Yeah no that wouldn't be used... Unlike some conspiracy theorists think people in general have empathy, in fact the lack of empathy is seen as a severe personality defect. It is also understood that stress response can have severe effects in an individual.
So if this was true most anesthesiologists would refuse to use it at least without other drugs. Most others would refuse to take part of the operation.
And as others point out the indications of the extreme stress would be visible during the operation - and the anesthesiologist _will_ monitor the patient for these indications. It's part of their job after all.
That isn't abuse. If there are reason to believe criminal acts are happening and people refuse to co-operate with legal requests the material can and will be confiscated. It isn't punishment nor harassment - it's called an investigation.
It never cease to amaze me that people don't understand basics and instead push forward legal arguments that aren't generally even internally consistent.
Police: "We have reason to suspect you are violating rule X and according to law Y we request that you produce the material Z as you are required" Unter: "Nope, we don't wanna - it wuld be harrussment" Police: "Okay, have a good day"
Which is why Microsoft "forced" Intel to use AMD64 (renamed though) instead of their own emergency hack? There are other cases where MS forced Intel to behave.
With exception of some optimization why would there be two kernels for a group of binary compatible processors? AMD and Intel are binary compatible unless one goes into some dusty corners and some setup specific things.
To answer AC's question a few moths later: "What's the big advantage with RISC over ARM or x86?"
Meltdown, Spetre.
Meltdown? Nope. You can buy high performance x86 processors now that isn't affected, you could have bought high performance x86 processors in the past that weren't affected. So that's simply put bullshit, either you are lying or not knowing what you are talking about.
Spectre? Nope. Nothing about it is x86 or ARM specific and the only reason RISC V isn't affected is that it didn't use the performance enhancing features other high-end processors did. Now that's a good slogan right? "We are so slow that we missed a stray bullet".
What's with the obviously crazy people posting about this? Not only here but elsewhere including "articles" (read: crap) claiming the sky is falling and processors as we know them aren't possible anymore...
Intel have a bug that leads to a potential security breach in certain systems under certain circumstances. Yes that's really really bad for some systems including cloud computing farms. It is bad as it opens up other systems for security breaches. But it isn't the end of the world.
30% impact is for some kind of software and most software isn't impacted as much. Software doing heavy computation will have little performance impact.
Bullshit. The suggestion is frankly completely bonkers - there are no similarities at all!
What you are suggesting is that Intel willingly incorporated a security violating bug in order to gain some performance... How the hell would that work out?
No don't respond as it's obvious you don't know enough to answer.
As the AC correctly points out bugs are to be expected and are known to exist. Just read the amount of "will not fix" erratas published by Intel and realize that most erratas that will get fixed will be in later revisions (steppings) and not in currently available chips. The things that do get fixed in released systems are things microcode or feature control hardware can touch.
The Intel propaganda machine is working hard, just look at all sites that try to combine the two kind of exploits into one and imply that all processors not only Intel is vulnerable when in reality one type of exploit with less severity is general while the severe one is Intel specific.
But I have no doubt that Intel engineers are also working hard in order to patch the problems as quickly as possible and with as little performance impact as possible.
Not when taken internally. The reasons for alcohol abuse back in the days are easily explained by shitty lives getting easier to cope with and shitty food getting easier to consume.
There's a reason one should listen to scientists doing proper blind (preferably double-blind) studies over personal experience - at least mostly: The placebo effect is very strong.
So why the "mostly" part? Because people and how they work physically and mentally can have large differences making a general study non-applicable.
A good saying for idiots. Or conspiracy theorists.
A sane person analyse the situation and don't care about denials or confirmation _unless_ they come with enough information to be relevant for further analysis.
Why should we care? Why would your beliefs be of interest given that you write things like:
Coming from the government that was able to get a screen shot of what anyone in a public internet cafe was doing in real time 10 years ago....
1) it isn't coming from the government. China have allowed private companies for a long time now. This is from a private company. and 2) that would be impossible in general.
... While you can continue thinking this is the case I'll try to explain things so that others (which have a brain) can understand. You however is of course free to be a bigoted clueless idiot.
There are laws. Those laws include trademarks (at least due to international treaties ensuring that). Trademarks apply to a certain area of commerce. A registration is valid if 1) if passes local laws that limit some wording, reserved words that can cause confusion or is already in use 2) the word/phrase isn't already registered as a whole or as a part of an already existing trademark _in_that_area_of_commerce.
See the problem here? Because 1) the name isn't off-limits as a trademark 2) it isn't already registered as a trademark 3) it isn't already trademarked for selling clothing.
So why should a reasonable court go against their own laws only to make some Apple fanboys feel alright? Indeed the members of the court may all think this is a shitty move to try to link the name of a wholly unrelated person with shitty articles of cloth. It doesn't matter.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah no that wouldn't be used... Unlike some conspiracy theorists think people in general have empathy, in fact the lack of empathy is seen as a severe personality defect. It is also understood that stress response can have severe effects in an individual.
So if this was true most anesthesiologists would refuse to use it at least without other drugs. Most others would refuse to take part of the operation.
And as others point out the indications of the extreme stress would be visible during the operation - and the anesthesiologist _will_ monitor the patient for these indications. It's part of their job after all.
True. :)
That isn't abuse. If there are reason to believe criminal acts are happening and people refuse to co-operate with legal requests the material can and will be confiscated. It isn't punishment nor harassment - it's called an investigation.
It never cease to amaze me that people don't understand basics and instead push forward legal arguments that aren't generally even internally consistent.
Police: "We have reason to suspect you are violating rule X and according to law Y we request that you produce the material Z as you are required"
Unter: "Nope, we don't wanna - it wuld be harrussment"
Police: "Okay, have a good day"
And this is why one shouldn't argue on the Internet: there are a lot of anonymous idiots.
That of a random member of a huge organization always speak for and represent the organization as a whole?
Which is why Microsoft "forced" Intel to use AMD64 (renamed though) instead of their own emergency hack? There are other cases where MS forced Intel to behave.
With exception of some optimization why would there be two kernels for a group of binary compatible processors? AMD and Intel are binary compatible unless one goes into some dusty corners and some setup specific things.
Not sure about others but some are available for purchase.
"SiFive has declared that 2018 will be the year of RISC V Linux processors" - Linux Now Has its First Open Source RISC-V Processor, Slashdot.
To answer AC's question a few moths later: "What's the big advantage with RISC over ARM or x86?"
Meltdown, Spetre.
Meltdown? Nope. You can buy high performance x86 processors now that isn't affected, you could have bought high performance x86 processors in the past that weren't affected. So that's simply put bullshit, either you are lying or not knowing what you are talking about.
Spectre? Nope. Nothing about it is x86 or ARM specific and the only reason RISC V isn't affected is that it didn't use the performance enhancing features other high-end processors did. Now that's a good slogan right? "We are so slow that we missed a stray bullet".
70%?
What's with the obviously crazy people posting about this? Not only here but elsewhere including "articles" (read: crap) claiming the sky is falling and processors as we know them aren't possible anymore...
Intel have a bug that leads to a potential security breach in certain systems under certain circumstances. Yes that's really really bad for some systems including cloud computing farms. It is bad as it opens up other systems for security breaches. But it isn't the end of the world.
30% impact is for some kind of software and most software isn't impacted as much. Software doing heavy computation will have little performance impact.
Bullshit. The suggestion is frankly completely bonkers - there are no similarities at all!
What you are suggesting is that Intel willingly incorporated a security violating bug in order to gain some performance... How the hell would that work out?
No don't respond as it's obvious you don't know enough to answer.
As the AC correctly points out bugs are to be expected and are known to exist. Just read the amount of "will not fix" erratas published by Intel and realize that most erratas that will get fixed will be in later revisions (steppings) and not in currently available chips. The things that do get fixed in released systems are things microcode or feature control hardware can touch.
This isn't unique to Intel of course.
The Intel propaganda machine is working hard, just look at all sites that try to combine the two kind of exploits into one and imply that all processors not only Intel is vulnerable when in reality one type of exploit with less severity is general while the severe one is Intel specific.
But I have no doubt that Intel engineers are also working hard in order to patch the problems as quickly as possible and with as little performance impact as possible.
No as "spectre" makes the victim process access data and expose that to the attacker.
Not when taken internally. The reasons for alcohol abuse back in the days are easily explained by shitty lives getting easier to cope with and shitty food getting easier to consume.
There's a reason one should listen to scientists doing proper blind (preferably double-blind) studies over personal experience - at least mostly:
The placebo effect is very strong.
So why the "mostly" part? Because people and how they work physically and mentally can have large differences making a general study non-applicable.
Not in this case though.
They may but that doesn't mean they can afford it.
Really? My system doesn't show it running. Microsoft didn't make it easy though which is yet another count against using their products.
I hope you are trolling.
No. There are problems with the current system(s) but your solution would be worse.
A good saying for idiots. Or conspiracy theorists.
A sane person analyse the situation and don't care about denials or confirmation _unless_ they come with enough information to be relevant for further analysis.
I don't believe that denial for a millisecond.
Why should we care? Why would your beliefs be of interest given that you write things like:
Coming from the government that was able to get a screen shot of what anyone in a public internet cafe was doing in real time 10 years ago....
1) it isn't coming from the government. China have allowed private companies for a long time now. This is from a private company.
and
2) that would be impossible in general.
Spewing â-characters? Who's the idiot?
It's always easy to spot the one that never had higher education but plenty of prejudices.
Then stop talking and start contributing. But talk is cheap and finding interesting stuff isn't, right?
... While you can continue thinking this is the case I'll try to explain things so that others (which have a brain) can understand. You however is of course free to be a bigoted clueless idiot.
There are laws. Those laws include trademarks (at least due to international treaties ensuring that). Trademarks apply to a certain area of commerce. A registration is valid if 1) if passes local laws that limit some wording, reserved words that can cause confusion or is already in use 2) the word/phrase isn't already registered as a whole or as a part of an already existing trademark _in_that_area_of_commerce.
See the problem here? Because 1) the name isn't off-limits as a trademark 2) it isn't already registered as a trademark 3) it isn't already trademarked for selling clothing.
So why should a reasonable court go against their own laws only to make some Apple fanboys feel alright? Indeed the members of the court may all think this is a shitty move to try to link the name of a wholly unrelated person with shitty articles of cloth. It doesn't matter.
TL;DR stuff your idiot EU v.s. US shit.