come and I don’t think it’s fantasy to suggest that big changes are ahead.
I think the overaching problem with all of this is that these massive organizations are for-profit corporations. A search engine with 90%+ marketshare, a social network with 2 billion people’s connections and growing, a communications platform connecting half the world, would be ok if they were decentralized, federated networks running on public coulds with data protected by their owners and secured with crypo.
We can benefit from technology without giving ourselves and our data over to corporations.
I think it's generally agreed by both sides that it would have been ideal if Apple had explained what was going on and provided a switch. The question here is whether lack of such warrants the government getting involved. I would say no.
I'm inclined to agree. Perhaps the CPU engineer could have foreseen prediction leaks, but so too could the OS devs have foreseen problems sharing address space. Why was there not already a KPTI switch?
There's plenty of egg to go 'round faces if you ask me.
I'm no fan of Intel but I can't help but see Meltdown as at least partly the fault of OS vendors. They decided to keep kernel and user memory in the same address space for performance despite known problems with branch prediction and despite KPTI being an option.
I doubt Intel ever claimed prediction could not be detected nor forced kernel devs not to use KPTI. Usually when a vulnerability is found in a software architecture you blame the software.
Presumably the reason there wasn’t a View Ads button before is that they know no one would click it. Now that they’ve generated a reason to do so, I wonder if the view will count as a proper ad view - and doubly so for people who were not targeted.
If it counts for targeted people then this could be viewed as a way to increase ad traffic for FB. If it counts for non-targeted people I doubt advertisers would like that very much. Thus the right answer would seem to be to make these views not count.
But then could Pages link to their own View Ads page to get hits they don’t pay for?
Even if it were true that the current situation is due to government mandated monopolies, which it isnâ(TM)t, it isnâ(TM)t true that âoeeven more regulationâ cannot be the best solution. Whether monopolies exist due to laws, competition/lack thereof or consolidation, itâ(TM)s appropriate for the government to ensure customers are protected from companiesâ(TM) insatiable greed. This is especially true for companies holding the keys to a resource as important as the internet.
Slashdot Mirror
The biggest indicator that the US is in trouble is that its leadership uses the term “cyber”.
No one who knows anything about computers says that.
I find it humorous how many people apparently want the jack for high end headphones. Phone DAC/amps suck! If you don’t have your own external DAC/amp you don’t get to complain about sound quality.
This just in: Trump pledges $1B to innovative Clean Mercury plants
News Flash: Trump’s picks don’t do their jobs.
In other news: The sky is blue.
Finally we find out how big a company has to get before the government cares about abuses of power:
*puts pinky to corner of mouth*
TWO TRILLION DOLLARS
Having a perimeter to protect the machines within suggests that they need protecting. Either they do and resources should be focused on fixing them, or they don’t and no perimiter is needed - like servers on the open internet.
Came here to say the same. I wouldn’t stand up a server on the internet that didn’t require authentication and authorization so why would I do so on an enterprise network? Even then trust must be limited since malware happens.
I was with you right up till you started using PHP ;)
Came here to say the same. It makes sense for the leader to keep their core customers happy and thus not switching to the underdog, but it seems win-win for AMD.
It’s entirely possible to create something that’s as easy to access and use as Facebook but that isn’t centralized or controlled by a corporation. People are getting increasingly concerned about privacy and they don’t need to be particularly tech savvy to change what apps they’re spending their time in. All they need to do is decide to use an alternative, when a decent one arrives, en masse.
The internet is a drop in the bucket of human history; there’s a lot more to come and I don’t think it’s fantasy to suggest that big changes are ahead.
I think the overaching problem with all of this is that these massive organizations are for-profit corporations. A search engine with 90%+ marketshare, a social network with 2 billion people’s connections and growing, a communications platform connecting half the world, would be ok if they were decentralized, federated networks running on public coulds with data protected by their owners and secured with crypo.
We can benefit from technology without giving ourselves and our data over to corporations.
I think it's generally agreed by both sides that it would have been ideal if Apple had explained what was going on and provided a switch. The question here is whether lack of such warrants the government getting involved. I would say no.
Why would a Senator ask questions he can easily find answers to on the internet?
I'm inclined to agree. Perhaps the CPU engineer could have foreseen prediction leaks, but so too could the OS devs have foreseen problems sharing address space. Why was there not already a KPTI switch?
There's plenty of egg to go 'round faces if you ask me.
I'm no fan of Intel but I can't help but see Meltdown as at least partly the fault of OS vendors. They decided to keep kernel and user memory in the same address space for performance despite known problems with branch prediction and despite KPTI being an option.
I doubt Intel ever claimed prediction could not be detected nor forced kernel devs not to use KPTI. Usually when a vulnerability is found in a software architecture you blame the software.
Fuck. That.
The US government did the same type of thing with STUXNET so obviously it’s totally ok.
Wow that’s like 4.93 Deloreans.
Eleven years of appeals! If the government actually gave a crap it would ban them.
The NoScript guys say an updated version will be out by the end of the week.
Waiting for a NoScript update, then I’ll jump.
The problem with theatre is that if you look behind the curtain the whole illusion comes crashing down.
Presumably the reason there wasn’t a View Ads button before is that they know no one would click it. Now that they’ve generated a reason to do so, I wonder if the view will count as a proper ad view - and doubly so for people who were not targeted.
If it counts for targeted people then this could be viewed as a way to increase ad traffic for FB. If it counts for non-targeted people I doubt advertisers would like that very much. Thus the right answer would seem to be to make these views not count.
But then could Pages link to their own View Ads page to get hits they don’t pay for?
*grabs popcorn*
You willingly visited a site using software that's designed to download and run scripts pointed to by that site. How is that not giving permission?
Put another way, do you also want to give permission for ads, tracking, analytics and other scripts that run on the pages you visit?
Even if it were true that the current situation is due to government mandated monopolies, which it isnâ(TM)t, it isnâ(TM)t true that âoeeven more regulationâ cannot be the best solution. Whether monopolies exist due to laws, competition/lack thereof or consolidation, itâ(TM)s appropriate for the government to ensure customers are protected from companiesâ(TM) insatiable greed. This is especially true for companies holding the keys to a resource as important as the internet.