Yeah, but think of all the dumb ones that will be caught! We could also do something to make the smart ones dumb. Like put stuff in their water. Or make them read the comments on Slashdot. That way we will catch them all. Because they will be dumb. It will be like Idiocracy, but real.
Oh, but you missed his point: only the DUMB ones would be susceptible to all that. They smart ones wouldn't. You need to think of the children, and the dumb ones, and the dumb children.
I think a better option is just to monitor people. Oh just the dumb ones of course. Everyone else (the smart ones like the OP) could just flip a switch to "not monitored".
It makes sense to me too. That way, people with encryption must either be 1) The smart ones 2) Have something to hide. Are you thinking of the children, yet?
Exactly. Think of the children. How many children could have been found if only there were no encryption? Why aren't you thinking of the children? You must want the kidnappers to win.
Exactly. Once the plan is in place it is very hard to repeal. After all, the plan was keeping us safe. Why would you want to repeal it? Do you want the terrorists to win?
Yes. The "s" at the end of "patches" indicates there are multiple patches. So why push a fix for Meltdown when AMD chips aren't affected? Very confusing.
The only commercially available chips susceptible to Meltdown are Intel chips. Why is a Meltdown patch being pused to AMD systems? They aren't affected.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like this isn't a big issue after all. Good job by Microsoft and Intel with their timely fixes!
"Modern CPU's are almost like mini-computers"
Genius!
It is in "direct competition" with Echo, but "not positioned as a smart assistant". This Cheddar guy is an expert analyst.
Yeah, but think of all the dumb ones that will be caught! We could also do something to make the smart ones dumb. Like put stuff in their water. Or make them read the comments on Slashdot. That way we will catch them all. Because they will be dumb. It will be like Idiocracy, but real.
Oh, but you missed his point: only the DUMB ones would be susceptible to all that. They smart ones wouldn't. You need to think of the children, and the dumb ones, and the dumb children.
You are right. Disabling encryption helps the long-term fight for encryption.
I think a better option is just to monitor people. Oh just the dumb ones of course. Everyone else (the smart ones like the OP) could just flip a switch to "not monitored".
NOW you are thinking of the children!
It makes sense to me too. That way, people with encryption must either be 1) The smart ones 2) Have something to hide. Are you thinking of the children, yet?
I am pretty sure they are already in our heads. I hear them talking to me all the time.
Exactly. Think of the children. How many children could have been found if only there were no encryption? Why aren't you thinking of the children? You must want the kidnappers to win.
Exactly. Once the plan is in place it is very hard to repeal. After all, the plan was keeping us safe. Why would you want to repeal it? Do you want the terrorists to win?
Think of the children! No, not the children assembling iPhones in sweatshops: the children the FBI are looking to protect. Think of them.
"There is only one x86 and one x86-64 kernel for windows. AMD needs to work with MS to get the fix code in the kernel deactivated"
Wait, why wasn't this done? They knew about it 6 months ago. Were the engineers too busy? Were they on vacation? Missed their calls from Microsoft?
"There isn't a specific kernel for intel systems and a separate kernel for AMD systems. They both use the same kernel"
Oh, wow. Really? Binary equivalent kernel for two different processors? Wow!
So why didn't they do something similar?
Oh I understand now. The patch was for Spectre, not Meltdown and Spectre. Because AMD isn't affected by Meltdown. Thanks for clarifying.
What? That doesn't make sense. Are you suggesting the Windows builds for AMD and Intel are binary equivalent?
It really is. So please explain why a fix for Meltdown is needed for AMD systems? They aren't affected by Meltdown.
Why would an AMD system need to suffer the 30% slowdown, when it is Intel that messed up their architecture? That seems odd.
Yes. The "s" at the end of "patches" indicates there are multiple patches. So why push a fix for Meltdown when AMD chips aren't affected? Very confusing.
I don't get it. Do you think AMD and Intel Windows builds are 100% equivalent? Adorable!
Ah makes sense, seems to be contagious! Microsoft and Intel. What a team.
The only commercially available chips susceptible to Meltdown are Intel chips. Why is a Meltdown patch being pused to AMD systems? They aren't affected.
Meltdown is Intel only. No other released processor has this flaw. Grow up.