So the NSA put in a magical untraceable backdoor that has never been found by the likes of Bruce Scheier or others in his field, but the NSA was also so stupid that they named the file "NSA_secret_evil_backdoor.dll" or something like that... yeah whatever.
Despite what you think, lots of people, including security researches, have access to the Windows source code too.
What you are saying is that: 1. Without source code, people find security holes in Windows all the time... you do agree with that statement right? 2. With source code, only the good guys find all the security bugs and fix them so fast that they never become an issue. Oh, and all existing Linux deployments, including the embedded Linux installs in your home router/cell phone/toaster/etc. get up to the minute security fixes applied too (yeah right, and I really don't care if you personally hack your devices with daily upstream kernel commits because there are millions upon millions of devices that aren't running that way). 3. Before you start accusing other people of spewing FUD, I never said that Windows is some paragon of security. You obviously see things in a very simplistic black and white world where Windows == All Bad and !Windows == All Good. Sorry sunshine, life is a lot more complex than that.
Last year or early this year there was a fix for a Linux kernel bug that could provide root privilege escalation. Here's the kicker though: The bug had been fixed years earlier but had been reintroduced into the kernel and nobody caught it for a very long time. For some reason, OpenSuse's kernel patches still included the bug fix, so OpenSuse couldn't be exploited, but mainline didn't reintroduce the fix for a long time.
Given the complexity of the kernel as just one example of a large open-source project, I don't really buy the "all bugs are shallow" argument from days of past. That argument was making a presumption that people *wanted* to fix the bugs, and as we all know there are large groups of people who don't want the bugs fixed. That's not to say that there is a magical NSA backdoor in Linux (and no, there isn't a magical NSA backdoor in Windows either, get over it conspiracy fanboys). That is to say that simply not running Windows isn't enough to give you real security and yes, your Linux box can be attacked by a skilled and determined adversary.
The second reason was adventure? So basically this guy was just like Bradley Manning who was self-avowedly in it for the thrill and the power trip.
This is basically the Icelandic Bradley Manning except 1. Nobody will die due to his leaks and 2. the exact same people who say there's some sort of duty to leak information from abusive and secretive organizations will vilify him for leaking information from an abusive and secretive organization (oh wait, Wikileaks is our new God-substitute and is above good and evil, sorry I forgot).
AMD Fanboy: This Post should be deleted because it doesn't agree with my pro-AMD RDF.
Can we please have another article about how Haswell is such a failure instead? Oh, and can you please not do any benchmarks between Haswell and any AMD products whatsoever except for a couple of IGP benchmarks that we will pretend represent the only types of systems gamers care about? K-thanks!
Did you bother to read that graph? Try looking at the bottom where it says "Wattage At the Wall"
You must be an enormous Intel fanboy to think that they have invented technology that allows every single component in the whole computer outside of the CPU to consume zero power in highly-overclocked systems....
That's like saying if Intel increases it's IGP performance by a factor of 10 then AMD will have to worry... of course it would, but the whole problem with that statement is the pesky word "if"
My 4770K is overclocked to 4.6GHz without that much tuning right now, and I guarantee it beats these new parts even in the perfectly multithreaded synthetic benchmarks that are best-case scenarios for AMD. It does that without being a space heater, and if the rumors about prices are true, the 4770K is an outright bargain to boot.
You sed: "The part I find interesting, is that if they can beat the haswell with this part then they probably have an IPC advantage over intel again. Remember the top end haswell turbo boosts to 4.9Ghz."
Please re-read everything you just said very very carefully. Especially the parts about how a design with a known IPC will magically get huge IPC boosts by only increasing the core clock and power draw (hint: it won't). Please also remember that Haswell only has a 4.9GHz boost speed for incredibly small values of "4" (it's 3.9GHz, not 4.9GHz).
The message is: You got the Megahertz myth wrong! The only myth is that Megahertz isn't important!
Oh, and all that performance-per-watt stuff? You might want to walk that back. Oh and, pull those Youtube videos where you accuse Nvidia users of being fake-pot farmers because their cards pull so much power. Sure it was funny at the time, but we'd rather not have to live that one down now.
Yeah! After waiting 4 months after Bulldozer launched to get that $189 price, and now waiting another 8 months after Piledriver launched to get the current $180 price, you got almost-as-good-at-Intel-in-a-couple-of-synthetic-benchmarks performance for the low low price of $369 in 2013!!!!
Those blubbering morons who bought the 2600K in 2011 for $350 are stuck with outdated crap that will finally be eclipsed when steamroller launches next year*! What a ripoff!
* Assuming that they spent extra for the K-series part and never bothered to overclock it for some strange reason that is...
P.S. --> the score in question from my previous post was for Cinebench 11.5, but there are many many others like it. And don't think that OpenCL holds any miracles for Trinity either, the 4600 is actually a better OpenCL part than it is a GPU.
Richland's GPU is at best about 20% faster than the intentionally-midrange HD-4600 GPU in Haswell. Add in any form of desktop GPU, including midrange models from 2011, and Haswell wins by a landslide.
At CPU, I recall seeing delightfully hilarious graph where a 6800K overclocked to 5GHz had exactly half the score of the (stock clocked) 4770K. Before we get to the usual "But AMD is cheap!" argument, when you take into account the $150 price of the 6800K and the $350 price of the 4770K, AMD only wins on price/performance if you intentionally buy the most expensive Haswell model available and intentionally don't overclock it while also overclocking the crap out of the 6800K.
Kaveri could be a very interesting product. Richland is a placeholder meant to fight Haswell with numeric model number inflation.
On my supposedly "archaic" x86 desktop, I download any Linux distro I feel like using and can use the exact same installer to setup a 5 year old desktop or next month's Haswell.
On my "futuristic" smartphone I have to wade through outdated information on sketchy forums to find the exact set of model-specific voodoo in order to unlock the device. Oh.. and I'm aware that not every ARM device comes locked, I was in the first-wave of Raspberry Pi purchasers. But guess what? Even with my Raspberry Pi I have to hunt down images that are tailor made just to booth with the Pi and stepping off the Raspberry Pi software reservation gets real ugly real fast.
Why is the thought of an unlocked x86 tablet that could host the exact same Linux distro that I feel comfortable with on various other computers be considered some type of evil? Why is the idea of having the ability to install a stock Android with no garbage without having to sift throught 2,000 forum posts dedicated to a specific flavor of smartphone for a specific vendor considered "anti-freedom"?
Of the two predictions I listed above (and believe me, climate researchers have made both predictions), I can guarantee that both can't be correct despite how much you claim I hate science. I think even you can say that both predictions can't be correct.
So if you agree that both predictions can't be correct, doesn't that mean that you are rejecting the work of the scientific community? Oh, but SOME of the predictions MIGHT come true one day you say! So the entire scientific community is correct! Yeah, so what, I can predict the winner of the next 10 Superbowls with 100% accuracy using that technique.
Here's a hint: Science is rooted in facts, experiments, and observations. Politicians who want to exert ever more control over peoples' lives are rooted in painting a thin veneer of "fact" over their policies to justify their power grabs as "being for your own good." Any "scientist" who crosses the line has left the realm of science and entered politics. Considering that most climate scientists get a paycheck from the politicians who want a certain outcome to be true, there is an inherent
If Rush Limbaugh is saying that you should judge a what man really believes by his actions and not his empty rhetoric, then he's right.
I thought that being a good scientist meant looking at facts objectively instead of fitting the facts to your predisposed feelings. I guess that must be the "old white guy" science that has fortunately been superseded by collective groupthink.
Yeah, that whole "make a hypothesis" and "experiment to identify data to disprove the hypothesis" schtick is obviously a right-wing propaganda tool made up by young-earth creationist Oil executives!
We need a more "balanced approach*" where all science is correct as long as it starts with the "correct" conclusion that Global Warming is the fault of Evil Republicans and works backwards to the inevitably correct conclusion that all industry should be shipped to China in the name of "fairness" because only Republican CO2 emissions hurt the environment.
* Balanced Approach is an officially approved Obama buzzword.
Do those 97% of papers all predict the same effects of the man-made global warming? And are those predicted effects of man-made global warming actually observed in real data that occurred *after* the predictions were made?
Once again, we go back to the standard process of: Weather event X occurs. (where, for example, X is a cool and wet spring that just happened in the midwest). X is either: 1. PREDICTED BY GLOBAL WARMING MODELS!*
* Which model? There are so many to choose from and "global warming" can mean everything from "it will never snow in Europe again! We will have malaria and jungle diseases covering Norway!" to "Europe will be covered in glaciers because the Atlantic currents will fail!" OR: 2. SO WHAT IF IT WASN'T PREDICTED! THAT'S JUST LOCAL WEATHER NOT THE CLIMATE!*
* But don't worry, if it gets hot this summer or if there's a mild winter somewhere, that will be proof of global warming and not "just the weather". You see, it's a one-way street where global warming is always right.
1. As I told another poster, Network Forwarding != Network Transparency. You know how modern X servers operate over a network? By pushing a bunch of bitmaps in a less-efficient manner than RDP. I really don't care if some dusty design document from 1985 says otherwise, you're irrational wishes don't create a new reality. Unless you are a real fossil, I was probably doing X forwarding before you even new what Linux was, and I know much much more about its limitations than you do. 2. If you're calling me a liar, you're also calling the main developers of the X server and Wayland liars because they agree with me and not with you.
If arrogance, ignorance, and disrespect for people who do hard work could be trasmuted into display server code, you would control the market!
THAT IS USELESS! You didn't show forwarded Xterms using the exact same perfect protocol that was cool in 1985! Your system is obviously bloated and inefficient compared to X11 and a complete waste of time!!/sarcasm
Much more seriously, thank you very much for your hard work and for pushing forward with implementing this technology in an open & cross-platform way. The video is fantastic!
The very fact that FreeNX exists is absolute proof that X has fundamental issues and you have admitted that those issues exist and that another layer of complexity needs to be added around X is a direct admission that X isn't cutting it!
You also lied in your original post when you said you forward over X and therefore X is transparent.
1. No you don't forward over X, you use a much more convoluted FreeNX setup.
2. Forwarding != Transparency. If you think it does, then FreeRDP is also network transparent! Modern X is basically a less-efficient screen-scraping version of RDP, and everything that FreeNX does makes X more like RDP in a kludgy manner!
3. Please stop insulting X developers who have put a whole lot more time and effort into developing these systems than you have ever done. If you were more respectful you'd actually watch the video in TFA and come up with an intelligent response instead just repeating over & over that "I GOT AN XTERM TO FORWARD EVERYONE ELSE IS STUPID!"
Being disingenuous and hiding the truth.. which is exactly what you did in your original post when you said "X" and really meant the kludge-fest that is "FreeNX" is also a form of censorship, so try being more honest and less sanctimonious, self-righteous, and obscene in the future, mkay?
You're misinterpreting... I was agreeing with you about X fanboys who always cry about "network transparency" when X hasn't been network transparent for years & years. Any modern X server is just shooting bitmaps over a network link in a less efficient manner than RDP.
Slashdot Mirror
So the NSA put in a magical untraceable backdoor that has never been found by the likes of Bruce Scheier or others in his field, but the NSA was also so stupid that they named the file "NSA_secret_evil_backdoor.dll" or something like that... yeah whatever.
Despite what you think, lots of people, including security researches, have access to the Windows source code too.
What you are saying is that:
1. Without source code, people find security holes in Windows all the time... you do agree with that statement right?
2. With source code, only the good guys find all the security bugs and fix them so fast that they never become an issue. Oh, and all existing Linux deployments, including the embedded Linux installs in your home router/cell phone/toaster/etc. get up to the minute security fixes applied too (yeah right, and I really don't care if you personally hack your devices with daily upstream kernel commits because there are millions upon millions of devices that aren't running that way).
3. Before you start accusing other people of spewing FUD, I never said that Windows is some paragon of security. You obviously see things in a very simplistic black and white world where Windows == All Bad and !Windows == All Good. Sorry sunshine, life is a lot more complex than that.
Last year or early this year there was a fix for a Linux kernel bug that could provide root privilege escalation. Here's the kicker though: The bug had been fixed years earlier but had been reintroduced into the kernel and nobody caught it for a very long time. For some reason, OpenSuse's kernel patches still included the bug fix, so OpenSuse couldn't be exploited, but mainline didn't reintroduce the fix for a long time.
Given the complexity of the kernel as just one example of a large open-source project, I don't really buy the "all bugs are shallow" argument from days of past. That argument was making a presumption that people *wanted* to fix the bugs, and as we all know there are large groups of people who don't want the bugs fixed. That's not to say that there is a magical NSA backdoor in Linux (and no, there isn't a magical NSA backdoor in Windows either, get over it conspiracy fanboys). That is to say that simply not running Windows isn't enough to give you real security and yes, your Linux box can be attacked by a skilled and determined adversary.
The second reason was adventure? So basically this guy was just like Bradley Manning who was self-avowedly in it for the thrill and the power trip.
This is basically the Icelandic Bradley Manning except 1. Nobody will die due to his leaks and 2. the exact same people who say there's some sort of duty to leak information from abusive and secretive organizations will vilify him for leaking information from an abusive and secretive organization (oh wait, Wikileaks is our new God-substitute and is above good and evil, sorry I forgot).
AMD Fanboy: This Post should be deleted because it doesn't agree with my pro-AMD RDF.
Can we please have another article about how Haswell is such a failure instead? Oh, and can you please not do any benchmarks between Haswell and any AMD products whatsoever except for a couple of IGP benchmarks that we will pretend represent the only types of systems gamers care about? K-thanks!
Did you bother to read that graph? Try looking at the bottom where it says "Wattage At the Wall"
You must be an enormous Intel fanboy to think that they have invented technology that allows every single component in the whole computer outside of the CPU to consume zero power in highly-overclocked systems....
That's like saying if Intel increases it's IGP performance by a factor of 10 then AMD will have to worry... of course it would, but the whole problem with that statement is the pesky word "if"
My 4770K is overclocked to 4.6GHz without that much tuning right now, and I guarantee it beats these new parts even in the perfectly multithreaded synthetic benchmarks that are best-case scenarios for AMD. It does that without being a space heater, and if the rumors about prices are true, the 4770K is an outright bargain to boot.
You sed: "The part I find interesting, is that if they can beat the haswell with this part then they probably have an IPC advantage over intel again. Remember the top end haswell turbo boosts to 4.9Ghz."
Please re-read everything you just said very very carefully. Especially the parts about how a design with a known IPC will magically get huge IPC boosts by only increasing the core clock and power draw (hint: it won't). Please also remember that Haswell only has a 4.9GHz boost speed for incredibly small values of "4" (it's 3.9GHz, not 4.9GHz).
The message is: You got the Megahertz myth wrong! The only myth is that Megahertz isn't important!
Oh, and all that performance-per-watt stuff? You might want to walk that back. Oh and, pull those Youtube videos where you accuse Nvidia users of being fake-pot farmers because their cards pull so much power. Sure it was funny at the time, but we'd rather not have to live that one down now.
Yeah! After waiting 4 months after Bulldozer launched to get that $189 price, and now waiting another 8 months after Piledriver launched to get the current $180 price, you got almost-as-good-at-Intel-in-a-couple-of-synthetic-benchmarks performance for the low low price of $369 in 2013!!!!
Those blubbering morons who bought the 2600K in 2011 for $350 are stuck with outdated crap that will finally be eclipsed when steamroller launches next year*! What a ripoff!
* Assuming that they spent extra for the K-series part and never bothered to overclock it for some strange reason that is...
P.S. --> the score in question from my previous post was for Cinebench 11.5, but there are many many others like it. And don't think that OpenCL holds any miracles for Trinity either, the 4600 is actually a better OpenCL part than it is a GPU.
AMD's marketing department wrote that summary!
Richland's GPU is at best about 20% faster than the intentionally-midrange HD-4600 GPU in Haswell. Add in any form of desktop GPU, including midrange models from 2011, and Haswell wins by a landslide.
At CPU, I recall seeing delightfully hilarious graph where a 6800K overclocked to 5GHz had exactly half the score of the (stock clocked) 4770K. Before we get to the usual "But AMD is cheap!" argument, when you take into account the $150 price of the 6800K and the $350 price of the 4770K, AMD only wins on price/performance if you intentionally buy the most expensive Haswell model available and intentionally don't overclock it while also overclocking the crap out of the 6800K.
Kaveri could be a very interesting product. Richland is a placeholder meant to fight Haswell with numeric model number inflation.
"Its not a new weapon, they have been operational for around over 40 years."
Why do soldiers need to fire rifles? They aren't new weapons, they have been operational for decades.
On my supposedly "archaic" x86 desktop, I download any Linux distro I feel like using and can use the exact same installer to setup a 5 year old desktop or next month's Haswell.
On my "futuristic" smartphone I have to wade through outdated information on sketchy forums to find the exact set of model-specific voodoo in order to unlock the device. Oh.. and I'm aware that not every ARM device comes locked, I was in the first-wave of Raspberry Pi purchasers. But guess what? Even with my Raspberry Pi I have to hunt down images that are tailor made just to booth with the Pi and stepping off the Raspberry Pi software reservation gets real ugly real fast.
Why is the thought of an unlocked x86 tablet that could host the exact same Linux distro that I feel comfortable with on various other computers be considered some type of evil? Why is the idea of having the ability to install a stock Android with no garbage without having to sift throught 2,000 forum posts dedicated to a specific flavor of smartphone for a specific vendor considered "anti-freedom"?
Oh really?
Of the two predictions I listed above (and believe me, climate researchers have made both predictions), I can guarantee that both can't be correct despite how much you claim I hate science. I think even you can say that both predictions can't be correct.
So if you agree that both predictions can't be correct, doesn't that mean that you are rejecting the work of the scientific community? Oh, but SOME of the predictions MIGHT come true one day you say! So the entire scientific community is correct! Yeah, so what, I can predict the winner of the next 10 Superbowls with 100% accuracy using that technique.
Here's a hint: Science is rooted in facts, experiments, and observations. Politicians who want to exert ever more control over peoples' lives are rooted in painting a thin veneer of "fact" over their policies to justify their power grabs as "being for your own good." Any "scientist" who crosses the line has left the realm of science and entered politics. Considering that most climate scientists get a paycheck from the politicians who want a certain outcome to be true, there is an inherent
If Rush Limbaugh is saying that you should judge a what man really believes by his actions and not his empty rhetoric, then he's right.
I thought that being a good scientist meant looking at facts objectively instead of fitting the facts to your predisposed feelings. I guess that must be the "old white guy" science that has fortunately been superseded by collective groupthink.
Yeah, that whole "make a hypothesis" and "experiment to identify data to disprove the hypothesis" schtick is obviously a right-wing propaganda tool made up by young-earth creationist Oil executives!
We need a more "balanced approach*" where all science is correct as long as it starts with the "correct" conclusion that Global Warming is the fault of Evil Republicans and works backwards to the inevitably correct conclusion that all industry should be shipped to China in the name of "fairness" because only Republican CO2 emissions hurt the environment.
* Balanced Approach is an officially approved Obama buzzword.
How dare you spread blasphemies that could hurt the profit potential of businesses that have been blessed with investments from his Holiness ALGORE!
Do those 97% of papers all predict the same effects of the man-made global warming?
And are those predicted effects of man-made global warming actually observed in real data that occurred *after* the predictions were made?
Once again, we go back to the standard process of: Weather event X occurs. (where, for example, X is a cool and wet spring that just happened in the midwest).
X is either:
1. PREDICTED BY GLOBAL WARMING MODELS!*
* Which model? There are so many to choose from and "global warming" can mean everything from "it will never snow in Europe again! We will have malaria and jungle diseases covering Norway!" to "Europe will be covered in glaciers because the Atlantic currents will fail!"
OR:
2. SO WHAT IF IT WASN'T PREDICTED! THAT'S JUST LOCAL WEATHER NOT THE CLIMATE!*
* But don't worry, if it gets hot this summer or if there's a mild winter somewhere, that will be proof of global warming and not "just the weather". You see, it's a one-way street where global warming is always right.
DO NOT TAUNT GOOGLE GLASS!
Spoken like someone who has obviously never been involved in getting a patent in any capacity in his entire life....
1. As I told another poster, Network Forwarding != Network Transparency. You know how modern X servers operate over a network? By pushing a bunch of bitmaps in a less-efficient manner than RDP. I really don't care if some dusty design document from 1985 says otherwise, you're irrational wishes don't create a new reality. Unless you are a real fossil, I was probably doing X forwarding before you even new what Linux was, and I know much much more about its limitations than you do.
2. If you're calling me a liar, you're also calling the main developers of the X server and Wayland liars because they agree with me and not with you.
If arrogance, ignorance, and disrespect for people who do hard work could be trasmuted into display server code, you would control the market!
THAT IS USELESS! You didn't show forwarded Xterms using the exact same perfect protocol that was cool in 1985! Your system is obviously bloated and inefficient compared to X11 and a complete waste of time!! /sarcasm
Much more seriously, thank you very much for your hard work and for pushing forward with implementing this technology in an open & cross-platform way. The video is fantastic!
The very fact that FreeNX exists is absolute proof that X has fundamental issues and you have admitted that those issues exist and that another layer of complexity needs to be added around X is a direct admission that X isn't cutting it!
You also lied in your original post when you said you forward over X and therefore X is transparent.
1. No you don't forward over X, you use a much more convoluted FreeNX setup.
2. Forwarding != Transparency. If you think it does, then FreeRDP is also network transparent! Modern X is basically a less-efficient screen-scraping version of RDP, and everything that FreeNX does makes X more like RDP in a kludgy manner!
3. Please stop insulting X developers who have put a whole lot more time and effort into developing these systems than you have ever done. If you were more respectful you'd actually watch the video in TFA and come up with an intelligent response instead just repeating over & over that "I GOT AN XTERM TO FORWARD EVERYONE ELSE IS STUPID!"
Being disingenuous and hiding the truth.. which is exactly what you did in your original post when you said "X" and really meant the kludge-fest that is "FreeNX" is also a form of censorship, so try being more honest and less sanctimonious, self-righteous, and obscene in the future, mkay?
You're misinterpreting... I was agreeing with you about X fanboys who always cry about "network transparency" when X hasn't been network transparent for years & years. Any modern X server is just shooting bitmaps over a network link in a less efficient manner than RDP.