US intel is not "stupid" except when talking to Congress, which is.
This is the same 'US intel' which missed the collapse of the USSR, 9/11, the Boston Bombers, and were totally sure Saddam Hussein had WMDs, right, not another 'US intel' that's actually competent?
As for original comment, intercepting calls is vastly easier when they go to a central server and they have direct access to the decrypted data than when they go peer to peer with encryption.
I'm guessing that, if the US government is doing this, other governments will say 'open season'. They can hardly complain when the Chinese start breaking into computers all over the world and installing malware.
But, as I said, Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD's high-end was competitive with Intel's high-end.
Intel has no competition for their high-end desktop CPUs. So why don't they push prices up much higher? It's not because you can turn around and buy a similar performance CPU from AMD.
I imagine the next-gen consoles being all AMD has something to do with that.
Aren't the new consoles the first time in decades that a console is much less powerful than a typical gaming PC at release? The original Xbox, for example, was a PC with a decent CPU for that era and a faster GPU than you could buy for a PC, and only really limited in RAM.
AMD has clearly lost the performance war. But I'm still hoping the brand sticks around because I believe it's the only thing keeping Intel CPU prices low.
Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD was competitive with them.
ARM are Intel's real competitor at the moment, not AMD.
That four months is four months of lost revenue for AMD. Back when I worked in the chip business we typically had about six months after release where we could charge a premium for the new chips before the competition released something better. Unless they slipped too, every day we slipped was a day of premium, high-margin sales lost.
Yeah, we'd probably still be selling those chips two years later, but they'd then be at bargain basement prices with tiny margins.
Seems the airline industry was started by governments investing in warplanes during a couple of world wars.
If I remember correctly, the sale of cheap military transports after WWII killed off several aircraft manufacturers who'd otherwise have been producing civilian transports.
The most expensive way to put people on Mars is to have states fund it, because then it becomes a pork-barrel project that will take decades and cost hundreds of billions of dollars.
The cheap way to put people on Mars is for a few billionaire tourists to pay for it out of their own pocket. That way you get something adequately safe, at a reasonable price, with no frills.
Of course it doesn't help that there's no good reason to go to Mars other than tourism. Pretty much any resources you want are available on the Moon or asteroids, and on Mars you're just dropping yourself into a signiificant gravity well for no good reason.
Right, because having users manage their own risk profile has worked out so well in the PC/Windows world...
Indeed. Letting someone else control your computer is much safer.
Android's big problem is that you have no way of saying 'no, I'm not giving this app that permission', and can only choose to install or not install the Fluffy Kitty Screen Saver that wants access to your filesystem, the Internet, and the ability to send SMS messages.
Yeah, it makes perfect sense to announce your retirement just after a major re-organization, when your successor is only going to reorganize everything again after you leave.
Then again, I guess it does make about as much sense as Windows 8.
Autonomous cars will allow tailgating and higher speeds, with much less risk, raising the effective traffic load to 3 cars per second, which is a 50% increase in throughput, without adding more lanes, going to double-decker limos for everyone, etc.
No, they won't, outside of Ideal Driverless Car Utopia.
What happens when the car at the front slams on its brakes, and your car can't stop as fast because the pads are worn and the owner hasn't bothered to keep up with regular maintenance?
Oops. You crash. Then many of the cars behind crash too.
20 million iPads means 500,000 fewer Mac sales and 19.5 million fewer sales of other computers.
Uh, no, it doesn't.
Everyone I know who owns a tablet has it in addition to other computers, and wouldn't have bought another computer if they hadn't bought a tablet.
Windows 8 is killing PC sales, not iPads.
Re: What's good for others apparently is no good f
on
Break Microsoft Up
·
· Score: 2
Unify them by making them totally separate functional modes. Interesting strategy, that's for sure.
Yes. Microsoft even screwed that up.
Metro apps should have been able to run in Windows on the desktop. Instead they split the OS into two glaringly incompatible modes, and forced users to keep switching between them.
Their problem was that no-one was going to buy a Microsoft tablet without apps, and no-one was going to write apps for a tablet with no market share. So they had to push that Metro crap onto desktop users to try to get people to write apps that could then run on tablets and phones.
Re:My thoughts on what is wrong with MS
on
Break Microsoft Up
·
· Score: 1
People like change.
They just like change that actually benefits them, not change that benefits Microsoft ('Yes, dump all your old desktop apps and run Metro apps so we can make 30% in the app store! It's the glorious new future of Window!').
Why is this so hard for fanboys to understand? Windows 8 is a disaster becuase it tries to push users in a UI they don't want. You only need to go into a computer store and try to run notepad on one of the demo Windows 8 machines to realise what a colossal fsck-up it is and why home users are avoiding it in droves.
This is for a very simple reason, without it all the big earners would simply have their pay given to them in another nation.
Uh, no.
I believe there are three or four nations on the planet who try to tax their citizens no matter where they live, and America is the only first-world nation on the list. It's one reason why the US government have made renouncing American citizenship so hard.
Re:What's good for others apparently is no good fo
on
Break Microsoft Up
·
· Score: 2
The start menu wasn't 'incredibly awful' until they broke it in Windows 7. Then they said 'no-one uses the start menu, so let's get rid of it'.
The only thing they need to do to fix Windows 8 is remove the GUI and put back the one from Windows 7, preferably with the Windows XP start menu.
Nah, you don't even need a majority. You just need to claim you have a majority and have friends in the media who'll mindlessly parrot whatever crap you send them.
Slashdot Mirror
US intel is not "stupid" except when talking to Congress, which is.
This is the same 'US intel' which missed the collapse of the USSR, 9/11, the Boston Bombers, and were totally sure Saddam Hussein had WMDs, right, not another 'US intel' that's actually competent?
As for original comment, intercepting calls is vastly easier when they go to a central server and they have direct access to the decrypted data than when they go peer to peer with encryption.
I'm guessing that, if the US government is doing this, other governments will say 'open season'. They can hardly complain when the Chinese start breaking into computers all over the world and installing malware.
But, as I said, Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD's high-end was competitive with Intel's high-end.
Intel has no competition for their high-end desktop CPUs. So why don't they push prices up much higher? It's not because you can turn around and buy a similar performance CPU from AMD.
I imagine the next-gen consoles being all AMD has something to do with that.
Aren't the new consoles the first time in decades that a console is much less powerful than a typical gaming PC at release? The original Xbox, for example, was a PC with a decent CPU for that era and a faster GPU than you could buy for a PC, and only really limited in RAM.
AMD has clearly lost the performance war. But I'm still hoping the brand sticks around because I believe it's the only thing keeping Intel CPU prices low.
Intel CPU prices were higher when AMD was competitive with them.
ARM are Intel's real competitor at the moment, not AMD.
That four months is four months of lost revenue for AMD. Back when I worked in the chip business we typically had about six months after release where we could charge a premium for the new chips before the competition released something better. Unless they slipped too, every day we slipped was a day of premium, high-margin sales lost.
Yeah, we'd probably still be selling those chips two years later, but they'd then be at bargain basement prices with tiny margins.
I find it hilarious that a lot even use encryption by default and yet the controller decrypts and spits out the data.
Sigh.
The Intel SSDs encrypt data so you can 'secure wipe' them by just erasing the encryption key, not to make them secure against external attack.
But yes, I guess that's hilarious to some people.
Actually no, GWB would only have been attacked by the Left for the most part
Like, you know, almost the entire mass media.
he Left is naturally suspicious of police and spying
Tell that to the Stasi.
The left are only suspicious of police and spies they don't control. They love police and spies who can be used against their opponents.
Seems the airline industry was started by governments investing in warplanes during a couple of world wars.
If I remember correctly, the sale of cheap military transports after WWII killed off several aircraft manufacturers who'd otherwise have been producing civilian transports.
The most expensive way to put people on Mars is to have states fund it, because then it becomes a pork-barrel project that will take decades and cost hundreds of billions of dollars.
The cheap way to put people on Mars is for a few billionaire tourists to pay for it out of their own pocket. That way you get something adequately safe, at a reasonable price, with no frills.
Of course it doesn't help that there's no good reason to go to Mars other than tourism. Pretty much any resources you want are available on the Moon or asteroids, and on Mars you're just dropping yourself into a signiificant gravity well for no good reason.
Right, because having users manage their own risk profile has worked out so well in the PC/Windows world...
Indeed. Letting someone else control your computer is much safer.
Android's big problem is that you have no way of saying 'no, I'm not giving this app that permission', and can only choose to install or not install the Fluffy Kitty Screen Saver that wants access to your filesystem, the Internet, and the ability to send SMS messages.
Yeah, it makes perfect sense to announce your retirement just after a major re-organization, when your successor is only going to reorganize everything again after you leave.
Then again, I guess it does make about as much sense as Windows 8.
World is full of stupid people.
Unfortunately, many of them get to make laws.
DirectX 11.2 is on the way too and developers can enjoy thinking about that support.
No-one other than Microsoft will be releasing a DirectX game that only runs on Windows 8 and above until Windows 11 is out.
Simple. If the animal is small enough to cause no damage on impact, hit it and keep going. If it is big enough to damage the vehicle, don't hit it.
So when it sees a baby in the road, it will run over them and keep going.
Sounds good.
Autonomous cars will allow tailgating and higher speeds, with much less risk, raising the effective traffic load to 3 cars per second, which is a 50% increase in throughput, without adding more lanes, going to double-decker limos for everyone, etc.
No, they won't, outside of Ideal Driverless Car Utopia.
What happens when the car at the front slams on its brakes, and your car can't stop as fast because the pads are worn and the owner hasn't bothered to keep up with regular maintenance?
Oops. You crash. Then many of the cars behind crash too.
At highway speeds, human driven cars should be over 150 feet apart to be safe. Autonomous cars can be separated by just a few feet.
Yeah, because nothing could happen so fast that computer-driven cars a few feet apart could cause a massive pileup with thousands dead.
Is that a 1990's style, proprietary approach to an competing API?
I believe it's kind of like OpenGL, except it only runs on Windows?
Yeah, but the battery will run out two miles down the road, so it's not really a big deal.
20 million iPads means 500,000 fewer Mac sales and 19.5 million fewer sales of other computers.
Uh, no, it doesn't.
Everyone I know who owns a tablet has it in addition to other computers, and wouldn't have bought another computer if they hadn't bought a tablet.
Windows 8 is killing PC sales, not iPads.
Unify them by making them totally separate functional modes. Interesting strategy, that's for sure.
Yes. Microsoft even screwed that up.
Metro apps should have been able to run in Windows on the desktop. Instead they split the OS into two glaringly incompatible modes, and forced users to keep switching between them.
Their problem was that no-one was going to buy a Microsoft tablet without apps, and no-one was going to write apps for a tablet with no market share. So they had to push that Metro crap onto desktop users to try to get people to write apps that could then run on tablets and phones.
People like change.
They just like change that actually benefits them, not change that benefits Microsoft ('Yes, dump all your old desktop apps and run Metro apps so we can make 30% in the app store! It's the glorious new future of Window!').
Why is this so hard for fanboys to understand? Windows 8 is a disaster becuase it tries to push users in a UI they don't want. You only need to go into a computer store and try to run notepad on one of the demo Windows 8 machines to realise what a colossal fsck-up it is and why home users are avoiding it in droves.
This is for a very simple reason, without it all the big earners would simply have their pay given to them in another nation.
Uh, no.
I believe there are three or four nations on the planet who try to tax their citizens no matter where they live, and America is the only first-world nation on the list. It's one reason why the US government have made renouncing American citizenship so hard.
The start menu wasn't 'incredibly awful' until they broke it in Windows 7. Then they said 'no-one uses the start menu, so let's get rid of it'.
The only thing they need to do to fix Windows 8 is remove the GUI and put back the one from Windows 7, preferably with the Windows XP start menu.
Nah, you don't even need a majority. You just need to claim you have a majority and have friends in the media who'll mindlessly parrot whatever crap you send them.