Make no mistake, Mr. fake van Doorn is going to get caught. People that steal real money like this without connections and money behind them are doomed to get caught and go to jail. The SEC started the initial paperwork to start going after these ICO scammers and they don't' screw around, they ruin your life, send you to jail and then let the IRS have their way with you.
In the end you've got nothing but a sore ass for thinking you can outwit the people with unlimited resources to find you and the money is always traceable unless you are rich enough and connected enough to bounce it off a dozen banks in unregulated jurisdictions to launder it.
To condense your comment. NOx is generated any time you have a high pressure, high temperature environment in air. It actually doesn't have anything to do with the fuel being burned as it's a natural reaction at those conditions between the nitrogen and oxygen in the air. But diesel engines by their very nature need higher pressures and higher temperatures to ignite the diesel. This means any air passing through the engine is going to generate NOx at much higher rates than gasoline.
You can scrub NOx in a catalytic converter which is how the problem is solved in gas engines but diesel particulate emissions destroy catalytic converters. Big trucks get around this by using Urea which contains the NOx emissions by converting it. VW claimed to have solved the Urea problem on small diesels but in fact hadn't solved the problem, just found a way to cheat on the emissions. The result being the only way to get an effective diesel with low emissions will be to outfit the cars with urea tanks just like big rigs. This is a non-starter for residential drivers and VW has decided that rather than trying to switch to gasoline they will just jump straight to electric. It's the only real move they could have made after the diesel cheating was revealed.
I believe that just like search a determined competitor could quickly take market share, but they would need to make their tools and systems as good as googles and none of their competitors do.
For whatever reason few of Google's competitors don't actually try to make their products as good as Google's, for example as easy to use and quick and easy to place advertising. Google makes the process extremely easy and almost fully automated, and I've yet to see a competitor that takes this aspect seriously. Their tools are clunky, their systems are often slow and unresponsive and frequently require human intervention. Google's competitors just don't take the need for simple easy technology seriously.
Do I think they abuse their advertising monopoly? Yes, but I do believe that just like search if someone really wanted to compete and was willing to invest the resources they could take market share. For example, why has facebook not moved out into advertising off their own systems successfully? Because they try to tie everything in to facebook, they make people use their systems and technology and it's never as easy as googles to implement with a simple link. The same thing prevents microsoft from succeeding, they are always trying to cross sell and make their tools suck to do it.
Facebook could take a significant chunk of general advertising on the internet within a month if they let their advertising unit act as an independent entity that isn't forced to dog food everything off their own systems and cross link and sell everything.
It's called politicizing law and order, not much different than the president demanding Justice to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton to act as a distraction about Russia and little Trump Jr. being brain dead stupid. This is the kind of shit that happens in banana republics and places like Russia and China.
No have no doubt the whole investigation is politically based as I doubt the state of Missouri has any serious privacy protections and this whole thing is to distract from Trumps own problems and to try to punish Google for their political activism. Only problem is that when you politicize law enforcement it ends up going the other way too and law and order goes out the windows and police start being used for political retaliation. For example the NY attorney general then launches a massive investigation of Trump Corp and when Trump loses in 2020 a special prosecutor gets appointed to investigate everything he's ever done (him and his kids would probably end up in jail for life with all the shady bullshit they've done) and the big blue state AG's (NY and Cali) open investigations of all the major GOP doners. Is that where we want to go, every politician gets a special prosecutor after leaving office and any company that advocates for anything gets law enforcement thrown against them?
It's not right to politicize law enforcement, it's a dangerous and IMO illegal use of law enforcement assets and ANYONE that does it should be arrested and charged with abuse of authority. Trump and this Missouri AG are on a very dangerous path here and there should be severe repercussions for doing what they are doing. The fact that they are both so fucking short-sided to see where this slope leads once they aren't in power should stop them but if it doesn't the rest of us should. No one on either side of the aisle should be defending this perversion of the justice system. The president should not have the authority to order an investigation of anything/anyone by the justice department.
Of course, because UAW wants to unionize Tesla therefore all complaints about anything should be automatically discarded and no investigation of any kind should be undertaken.
They already retrained everyone, 10 years ago. They've been using Linux continuously for close to a decade. At this point going back to microsoft will probably cost MORE in training.
Not just pro-Microsoft but actively trying to move the city to their products since his election even though polls of hte city residents indicate they would prefer the city remain using linux.
Not only do we know what ports it could use, it could easily piggyback it's communications on a known port while it's being used. It's code may include anti-circumvention code that in the case it can't communicate with it's home base that it starts trying all available ports including port 80. It's ability to edit packets at transmission.
The ME has DMA access to memory and disks and can open a network socket the main computer won't even be aware of. Any protection scheme on the computer can easily be subverted by the ME because it has ring 0 access to everything in the CPU such as, the kernel, the RAM, the disks and the network port. All communication to the CPU goes through the ME first. So when your computer decrypts that drive the ME can intercept and record the decryption key, it's also fully capable of decrypting the disk itself.
Now do you realize why people are so scared of it?
It's not disabled, it's "neutralized". In other words they believe they've cut it's access but they can't be certain. You can't disable it completely as severing it's connection to the main CPU kills the CPU.
Google is a major computer purchaser, rather than trying to disable the ME they should use their market power to force intel to sell CPU's without the ME. It should be trivial for Intel to spin up die without the ME integrated or fully disabled. Hell they should have the knowledge on how to disable the one currentley on the die if they don't want to do another tape-out.
It's ridiculous when we get to a place where a major purchaser can't strong arm the CPU maker into removing an anti-feature they don't want. Google has the market power here to force Intel.
3) Intel doesn't need to recall anything. It is OFF by default.
This is not true. It cannot be turned off. Access can be disabled, but the ME itself is powered if the computer is plugged in (the computer doesn't even need to be turned on).
What is off by default is the ability to access and use the ME without paying Intel. Just because you the owner can't access the ME doesn't mean it's turned off or not doing things in the background, in fact it's been shown to do quite a bit even when it's "off" in the bios. And whether access is actually cut is another open question as no one can actually verify that or that it doesn't have a bug or backdoor.
People who smoke Pot don't chain smoke, most doen't even smoke a full joint a day even in active users. They'll take a couple puffs and put it out almost immediately. And as we've seen in areas where it's been made legal, a significant amount of pot consumption is done with edibles precisely so people don't have to smoke it.
All the majors have huge air exchange systems that suck any smoke straight up. I can't remember the last time I could smell more than a hint of cigarette inside one of the major casinos? Watch someone smoke at a table sometime, you can sit and watch the smoke go straight upward.
Don't listen to any legal advice provided on Slashdot, including my own.
It is perfectly legal to deny hiring in the case of smoking even in California. Smoking isn't an activity that only occurs outside work hours. You ever met a smoker that smokes ONLY outside work hours and identifies as a smoker? Neither have I.
The problem with smoking is two fold. They take far more breaks than their coworkers and they are far more likely to have health issues. I disagree with excluding a potential hires because they smoke but I fully support higher health costs (which means the smoker will lie about smoking) and an understanding that any time spent smoking outside legally required breaks will be made up at a time convenient to the business.
I actually think the idea of providing additional vacation time to no smokers is a great idea, of course the smokers will simply lie again.
So incredibly wrong but not at all surprising, after all we're in the era of alternative facts.
Smokers cost the system somewhere around 25% more than non-smokers over their lifetime. They are far more likely to have expensive cancer and other medical care costs. Treating lung cancer can cost more than $1 million down to $50,000 or so depending on type and number of treatments needed. And you have several orders of magnitude more probability to get lung cancer than those who don't smoke.
But not even including lung cancer risks, smokers have higher blood pressure, more heart disease, lung and kidney problems and on and on. Smoking does nothing but increase health care costs often massively.
The Jump from $2 to $15 priced in all the growth you're talking about. In fact it priced in more growth assumptions. If AMD doesn't hit all the targets that got priced in (look to the consensus earning estimates made last quarter that covers the next year) the price is going to fall.
EPYC is still on full allocation to cloud providers and OEMs only. It's impossible to buy on the individual market. This makes it apparent that it's popular but how popular we won't know until AMD tells us how many they sold, it could be simply that their production runs have not been large enough to tackle demand and that's a scary though considering we a more than a full quarter away from when production started. I'm not encouraged by the fact that Supermicro hasn't bothered finalizing their single core motherboard designs. I'm willing to bet they are having production issues and they haven't sold anywhere near what everyone thought they would. For example if the 0.08cent per share earnings that was the consensus for 4Q (I'm going off memory here not verifying, my intent is the scale not the exact figure) ends up being half that you'll see the price fall to $7.
Personally I believe AMD is missing a critical envelope here in the individual server market where I think they would do relatively decent on the linux server market. They trying to ensure Cloud computing and OEM's get first pick. I understand why they did this, they wanted the companies that will absolutely love their high core counts and expanded PCIe bus to get first shot and it helps the cloud providers are happy to buy thousands of these at a time and can fully utilize them right out of the door because their clouds run Linux (ie they won't be waiting on Microsoft to update the windows kernel). But if Google, Facebook and Rackspace get all the production for the next 6 months there never will be an individual market for these chips where they could build some lasting execution. The cloud companies are happy to jump around and buy from anyone who can provide the most compute per dollar per watt. You don't get long term purchases in that market, where in the individual market you'll build brand awareness and are far more likely to get return purchases. The PCIe advantage in particular I believe could draw off a significant number of Intel sales in the individual server market and benefit AMD for years to come.
In the end all that's going to matter is can AMD remain competitive with Intel and avoid missteps while continuing to execute. They've had bad management IMO the last couple decades, pursuing fads with no long term vision and significantly overpaying their executives. Only by cleaning out the MBA's and stocking management with engineering experience and a desire to compete do they stand a chance here. They need to start executing and planning to remain competitive with Intel. Ultimately this will decide if Bankruptcy eventually takes them as that $2 stock price portended but Ryzen barely avoided.
Not on CDMA, that was not an industry standard it was a wholly developed by Qualacomm. You can't build a cellphone that's functional without including CMDA technologies that aren't under a FRAND license agreement. This is the primary vehicle Qualacomm has been using to control the cellular radio market. Wanting it to be different doesn't change the reality that Qualacomm has deep patents in cellular technologies, many of which they pioneered. The cellphone likely wouldn't even exist without their developments.
FRAND is an intra-industry agreement, not a law and it doesn't apply to CDMA. CDMA was developed solely by Qualacomm, it's not an industry standard. Some of it's componets may be under FRAND as part of the LTE industry standard but to fully comply with CDMA you likely have to negotiate with Qualacomm to use the patents and pay whatever they want to charge for the ones that aren't part of LTE or GSM.
Based on the last IPhone that shipped with both Qualacom and Intel Radios randomly and the complaints this elicited with those that received inferior Intel radio's I'm not sure I'd agree. Qualacomm produces the best radio's in the market, this is a fact. A lot of this was tied to their market position, their sales volume allowed them to continually innovate on the radio, but anyone choosing to use something other than qualacomm for the radio is going to pick an inferior product.
But there is something else to consider and that is the massive patent portfolio Qualacomm has, they developed or were key to the development of most of the radio standards, they solely invented CDMA and overall they probably contributed more than 60% of the innovation in LTE. This doesn't include all the other things they've patented over the years developing chips and radios. I dare say it's impossible to build a cellphone without paying qualacomm and they are entitled to charge whatever price they want for those patents including providing discounts if you use their chips.
All DRM can be cracked and will be cracked. They sell the idea of DRM to game company executives by saying that they've got this uncrackable encryption, they just don't tell them that they have to give the user the private key or paying customers can't play the game, they just "hide the private key really good". And that's the thing, as soon as the cracking teams figure out where you hid the key it's game over. And once they know the pattern it's ever easier to find it in future releases.
Slashdot Mirror
Eh, when the inevitable hacking starts and then the lawsuits start Intel as a company may cease to exist in it's current form.
You want a helicopter that flies only in circles?
Make no mistake, Mr. fake van Doorn is going to get caught. People that steal real money like this without connections and money behind them are doomed to get caught and go to jail. The SEC started the initial paperwork to start going after these ICO scammers and they don't' screw around, they ruin your life, send you to jail and then let the IRS have their way with you.
In the end you've got nothing but a sore ass for thinking you can outwit the people with unlimited resources to find you and the money is always traceable unless you are rich enough and connected enough to bounce it off a dozen banks in unregulated jurisdictions to launder it.
To condense your comment. NOx is generated any time you have a high pressure, high temperature environment in air. It actually doesn't have anything to do with the fuel being burned as it's a natural reaction at those conditions between the nitrogen and oxygen in the air. But diesel engines by their very nature need higher pressures and higher temperatures to ignite the diesel. This means any air passing through the engine is going to generate NOx at much higher rates than gasoline.
You can scrub NOx in a catalytic converter which is how the problem is solved in gas engines but diesel particulate emissions destroy catalytic converters. Big trucks get around this by using Urea which contains the NOx emissions by converting it. VW claimed to have solved the Urea problem on small diesels but in fact hadn't solved the problem, just found a way to cheat on the emissions. The result being the only way to get an effective diesel with low emissions will be to outfit the cars with urea tanks just like big rigs. This is a non-starter for residential drivers and VW has decided that rather than trying to switch to gasoline they will just jump straight to electric. It's the only real move they could have made after the diesel cheating was revealed.
I believe that just like search a determined competitor could quickly take market share, but they would need to make their tools and systems as good as googles and none of their competitors do.
For whatever reason few of Google's competitors don't actually try to make their products as good as Google's, for example as easy to use and quick and easy to place advertising. Google makes the process extremely easy and almost fully automated, and I've yet to see a competitor that takes this aspect seriously. Their tools are clunky, their systems are often slow and unresponsive and frequently require human intervention. Google's competitors just don't take the need for simple easy technology seriously.
Do I think they abuse their advertising monopoly? Yes, but I do believe that just like search if someone really wanted to compete and was willing to invest the resources they could take market share. For example, why has facebook not moved out into advertising off their own systems successfully? Because they try to tie everything in to facebook, they make people use their systems and technology and it's never as easy as googles to implement with a simple link. The same thing prevents microsoft from succeeding, they are always trying to cross sell and make their tools suck to do it.
Facebook could take a significant chunk of general advertising on the internet within a month if they let their advertising unit act as an independent entity that isn't forced to dog food everything off their own systems and cross link and sell everything.
It's called politicizing law and order, not much different than the president demanding Justice to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton to act as a distraction about Russia and little Trump Jr. being brain dead stupid. This is the kind of shit that happens in banana republics and places like Russia and China.
No have no doubt the whole investigation is politically based as I doubt the state of Missouri has any serious privacy protections and this whole thing is to distract from Trumps own problems and to try to punish Google for their political activism. Only problem is that when you politicize law enforcement it ends up going the other way too and law and order goes out the windows and police start being used for political retaliation. For example the NY attorney general then launches a massive investigation of Trump Corp and when Trump loses in 2020 a special prosecutor gets appointed to investigate everything he's ever done (him and his kids would probably end up in jail for life with all the shady bullshit they've done) and the big blue state AG's (NY and Cali) open investigations of all the major GOP doners. Is that where we want to go, every politician gets a special prosecutor after leaving office and any company that advocates for anything gets law enforcement thrown against them?
It's not right to politicize law enforcement, it's a dangerous and IMO illegal use of law enforcement assets and ANYONE that does it should be arrested and charged with abuse of authority. Trump and this Missouri AG are on a very dangerous path here and there should be severe repercussions for doing what they are doing. The fact that they are both so fucking short-sided to see where this slope leads once they aren't in power should stop them but if it doesn't the rest of us should. No one on either side of the aisle should be defending this perversion of the justice system. The president should not have the authority to order an investigation of anything/anyone by the justice department.
Of course, because UAW wants to unionize Tesla therefore all complaints about anything should be automatically discarded and no investigation of any kind should be undertaken.
That makes perfect sense. /sarcasm.
They already retrained everyone, 10 years ago. They've been using Linux continuously for close to a decade. At this point going back to microsoft will probably cost MORE in training.
Not just pro-Microsoft but actively trying to move the city to their products since his election even though polls of hte city residents indicate they would prefer the city remain using linux.
Not only do we know what ports it could use, it could easily piggyback it's communications on a known port while it's being used. It's code may include anti-circumvention code that in the case it can't communicate with it's home base that it starts trying all available ports including port 80. It's ability to edit packets at transmission.
The ME has DMA access to memory and disks and can open a network socket the main computer won't even be aware of. Any protection scheme on the computer can easily be subverted by the ME because it has ring 0 access to everything in the CPU such as, the kernel, the RAM, the disks and the network port. All communication to the CPU goes through the ME first. So when your computer decrypts that drive the ME can intercept and record the decryption key, it's also fully capable of decrypting the disk itself.
Now do you realize why people are so scared of it?
It's not disabled, it's "neutralized". In other words they believe they've cut it's access but they can't be certain. You can't disable it completely as severing it's connection to the main CPU kills the CPU.
Google is a major computer purchaser, rather than trying to disable the ME they should use their market power to force intel to sell CPU's without the ME. It should be trivial for Intel to spin up die without the ME integrated or fully disabled. Hell they should have the knowledge on how to disable the one currentley on the die if they don't want to do another tape-out.
It's ridiculous when we get to a place where a major purchaser can't strong arm the CPU maker into removing an anti-feature they don't want. Google has the market power here to force Intel.
This is not true. It cannot be turned off. Access can be disabled, but the ME itself is powered if the computer is plugged in (the computer doesn't even need to be turned on).
What is off by default is the ability to access and use the ME without paying Intel. Just because you the owner can't access the ME doesn't mean it's turned off or not doing things in the background, in fact it's been shown to do quite a bit even when it's "off" in the bios. And whether access is actually cut is another open question as no one can actually verify that or that it doesn't have a bug or backdoor.
Cockatoo's don't dig holes, if they have a problem with wildlife eating the cables they should have buried them, then the spiders would protect them.
People who smoke Pot don't chain smoke, most doen't even smoke a full joint a day even in active users. They'll take a couple puffs and put it out almost immediately. And as we've seen in areas where it's been made legal, a significant amount of pot consumption is done with edibles precisely so people don't have to smoke it.
What awful low end casino did you walk into?
All the majors have huge air exchange systems that suck any smoke straight up. I can't remember the last time I could smell more than a hint of cigarette inside one of the major casinos? Watch someone smoke at a table sometime, you can sit and watch the smoke go straight upward.
Don't listen to any legal advice provided on Slashdot, including my own.
It is perfectly legal to deny hiring in the case of smoking even in California. Smoking isn't an activity that only occurs outside work hours. You ever met a smoker that smokes ONLY outside work hours and identifies as a smoker? Neither have I.
The problem with smoking is two fold. They take far more breaks than their coworkers and they are far more likely to have health issues. I disagree with excluding a potential hires because they smoke but I fully support higher health costs (which means the smoker will lie about smoking) and an understanding that any time spent smoking outside legally required breaks will be made up at a time convenient to the business.
I actually think the idea of providing additional vacation time to no smokers is a great idea, of course the smokers will simply lie again.
So incredibly wrong but not at all surprising, after all we're in the era of alternative facts.
Smokers cost the system somewhere around 25% more than non-smokers over their lifetime. They are far more likely to have expensive cancer and other medical care costs. Treating lung cancer can cost more than $1 million down to $50,000 or so depending on type and number of treatments needed. And you have several orders of magnitude more probability to get lung cancer than those who don't smoke.
But not even including lung cancer risks, smokers have higher blood pressure, more heart disease, lung and kidney problems and on and on. Smoking does nothing but increase health care costs often massively.
The Jump from $2 to $15 priced in all the growth you're talking about. In fact it priced in more growth assumptions. If AMD doesn't hit all the targets that got priced in (look to the consensus earning estimates made last quarter that covers the next year) the price is going to fall.
EPYC is still on full allocation to cloud providers and OEMs only. It's impossible to buy on the individual market. This makes it apparent that it's popular but how popular we won't know until AMD tells us how many they sold, it could be simply that their production runs have not been large enough to tackle demand and that's a scary though considering we a more than a full quarter away from when production started. I'm not encouraged by the fact that Supermicro hasn't bothered finalizing their single core motherboard designs. I'm willing to bet they are having production issues and they haven't sold anywhere near what everyone thought they would. For example if the 0.08cent per share earnings that was the consensus for 4Q (I'm going off memory here not verifying, my intent is the scale not the exact figure) ends up being half that you'll see the price fall to $7.
Personally I believe AMD is missing a critical envelope here in the individual server market where I think they would do relatively decent on the linux server market. They trying to ensure Cloud computing and OEM's get first pick. I understand why they did this, they wanted the companies that will absolutely love their high core counts and expanded PCIe bus to get first shot and it helps the cloud providers are happy to buy thousands of these at a time and can fully utilize them right out of the door because their clouds run Linux (ie they won't be waiting on Microsoft to update the windows kernel). But if Google, Facebook and Rackspace get all the production for the next 6 months there never will be an individual market for these chips where they could build some lasting execution. The cloud companies are happy to jump around and buy from anyone who can provide the most compute per dollar per watt. You don't get long term purchases in that market, where in the individual market you'll build brand awareness and are far more likely to get return purchases. The PCIe advantage in particular I believe could draw off a significant number of Intel sales in the individual server market and benefit AMD for years to come.
In the end all that's going to matter is can AMD remain competitive with Intel and avoid missteps while continuing to execute. They've had bad management IMO the last couple decades, pursuing fads with no long term vision and significantly overpaying their executives. Only by cleaning out the MBA's and stocking management with engineering experience and a desire to compete do they stand a chance here. They need to start executing and planning to remain competitive with Intel. Ultimately this will decide if Bankruptcy eventually takes them as that $2 stock price portended but Ryzen barely avoided.
Not on CDMA, that was not an industry standard it was a wholly developed by Qualacomm. You can't build a cellphone that's functional without including CMDA technologies that aren't under a FRAND license agreement. This is the primary vehicle Qualacomm has been using to control the cellular radio market. Wanting it to be different doesn't change the reality that Qualacomm has deep patents in cellular technologies, many of which they pioneered. The cellphone likely wouldn't even exist without their developments.
FRAND is an intra-industry agreement, not a law and it doesn't apply to CDMA. CDMA was developed solely by Qualacomm, it's not an industry standard. Some of it's componets may be under FRAND as part of the LTE industry standard but to fully comply with CDMA you likely have to negotiate with Qualacomm to use the patents and pay whatever they want to charge for the ones that aren't part of LTE or GSM.
Based on the last IPhone that shipped with both Qualacom and Intel Radios randomly and the complaints this elicited with those that received inferior Intel radio's I'm not sure I'd agree. Qualacomm produces the best radio's in the market, this is a fact. A lot of this was tied to their market position, their sales volume allowed them to continually innovate on the radio, but anyone choosing to use something other than qualacomm for the radio is going to pick an inferior product.
But there is something else to consider and that is the massive patent portfolio Qualacomm has, they developed or were key to the development of most of the radio standards, they solely invented CDMA and overall they probably contributed more than 60% of the innovation in LTE. This doesn't include all the other things they've patented over the years developing chips and radios. I dare say it's impossible to build a cellphone without paying qualacomm and they are entitled to charge whatever price they want for those patents including providing discounts if you use their chips.
All DRM can be cracked and will be cracked. They sell the idea of DRM to game company executives by saying that they've got this uncrackable encryption, they just don't tell them that they have to give the user the private key or paying customers can't play the game, they just "hide the private key really good". And that's the thing, as soon as the cracking teams figure out where you hid the key it's game over. And once they know the pattern it's ever easier to find it in future releases.
All DRM is broken by design.
Why would you use anything but the Free Windows Defender? Stop browsing porn and you won't be exposed to viruses.
Including all your financial information when it's been shown the FSB has deep links and connections to the Russian Maffia?