I need 5 to 10kwh of installed panel this year. I buy 100w panels due to shipping costs. they are 125$
I assume you mean 5 to 10 kW of panels. Or do you mean about 1/5 that to make 5 to 10 kWh per day, or about 5 times that to average 5 to 10 kW 24/7? (That's figuring 5 solar hours as a rule-of-thumb for a good site in the mid-latitude continental US.)
That's very expensive. Panels (new, UL approved, in 10-panel pallets) were going for $0.33 per watt last year. Maybe they weren't 100W panels, but shipping a pallet anywhere in the continental US is not all that pricey.
Even with these tariffs added, at 5 to 10 kW of panels (or 25 - 50, or 1 - 2) you should be able to do lots better than $1.50/watt.
That's more than an order of magnitude higher than the NREs we were paying for the ASICs (including sea-of-RISC network processors) the last time I was doing ASICs - abouit 5 years back.
Has it gotten that expensive? I sincerely doubt it. But even if it has:
You can do your prototyping at fabs that combine the prototypes from several customers into one combo wafer, split the NREs among them, and do a small run - then repeat a couple months later, ad-infinitim. If kyour design works you've already got your mask design placed and routed, and it's just a matter of making another set where you step-and-repeat for a whole wafer. (Meanwhile you can do small volumes and proofs-of-concept with the few dozen you got from the prototype run - or even get a few more made from the old masks and just get your piece.)
One online article notes 16nm Finfet fab entry cost at $80M, 66 mask steps.
You don't need to build a sawmill before you can build a house, an apartment complex, or a line of cabinetry. You don't need to build a steel mill to build cars. Why should building your own fab be a prerequisite for building a line of semiconductors?
Many big-name semiconductor companies have been "fabless", and many more have started that way. Design the chip, commission the masks, rent the fab services, split the swag.
Let the fabrication specialists raise the captial for building and operating the manufacturing plant, tracking the technology to smaller feature sizes and higher yields. Meanwhile, they let you take the design and marketing risk - along with all their other customers, at least some of them succeeding well enough to keep them in work and profit.
Get to tapeout. Then celebrate and take a break before packaged first silicon arrives, to be soldered to the test boards and turned into product.
Wife (a west-coaster) says: No, it didn't look to her like a ca condor, which mostly (except around "The Pinnacles" national monument) don't actually inhabit California. Probably a turkey vulture, judging by the size.
It has bigger implications than that. Just how intelligent animals really are?
Some decades ago some friends and I were driving through the forest just north of "The Geysers" in northern California.
The road was a two-lane cut through tall trees. A buzzard (probably a california condor) flew out of the trees at about eight feet above the ground and dropped a squirrel on the road about 12 feet in front of our car.
The squirrel bounced, landed, rolled onto its feet, and ran pell-mell into the woods, getting off the road before our car reached him.
The Buzzard then followed our car for several miles on the low-speed road, buzzing us and sometimes trying to get into it through the open windows (air conditioner was out on a hot day), which we quickly closed. Eventually it gave up or was left behind.
We think the buzzard had figured out that, not only did cars often hit small animals, producing tasty road kill, but that if you dropped on in front of a car you could create tasty road kill.
We refer to this bird as "the mathematician" - because he was obtaining a squirrel dinner from a live squirrel by reducing it to a previously solved problem.
You just left out most of the costs of fossil fuels!
Why worry about that?
When the DIRECT cost passes the crossovers, renewables first take up the new loads, then displace fossil fuels for old ones.
So you don't NEED government hacks to map the indirect costs into the market (and provide massive opportunities for graft and rent-seeking). The UN-hidden costs are enough to drive the market.
... by 2020 "all the renewable power generation technologies that are now in commercial use are expected to fall within the fossil fuel-fired cost range." [and will continue to drop below them]... "Turning to renewables for new power generation is not simply an environmentally conscious decision, it is now -- overwhelmingly -- a smart economic one."
THIS is how The Invisible Hand eliminates greenhouse gas emissions. B-)
Cost of renewable energy collection drops as tech advances.
* Solar photovoltaic, in particular, benefits from semiconductor tech.
* Control and conversion IS semiconductor tech, with all the Moore's Law benefits.
* Storage rides the battery advances driven by things like laptops and electric cars. Cost of grid generation may benefit some from tech, but it's mostly mature and advances slower.
Meanwhile, cost of fossil fuels continues to climb as the easy stuff gets used up - while renewables (if you already occupy a good site) pretty much don't HAVE ongoing fuel costs.
As the cost passes crossover in progressively more locations, renewables will first take up new loads, then (as the second crossover is passed similarly and it becomes cheaper to switch than not), displace existing fossil fuel generation.
Just how many tabs are people keeping open at a time...
I just checked: 725
that this is considered a good feature?
I do NOT consider it a good feature.
Things I WOULD consider good features:
* Grouping tabs into multiple toolbrs by user-defined subject
- With each separately switchable between visible and invisible
- Stock, not an add-on / plug-in / whatever they're supporting this week.
* Restoring the "delay image loading" configuration setting (for slow lines or expensive bandwidth)
- And make the dropdown menu item to load a particular load-delayed image work correctly, rather than forcing me to "view image" to see what SHOULD be in the frame.
There are (at least) two attacks based on speculative execution - and disclosed at the same time.
Meltdown is Intel-specific. Spectre runs just FINE on AMD - and some high-end ARM cores, too.
(It's beside the point in this case, though. Speculative loading and rendering/re-rendering/activating animations of a page when the mouse hovers over the tab will leak the same information regardless of whether the browser is running on Intel, AMD, ARM, or whatever.)
You need a mechanical physical switch with a switch guard.
No, you DON'T!
If you had such a switch, pushing it would have to be part of the test. Otherwise you've created a single point of failure that causes the live function to fail even though the test psses - and you don't find out until the missiles are inbound.
Yes, they should have done things like word and position the menu items differently, so hitting the wrong one by accident was less likely, and have glaringly different text and graphics (by selection, with the function still identical) for the confirm popups. But the further the test and live functions diverge, the more opportunity you have to build a system that passes the tests but doesn't work when you need it.
Conelrad (cold-war predecessor to the Emergency Broadcast System) had a similar failure: The test and inbound-nukes kickoff keys were paper tapes on adjacent pegs, and one day the low-ranking communications guy put the wrong one in the teletype tape reader on weekly test day, telling the whole country to duck and cover. Nothing new here.
(The teletypes had a bell and the newswires had a number-of-bings code for how urgent a message would be. I think major stories rated about a three. Max was ten, which was reserved for nuclear war warning activations. I recall one time in '65 or '66 when the AP wire tape got stuck on the bell code and that thing rang something over 30 times before they got it unstuck... Fun times.)
What kind of thought train does from 'hang on there're some big faultlines here and we all know big ones are due' to 'sure here's a million bucks let me put all my stuff on top of this faultline'
So where can you build that DOESN'T have SOME recurrent set of disasters AND lets you make enough money to live well on?
East and south coasts have hurricanes (and much more often). Northern tier has blizzards. Sourthern states are lousy with tornadoes (and virtually any flat region south of mid-Michigan has some of them). Crippling / killing blizzards across the upper tier. Floods. Forest fires. Then there's a bunch of nasty diseases that are primarily local and break out intermittently. I could go on for pages.
Earthqakes can be bad. But big ones are rare - far rarer (even right on the major fault lines) than floods and tornadoes are in other parts of the country - and you can build structures that survive them just fine.
Even a 7ish like the famous Loma Prieta quake was, in the S.F. Peninsula, about like "15 seconds of mild turbulence" on a passenger airliner. That's nothing compared to, say, what a manufactured home goes through on its way from the factory to the site. Sure some old stuff in a couple spots failed - and the media zeroed in on them and made it look like several counties were flattened and burning. But they're really not as big a deal as their reputation suggests.
Actually, California is due Real Soon Now (in human, not geologic, time) for a really big one on the Hayward fault (parallel to, and just across the bay from, the more famous, and more recently active, San Andreas).
I was looking at where it runs recently. It runs right under hospital row in Fremont - literally through the parking lot that separates my doctor's office building (and a surgery center) from the BART tracks. Right up the main driveway into the Kaiser medical complex.
Back in German class in the early '70s, my instructor made this claim for "telephone":
In every other language in the world, it was called "telephone" - inheriting the sound from the American English word for the American invention and and (if necessary) distorting the pronunciation slightly to use the closest phonemes.
But German, with its standard of buildAWordByRunningTogetherADescriptivePhrase, called it a "fernsprecher" (far-speaker).
I woke up the morning after the fires in Northern California not noticing I had no cell service, not receiving any SMS about the situation, no being able to receive email to alert me.
You're welcome. B-)
Note that (probably a bit before that, when the cells were still up) the officials, regarding the Santa Rosa fire, decided to NOT activate the warning systems, fearing that "panic"ed citizens would clog the roads.
One advantage of not depending on the official channels, by additionally having access to multiple private-industry radio outlets, is that you have more chances for the information to make it past some decision maker's filter and reach your ears.
AM might be even more useful, given its typical programming. But FM has the advantage of being trivial to include in a cellphone's radio chip (so it was in the common chips). Add a couple traces to the board and a couple surface-mount components costing single-digit-pennies, to couple the earphone wire (and/or charger cable) to the chip's FM antenna input, and you make an FM radio reception function available to the phone's software, almost for free.
Once we've all been automated out of work...who's going to buy the burgers?
Reminds me of this oft-quoted aphorism, about a UAW official being shown some early auto-plant automation:
Henry Ford II: Walter, how are you going to get those robots to pay your union dues? Walter Reuther: Henry, how are you going to get them to buy your cars?
(Apparently it wasn't really Henry Ford II. But Ruther confirmed the exchange occurred, with a high Ford official and words roughly equivalent.)
The utility can retain ownership of the poles, but the municipality can grant an easement to whomever it wants and it doesn't cost the municipality anything.
Sure does cost the municipality something (if the utility chooses to enforce its rights).
Granting an easement to someone else's property is a "taking" under the Fifth Amendment. Without the easement the utility could charge whatever it pleased for the use of a zone on its poles, refuse to grant it if they thought that was in their interest, insist the attachments occur at a convenient time and manner for them, hire their guys to do the hookup, etc.. With the easement they must let the tenant use that section of the poles at the tenant's convenience, for free or for a government-defined price. This reduces the value of the property, so the government granting the easement must pay the difference.
It's less than just taking over the poles, but it's still not free. (Just for starters it will amount to a substantial fraction of what it cost the utility to put in all those poles.)
See "partial taking" and "regulatory taking". There's a LOT of law there and a simple web search will show you far more than you'll want to read right now. B-)
Maybe somebody can correct me, but they need to get rid of the speculative execution pipeline all together.
Or break the side-channel information leak of which cache lines were filled by the speculative execution (which is how the attacker finds out the value of the bits or bytes it shouldn't know).
Or separate the branch predictions per-context (which is how the attacker gets the speculative execution to look at the desired bits or bytes).
I like that last one. IMHO the behavior (especially the target address) of a branch in one context shouldn't be "hinting" about the behavior of a branch in another context. Yes, it might be a useful hint if the branch is in a commonly used shared library, being used the same way by many clients. But when it's in different code in different execution contexts for different users?
Considering it requires malware to be run on the system, there are better ways to spy out user's passwords (without dumping some 32GB of RAM). So, why bother?
The attacker's malware doesn't have to dump all the physical RAM. It CAN do so, if he feels like it. But it can also read it selectively, RAM style, a bit or byte at a time. So he can just go right to whatever he wants to see.
Given that the side-channel bandwidth is about that of fiber-to-the-curb DSL, rather than a memory bus, that is actually the preferred way for such malware to operate.
Dunno what you teach your drivers over there, but there's generally regarded to be one lane, and multiple "overtaking lanes" in all the terminology for most of the countries I have seen driving-school things for.
When you have two lanes in the same direction, that terminology, and acting on it, makes sense. When you have, for instance, six lanes in the same direction, it does not. The extra lanes are about increasing capacity, and are intended to be used for long-distance driving rather than just passing slower traffic.
That's the sort of highways we have over here. (Especially in high-population states like California, for instance - I commute on such a 12-lane stretch every day.)
The laws have been adjusted according to this purpose. For instance: Passing on the right is expressly legal in California. On the other hand, excessive lane changes (as you'd have to make to use the "passing" paradigm) are added hazards when the lanes are being used for travel rather than merely passing, and are treated as the infraction called "weaving". Three lane changes (1 1/2 "passes") within one minute is one of the criteria police have used for issuing such citations.
Those were actually Democrats. Learn your history.
While you may be historically accurate, you omit the fact that the Democrats and Republicans have essentially switched ideologies since the Lyndon Johnson administration, if not earlier.
Wrong - at least on civil rights.
But the Democrats have a lock on the media and academia. So (while they used the mechanisms of the Great Society to destroy the black family structure and reduce the bulk of the black population to a government-dependent, jobless, ghetto-dwelling, reliable voting block) they taught that the parties had swapped ideologies - and that the Republicans' attempts to enable people to rise from poverty were self-serving exploitation.
Don't believe it? Look at their voting record on anything REAL relating to freedom and equality before the law, even today.
It's similar to what happened in Italy in WW II. Mussolini didn't REALLY make the trains run on time. He made the newspapers SAY he made the trains run on time.
If left-wingers can justify punching out people they disagree with then they can just as easily justify beating the crap out of Pai.
FTFY
(Note that the issue of whether right-wingers can justify punching out people they disagree with doesn't arise in this case. So don't bother following up to discuss whether I'm suggesting that right-wingers are less likely to escalate from discussion to beating the tar out of people or just that they mostly aren't disagreeing with Pai.)
Slashdot Mirror
I need 5 to 10kwh of installed panel this year. I buy 100w panels due to shipping costs. they are 125$
I assume you mean 5 to 10 kW of panels. Or do you mean about 1/5 that to make 5 to 10 kWh per day, or about 5 times that to average 5 to 10 kW 24/7? (That's figuring 5 solar hours as a rule-of-thumb for a good site in the mid-latitude continental US.)
That's very expensive. Panels (new, UL approved, in 10-panel pallets) were going for $0.33 per watt last year. Maybe they weren't 100W panels, but shipping a pallet anywhere in the continental US is not all that pricey.
Even with these tariffs added, at 5 to 10 kW of panels (or 25 - 50, or 1 - 2) you should be able to do lots better than $1.50/watt.
That's more than an order of magnitude higher than the NREs we were paying for the ASICs (including sea-of-RISC network processors) the last time I was doing ASICs - abouit 5 years back.
Has it gotten that expensive? I sincerely doubt it. But even if it has:
You can do your prototyping at fabs that combine the prototypes from several customers into one combo wafer, split the NREs among them, and do a small run - then repeat a couple months later, ad-infinitim. If kyour design works you've already got your mask design placed and routed, and it's just a matter of making another set where you step-and-repeat for a whole wafer. (Meanwhile you can do small volumes and proofs-of-concept with the few dozen you got from the prototype run - or even get a few more made from the old masks and just get your piece.)
One online article notes 16nm Finfet fab entry cost at $80M, 66 mask steps.
You don't need to build a sawmill before you can build a house, an apartment complex, or a line of cabinetry. You don't need to build a steel mill to build cars. Why should building your own fab be a prerequisite for building a line of semiconductors?
Many big-name semiconductor companies have been "fabless", and many more have started that way. Design the chip, commission the masks, rent the fab services, split the swag.
Let the fabrication specialists raise the captial for building and operating the manufacturing plant, tracking the technology to smaller feature sizes and higher yields. Meanwhile, they let you take the design and marketing risk - along with all their other customers, at least some of them succeeding well enough to keep them in work and profit.
Get to tapeout. Then celebrate and take a break before packaged first silicon arrives, to be soldered to the test boards and turned into product.
A buzzard (probably a california condor) ...
Wife (a west-coaster) says: No, it didn't look to her like a ca condor, which mostly (except around "The Pinnacles" national monument) don't actually inhabit California. Probably a turkey vulture, judging by the size.
It has bigger implications than that. Just how intelligent animals really are?
Some decades ago some friends and I were driving through the forest just north of "The Geysers" in northern California.
The road was a two-lane cut through tall trees. A buzzard (probably a california condor) flew out of the trees at about eight feet above the ground and dropped a squirrel on the road about 12 feet in front of our car.
The squirrel bounced, landed, rolled onto its feet, and ran pell-mell into the woods, getting off the road before our car reached him.
The Buzzard then followed our car for several miles on the low-speed road, buzzing us and sometimes trying to get into it through the open windows (air conditioner was out on a hot day), which we quickly closed. Eventually it gave up or was left behind.
We think the buzzard had figured out that, not only did cars often hit small animals, producing tasty road kill, but that if you dropped on in front of a car you could create tasty road kill.
We refer to this bird as "the mathematician" - because he was obtaining a squirrel dinner from a live squirrel by reducing it to a previously solved problem.
You just left out most of the costs of fossil fuels!
Why worry about that?
When the DIRECT cost passes the crossovers, renewables first take up the new loads, then displace fossil fuels for old ones.
So you don't NEED government hacks to map the indirect costs into the market (and provide massive opportunities for graft and rent-seeking). The UN-hidden costs are enough to drive the market.
... by 2020 "all the renewable power generation technologies that are now in commercial use are expected to fall within the fossil fuel-fired cost range." [and will continue to drop below them] ... "Turning to renewables for new power generation is not simply an environmentally conscious decision, it is now -- overwhelmingly -- a smart economic one."
THIS is how The Invisible Hand eliminates greenhouse gas emissions. B-)
Cost of renewable energy collection drops as tech advances.
* Solar photovoltaic, in particular, benefits from semiconductor tech.
* Control and conversion IS semiconductor tech, with all the Moore's Law benefits.
* Storage rides the battery advances driven by things like laptops and electric cars.
Cost of grid generation may benefit some from tech, but it's mostly mature and advances slower.
Meanwhile, cost of fossil fuels continues to climb as the easy stuff gets used up - while renewables (if you already occupy a good site) pretty much don't HAVE ongoing fuel costs.
As the cost passes crossover in progressively more locations, renewables will first take up new loads, then (as the second crossover is passed similarly and it becomes cheaper to switch than not), displace existing fossil fuel generation.
Just how many tabs are people keeping open at a time ...
I just checked: 725
that this is considered a good feature?
I do NOT consider it a good feature.
Things I WOULD consider good features:
* Grouping tabs into multiple toolbrs by user-defined subject
- With each separately switchable between visible and invisible
- Stock, not an add-on / plug-in / whatever they're supporting this week.
* Restoring the "delay image loading" configuration setting (for slow lines or expensive bandwidth)
- And make the dropdown menu item to load a particular load-delayed image work correctly, rather than forcing me to "view image" to see what SHOULD be in the frame.
I only use AMD, so nothing's going wrong here.
There are (at least) two attacks based on speculative execution - and disclosed at the same time.
Meltdown is Intel-specific. Spectre runs just FINE on AMD - and some high-end ARM cores, too.
(It's beside the point in this case, though. Speculative loading and rendering/re-rendering/activating animations of a page when the mouse hovers over the tab will leak the same information regardless of whether the browser is running on Intel, AMD, ARM, or whatever.)
You need a mechanical physical switch with a switch guard.
No, you DON'T!
If you had such a switch, pushing it would have to be part of the test. Otherwise you've created a single point of failure that causes the live function to fail even though the test psses - and you don't find out until the missiles are inbound.
Yes, they should have done things like word and position the menu items differently, so hitting the wrong one by accident was less likely, and have glaringly different text and graphics (by selection, with the function still identical) for the confirm popups. But the further the test and live functions diverge, the more opportunity you have to build a system that passes the tests but doesn't work when you need it.
Conelrad (cold-war predecessor to the Emergency Broadcast System) had a similar failure: The test and inbound-nukes kickoff keys were paper tapes on adjacent pegs, and one day the low-ranking communications guy put the wrong one in the teletype tape reader on weekly test day, telling the whole country to duck and cover. Nothing new here.
(The teletypes had a bell and the newswires had a number-of-bings code for how urgent a message would be. I think major stories rated about a three. Max was ten, which was reserved for nuclear war warning activations. I recall one time in '65 or '66 when the AP wire tape got stuck on the bell code and that thing rang something over 30 times before they got it unstuck... Fun times.)
What kind of thought train does from 'hang on there're some big faultlines here and we all know big ones are due' to 'sure here's a million bucks let me put all my stuff on top of this faultline'
So where can you build that DOESN'T have SOME recurrent set of disasters AND lets you make enough money to live well on?
East and south coasts have hurricanes (and much more often). Northern tier has blizzards. Sourthern states are lousy with tornadoes (and virtually any flat region south of mid-Michigan has some of them). Crippling / killing blizzards across the upper tier. Floods. Forest fires. Then there's a bunch of nasty diseases that are primarily local and break out intermittently. I could go on for pages.
Earthqakes can be bad. But big ones are rare - far rarer (even right on the major fault lines) than floods and tornadoes are in other parts of the country - and you can build structures that survive them just fine.
Even a 7ish like the famous Loma Prieta quake was, in the S.F. Peninsula, about like "15 seconds of mild turbulence" on a passenger airliner. That's nothing compared to, say, what a manufactured home goes through on its way from the factory to the site. Sure some old stuff in a couple spots failed - and the media zeroed in on them and made it look like several counties were flattened and burning. But they're really not as big a deal as their reputation suggests.
Actually, California is due Real Soon Now (in human, not geologic, time) for a really big one on the Hayward fault (parallel to, and just across the bay from, the more famous, and more recently active, San Andreas).
I was looking at where it runs recently. It runs right under hospital row in Fremont - literally through the parking lot that separates my doctor's office building (and a surgery center) from the BART tracks. Right up the main driveway into the Kaiser medical complex.
Back in German class in the early '70s, my instructor made this claim for "telephone":
In every other language in the world, it was called "telephone" - inheriting the sound from the American English word for the American invention and and (if necessary) distorting the pronunciation slightly to use the closest phonemes.
But German, with its standard of buildAWordByRunningTogetherADescriptivePhrase, called it a "fernsprecher" (far-speaker).
... do not carry phone when performing criminal acts.
Or when NOT performing criminal acts - when somebody ELSE performs a criminal act that confused police might try to pin on you.
Gosh: That's all the time, isn't it?
I woke up the morning after the fires in Northern California not noticing I had no cell service, not receiving any SMS about the situation, no being able to receive email to alert me.
You're welcome. B-)
Note that (probably a bit before that, when the cells were still up) the officials, regarding the Santa Rosa fire, decided to NOT activate the warning systems, fearing that "panic"ed citizens would clog the roads.
One advantage of not depending on the official channels, by additionally having access to multiple private-industry radio outlets, is that you have more chances for the information to make it past some decision maker's filter and reach your ears.
AM might be even more useful, given its typical programming. But FM has the advantage of being trivial to include in a cellphone's radio chip (so it was in the common chips). Add a couple traces to the board and a couple surface-mount components costing single-digit-pennies, to couple the earphone wire (and/or charger cable) to the chip's FM antenna input, and you make an FM radio reception function available to the phone's software, almost for free.
WTF do I need FM for?
Disaster situations where the cellphone service is down and/or saturated.
You know what else makes sense? Replacing fast food with home-cooked meals.
Try that in a rented single room with no cooking facilities.
Once we've all been automated out of work...who's going to buy the burgers?
Reminds me of this oft-quoted aphorism, about a UAW official being shown some early auto-plant automation:
(Apparently it wasn't really Henry Ford II. But Ruther confirmed the exchange occurred, with a high Ford official and words roughly equivalent.)
The utility can retain ownership of the poles, but the municipality can grant an easement to whomever it wants and it doesn't cost the municipality anything.
Sure does cost the municipality something (if the utility chooses to enforce its rights).
Granting an easement to someone else's property is a "taking" under the Fifth Amendment. Without the easement the utility could charge whatever it pleased for the use of a zone on its poles, refuse to grant it if they thought that was in their interest, insist the attachments occur at a convenient time and manner for them, hire their guys to do the hookup, etc.. With the easement they must let the tenant use that section of the poles at the tenant's convenience, for free or for a government-defined price. This reduces the value of the property, so the government granting the easement must pay the difference.
It's less than just taking over the poles, but it's still not free. (Just for starters it will amount to a substantial fraction of what it cost the utility to put in all those poles.)
See "partial taking" and "regulatory taking". There's a LOT of law there and a simple web search will show you far more than you'll want to read right now. B-)
Maybe somebody can correct me, but they need to get rid of the speculative execution pipeline all together.
Or break the side-channel information leak of which cache lines were filled by the speculative execution (which is how the attacker finds out the value of the bits or bytes it shouldn't know).
Or separate the branch predictions per-context (which is how the attacker gets the speculative execution to look at the desired bits or bytes).
I like that last one. IMHO the behavior (especially the target address) of a branch in one context shouldn't be "hinting" about the behavior of a branch in another context. Yes, it might be a useful hint if the branch is in a commonly used shared library, being used the same way by many clients. But when it's in different code in different execution contexts for different users?
Considering it requires malware to be run on the system, there are better ways to spy out user's passwords (without dumping some 32GB of RAM). So, why bother?
The attacker's malware doesn't have to dump all the physical RAM. It CAN do so, if he feels like it. But it can also read it selectively, RAM style, a bit or byte at a time. So he can just go right to whatever he wants to see.
Given that the side-channel bandwidth is about that of fiber-to-the-curb DSL, rather than a memory bus, that is actually the preferred way for such malware to operate.
It doesn't use an Intel cpu
True for "Meltdown", which only breaks Intel CPUs. But "Spectre" also breaks some AMD and ARM processors.
Fortunately, the particular ARM cores in the Raspbery Pi are also NOT doing the thing that lets Spectre break them.
Dunno what you teach your drivers over there, but there's generally regarded to be one lane, and multiple "overtaking lanes" in all the terminology for most of the countries I have seen driving-school things for.
When you have two lanes in the same direction, that terminology, and acting on it, makes sense. When you have, for instance, six lanes in the same direction, it does not. The extra lanes are about increasing capacity, and are intended to be used for long-distance driving rather than just passing slower traffic.
That's the sort of highways we have over here. (Especially in high-population states like California, for instance - I commute on such a 12-lane stretch every day.)
The laws have been adjusted according to this purpose. For instance: Passing on the right is expressly legal in California. On the other hand, excessive lane changes (as you'd have to make to use the "passing" paradigm) are added hazards when the lanes are being used for travel rather than merely passing, and are treated as the infraction called "weaving". Three lane changes (1 1/2 "passes") within one minute is one of the criteria police have used for issuing such citations.
Wrong - at least on civil rights.
But the Democrats have a lock on the media and academia. So (while they used the mechanisms of the Great Society to destroy the black family structure and reduce the bulk of the black population to a government-dependent, jobless, ghetto-dwelling, reliable voting block) they taught that the parties had swapped ideologies - and that the Republicans' attempts to enable people to rise from poverty were self-serving exploitation.
Don't believe it? Look at their voting record on anything REAL relating to freedom and equality before the law, even today.
It's similar to what happened in Italy in WW II. Mussolini didn't REALLY make the trains run on time. He made the newspapers SAY he made the trains run on time.
If left-wingers can justify punching out people they disagree with then they can just as easily justify beating the crap out of Pai.
FTFY
(Note that the issue of whether right-wingers can justify punching out people they disagree with doesn't arise in this case. So don't bother following up to discuss whether I'm suggesting that right-wingers are less likely to escalate from discussion to beating the tar out of people or just that they mostly aren't disagreeing with Pai.)