Re:"security applications and systems" only??
on
Security and Usability
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Having worked at secure facilities for longer than I care to remember, I am familiar with all of the problems you list and more. But the key at all of the secure sites I've worked at is that usuability is not a requirement put upon those who create and implement security policy. So they often make decisions based on how easy it makes their job as a security officer and not how difficult it makes life for the users. Thus they tend to come up with all manner of silly policies that marginally improve security while seriously degrading usuability. As long as they don't cause work to completely halt, they usually get away with such draconian policies.
If the security guys had to take responsibility for the indirect costs of their policies, I believe we would see a marked improvement in the usuability of the facilities being secured, probably bringing with it an increase in actual security because there would be less incentive for people to do bad things like write down a list of their 15 different passwords and what not.
You're certainly not damaging their ability to "leverage their assets" since they aren't doing anything to leverage them,
However, they could start selling it at any point in the future - at which point the pre-existing unauthorized copies would potentially interefere with their making a profit, thus that factor would not help him in making a fair-use defense.
Do you see greater value in purchasing a version that you can watch on your iPod than you do in purchasing the DVD? After reading your post, I personally thought you got screwed. If you could have the DVD for the same price, why buy the iPod version. Now, I realize we all have different priorities, and if you find value in it, that's great. Guess my question is how much of your example is due to the fact that you COULD download from iTunes and it's the new fun thing to do?
If he does, and enough people do likewise, that means that blu-ray and hd-dvd will be still-born, just like the mobility of mp3s have killed DVD-Audio and Super-Audio CD.
Are you saying that the chinese firewall can parse proxied traffic and will let some blocked sites through via proxy and not others? That seems kind of inconsistant - if they can nuke you for proxying any one normally blocked site, they ought to nuke you for all normally blocked sites.
If I microwave my passport with that disable the chip? I need to know. My passport expires in 2009.
If you are't leaving the country for the next 30 days or so, I suggest that you "lose" your current passport and apply for a new one. That way you'll still get an RFID-free one, but it should be good out til 2015. Mine just expired this summer so I will be re-applying immediately
Turn on television, flip channels, find nothing but crap, turn it off and read a book.
Garbage in - Garbage Out. Do some research first. Are you really so lazy and self-centered to think that you can just turn on the tv and find good quality shows? Do you walk into the bookstore and just randomly pick books off the shelves?
Next time, try something like the following instead:
Poke around tviv.org and various tv-show forums looking for dicsussion of shows that sound promising. Go to favorite bittorrent aggregrator and search for said shows. Download shows. Watch them.
How do you know it's fuelled by gouging and speculation? How can you say the price is "wrong"? Define "gouging".
Whatever the cause it is evident that something is wrong with the market. As others have pointed out, the oil companies are reporting overwhelmingly huge profits. In an efficient market, cost of production and selling price converge. Since they are currently hugely divergent, somebody is jiggering the system. Since the USA, and anything to do with oil the world around, is pretty much a corptocracy, chances are the blame lays with the corps.
Remember: there always has to be an initial source for news, and reporters are rarely there to experience the events themselves.
The fact the reporters use sources is not what the OP was talking about. He was saying that reporters do not investigate - instead they just get the stories from the newswires. Sure, some reporters just rewrite press releases, but since real reporters are behind the newswires they are not particularly more lazy than any other news organization, often because they are the other news organizations.
PS - don't italicize [sic] when you insert it into an italicized quote, otherwise it looks like you are quoting the [sic] too.
It seems like most of them just get their news from the AP or Reuters, as opposed to actual research.
Who do you think puts the stores on the newswires in the first place? Haliburton?
The newswires are simply a news-sharing system, member news organizations write their own stories and 'publish' them on the wire for syndication. But usually the original owner of the story also publishes the article in their own newspaper.
As I stated, worst case, you end up with exactly what you get with bluray.
No you do not. Go back to my original post, here's the summary:
Managed copy means the manager can reneg on a promise. Without it, the promise can not be made (i.e. SOLD) in the first place. In other words, you can pay for the ability to make copies and then lose that ability. Without managed copy, nobody can make believable false promises in the first place.
I've already demonstrated the industry's predeliction to make such false promises with the T2 DVD WMV9 release which uses Microsoft's own DRM to acomplish very similar goals as that of managed copy. This is not hypothetical, Artisan has already played that game of selling you a promise and then breaking it during phone-home authorization. T2 is not the only hi-def WMV9 title suffering from this problem either.
This thread is done.
Now that you've argued yourself into a circle, we are right back where we started. Since you had no clue anyway, that's no surprise.
Riight. Face it, at this point you're pulling shit out of your ass and are arguing that a feature is a negative point when at worst it is a neutral point and at best a positive point.
Common sense defeats your argument so you now you go the route of invective and hand-waving. Excellent defense, Old Boy. How's Mido?
What are the odds that a major media company will go bankrupt but not sell off their assets as part of liquidation? If it got any closer to zero it would be negative..
You must have a weird definition of asset - the ability to be sued in that class action lawsuit you postulated, that doesn't fit the definition of "asset" used by regular people. It is unlikely to fetch much at an liquidation either.
The whole point of a media center pc is the Tivo-like functionality. Why would you waste your time buying a glorified DVD player? It is pointless for you to deny that the "substantial number" (meaning a number greater than ten) represents a significant percentage.
The fact that you are unaware of other uses for a media pc (note, not a ms-windows branded "media center pc" which is a crippled thing in comparison) pretty much indicates that your level of understanding of the topic is entirely juvenile. Here's a hint - read the htpc forum at avsforum, it gets about 10x more traffic than any other forum there, generally 100+ new threads per day. That's far and away more than your personal anecdote of "absolutely zero." Your ignorance does not support your arguments. Especially since the context is playback from disc, not personal recording.
No, get your troll ass off the seat and prove me wrong. (hint: search for "aacs" and "managed copy", then note about how "support" for this feature is always referenced as something the player does)
1) A disc can't do anything by itself, thus your inference that such wording means the player has some hard-coded phone-home routine is specious 2) AACS is not even finalized yet, so clearly you are just making stuff up, which is why you tried to turn a call to back up your own claims into more shouting and hand-waving.
Get a clue; this isn't a DVD with "pc content" we're talking about. Managed copy is part of the AACS specification (used in HD-DVD & Bluray).
You want to be an ostrich and ignore the risks, go right ahead, but just keep quiet about it because trying to shout down those who can actually think these things through does not help anyone, not even yourself.
Then they're failing contractual obligations under the HD-DVD standard, and in doing so open themselves up to a class action lawsuit (among other things).
You gotta lot of faith in a contract written by only one side. My money says any such contract completely and totally eschews any liability under any condition because they've got no incentive to do otherwise. And, if the company goes bankrupt their ain't nobody left to sue anyway.
So that program guide data comes out of thin air does it?
1) No program guide data is required to play a DVD -- "MediaPC" does not necessarily mean "tivo replacement." 2) There are many non-internet sources of program guide data - usually embedded in the blanking interval of certain stations' broadcasts 3) Some people choose to move program guide data on a weekly basis via USB-fob sneaker-net. 4) Its pointless trying to deny that there is a substantial number of "media pcs" that are offline, go to avsforum.com and you'll find plenty of people who run that way.
The "phone home" option isn't a random program the producer of the HD-DVD launches.
You are making that up. Let's see some supporting evidence for your claim.
Even today there are DVD's with "PC content" on them that want to phone home as part of their "unique interactive experience" if you play them on a PC. Guaranteed there will be similar things on HD-DVD if a large enough proportion have internet connectivity and a scripting language that can access it.
Yes you can. You just can't threaten to do it. Just like you can't threaten to do it with anyone else. The only difference is that he's got his own security force actively looking for threats and running them down while most everyone else won't even know they've been threatened unless you do it to them directly and they have to go to the police and courts themselves.
I don't know how the managed copy functionality is implemented or what 'features' it supports, so I can't say what those terms and conditions may be, but it is still better than what you get with blu-ray.
It doesn't matter what the terms are - phone home means they can be arbitrarily changed. Just look at the guys who bought Terminator-2 with the WMV-HD edition on the 2nd disc. The box says nothing about phone home, but it requires phone home to enable at least once per week and if you are phoning from outside the USA, you will be refused activation. If the company backing the phone-home functionality goes out of business (say Artisan gets sold to another studio who doesn't like Micorsoft as much as Artisan did, and the new owner stops funding the phone home service) then even officially legit USA purchasers are dead in the water.
And who the hell has a media center pc without a net connection anyway?
1) Lots of people, isolation from the net means not having to worry about attacks that come in from the net.
2) It isn't necessarily the ability to phone home that is the problem, it is the conversation. Since there is effectively zero protection of personal data in the USA, anyone with even a hint of wanting to preserve their privacy knows what phoning home opens them to all kinds of data-exposure risks.
I watch streaming video on Fox News website all the time.
And unlike watching fox news on most televisions, when you watch it via streaming, Fox watches you back. You could be getting 'customized' news already and wouldn't even know it.
Managed copy makes it possible to legally copy content onto, say, a pc or portable device.
Possible, but not necessarily reasonable given that it has to phone home in order to authorize the "managed copy" and thus any number of terms and requirements can be affixed, and worse changed on the fly.
Personally, I don't want to see Java as a mandatory requirement because it will probably be used to augment DRM. When the DRM gets cracked, they will start coming up with ad-hoc DRM implemented in Java. Sony and others are already doing that today with current DVDs via the very limited scripting language used for menus - they try to enforce region coding and more recently include non-readable sectors on the disc and use the menu control software to skip the sectors on playback, expecting ripper software to just read all the sectors straight through and get stuck on the non-readable ones.
A friend saw one of those weddings on TV where the vows were "... as long as we both shall love..." What a joke.
What, you got a problem with honesty? Or perhaps you think masochism is the way to a healthy life? Staying married for marriage's sake is a huge mistake. If you are truely out of love, not just having a spat, then of course you should both move on.
More to the point, those "huuuuuuge" companies provide jobs and livelihood to a lot of people.
You can just as easily say that the people provide manpower and the livelihood to all corporations. The big difference is that without corps, the people would continue to exist but without people the corps would be nothing.
Most people agree that copyright is largely a good thing.
Or is it really that most people believe that because they are unaware of any alternative?
Today, financing a creative work is an investment with high risk - you have little guarantee that the end product will sell enough to recoup the investment, much less make a profit.
Long before the invention of the printing press, most creative works were financed by patrons - they were works for hire. The artist got paid for the effort of creation and the patron owned the end result. No need for copyright laws at all.
In today's world, the Internet brings people together. It should be possible to bring together thousands, even millions of interested 'patrons' to hire an artist - or an entire production company - to create works of entertainment. The benefit to the artist is that creation is no longer a financial risk, the money is in hand (or in an escrow account) and the benefit to the 'patrons' is that the creative work is released to the public domain so they can share it with anyone and everyone without breaking the law - they literally own it.
This kind of business model is a perfect example of a free market because the consumer is directly paying for the produced goods, no middle-men (like advertisers or distribution companies) to distort the market and no need for government regulation (ala copyright law). An artist that is popular will be able to charge progessively higher prices for each new work, thus quality work (or at least popular work) will be justly rewarded, and the goal, as stated in the US constitutionm to further the progress of science and the useful arts will be realized.
No, you just lack enough experience doing software Q&A to understand the magnitude of the issue.
It is far easier to fix a bug once than hundreds of times.
You choose to see only half the picture. The most accurate statement is that, "It is far easier to make a change once than a hundreds of times." As long as you ignore the fact that an untested change can cause problems, you are only addressing half of the issue.
Ask any sysadmin with a production server what he thinks of installing a patch, for, say Oracle that has been thoroughly tested against Oracle but will also modify his mail server which has received no testing against the patch. He'll tell you that no way in hell is that patch going on his system until ALL apps have been thoroughly tested against it.
Given you were the one who was talking about difficulty of maintenance, this is becoming a sad refusal to admit that programmers know what they are doing when they implement shared objects.
Yeah, boofookinghoo, I'm so sad, cry me a river. Keep the random invective to yourself, ok?
And lets not forget the advantage in memory savings with loading it once, etc.
No, let us. Because any runtime linker of any sophistication should be able to prevent duplication of identical code with a decent versioning system.
So, you see, the AMD design is in fact a real dual-core design. The current Intel dual-cores, on the other hand, share nothing on-chip.
Uh yeah, both AMD and Intel are true dual core. I never said otherwise. However, you seem to be implying that since AMD has an xbar and intel just has a bus that somehow means something relevant to being a dual core or not. It doesn't.
In fact, if you want to be picky about it, since a single core AMD64 chip has a single memory controller onboard, a completely dual implementation would involve 2 memory controllers instead of just one behind a xbar. Since Intel's chips have no onboard memory controller, it doesn't matter since 0*2 is still 0.
Not that I would make that argument, but it makes just as much sense as saying "since AMD designs share a memory controller and Intel designs share nothing, the AMD designs are true dual core and Intel is not."
Slashdot Mirror
Having worked at secure facilities for longer than I care to remember, I am familiar with all of the problems you list and more. But the key at all of the secure sites I've worked at is that usuability is not a requirement put upon those who create and implement security policy. So they often make decisions based on how easy it makes their job as a security officer and not how difficult it makes life for the users. Thus they tend to come up with all manner of silly policies that marginally improve security while seriously degrading usuability. As long as they don't cause work to completely halt, they usually get away with such draconian policies.
If the security guys had to take responsibility for the indirect costs of their policies, I believe we would see a marked improvement in the usuability of the facilities being secured, probably bringing with it an increase in actual security because there would be less incentive for people to do bad things like write down a list of their 15 different passwords and what not.
Great idea, but it doesn't fix anything today.
You're certainly not damaging their ability to "leverage their assets" since they aren't doing anything to leverage them,
However, they could start selling it at any point in the future - at which point the pre-existing unauthorized copies would potentially interefere with their making a profit, thus that factor would not help him in making a fair-use defense.
Do you see greater value in purchasing a version that you can watch on your iPod than you do in purchasing the DVD? After reading your post, I personally thought you got screwed. If you could have the DVD for the same price, why buy the iPod version. Now, I realize we all have different priorities, and if you find value in it, that's great. Guess my question is how much of your example is due to the fact that you COULD download from iTunes and it's the new fun thing to do?
If he does, and enough people do likewise, that means that blu-ray and hd-dvd will be still-born, just like the mobility of mp3s have killed DVD-Audio and Super-Audio CD.
Are you saying that the chinese firewall can parse proxied traffic and will let some blocked sites through via proxy and not others? That seems kind of inconsistant - if they can nuke you for proxying any one normally blocked site, they ought to nuke you for all normally blocked sites.
If I microwave my passport with that disable the chip? I need to know. My passport expires in 2009.
If you are't leaving the country for the next 30 days or so, I suggest that you "lose" your current passport and apply for a new one. That way you'll still get an RFID-free one, but it should be good out til 2015. Mine just expired this summer so I will be re-applying immediately
Turn on television, flip channels, find nothing but crap, turn it off and read a book.
Garbage in - Garbage Out. Do some research first. Are you really so lazy and self-centered to think that you can just turn on the tv and find good quality shows? Do you walk into the bookstore and just randomly pick books off the shelves?
Next time, try something like the following instead:
Poke around tviv.org and various tv-show forums looking for dicsussion of shows that sound promising.
Go to favorite bittorrent aggregrator and search for said shows.
Download shows.
Watch them.
How do you know it's fuelled by gouging and speculation? How can you say the price is "wrong"? Define "gouging".
Whatever the cause it is evident that something is wrong with the market. As others have pointed out, the oil companies are reporting overwhelmingly huge profits. In an efficient market, cost of production and selling price converge. Since they are currently hugely divergent, somebody is jiggering the system. Since the USA, and anything to do with oil the world around, is pretty much a corptocracy, chances are the blame lays with the corps.
Remember: there always has to be an initial source for news, and reporters are rarely there to experience the events themselves.
The fact the reporters use sources is not what the OP was talking about. He was saying that reporters do not investigate - instead they just get the stories from the newswires. Sure, some reporters just rewrite press releases, but since real reporters are behind the newswires they are not particularly more lazy than any other news organization, often because they are the other news organizations.
PS - don't italicize [sic] when you insert it into an italicized quote, otherwise it looks like you are quoting the [sic] too.
It was my understanding that the news wires had their own researchers.
Yes, there are newswire employees and stringers too. But member newspapers were the largest source of articles the last I heard.
It seems like most of them just get their news from the AP or Reuters, as opposed to actual research.
Who do you think puts the stores on the newswires in the first place? Haliburton?
The newswires are simply a news-sharing system, member news organizations write their own stories and 'publish' them on the wire for syndication. But usually the original owner of the story also publishes the article in their own newspaper.
As I stated, worst case, you end up with exactly what you get with bluray.
No you do not. Go back to my original post, here's the summary:
Managed copy means the manager can reneg on a promise. Without it, the promise can not be made (i.e. SOLD) in the first place. In other words, you can pay for the ability to make copies and then lose that ability. Without managed copy, nobody can make believable false promises in the first place.
I've already demonstrated the industry's predeliction to make such false promises with the T2 DVD WMV9 release which uses Microsoft's own DRM to acomplish very similar goals as that of managed copy. This is not hypothetical, Artisan has already played that game of selling you a promise and then breaking it during phone-home authorization. T2 is not the only hi-def WMV9 title suffering from this problem either.
This thread is done.
Now that you've argued yourself into a circle, we are right back where we started. Since you had no clue anyway, that's no surprise.
Riight. Face it, at this point you're pulling shit out of your ass and are arguing that a feature is a negative point when at worst it is a neutral point and at best a positive point.
..
Common sense defeats your argument so you now you go the route of invective and hand-waving. Excellent defense, Old Boy. How's Mido?
What are the odds that a major media company will go bankrupt but not sell off their assets as part of liquidation? If it got any closer to zero it would be negative
You must have a weird definition of asset - the ability to be sued in that class action lawsuit you postulated, that doesn't fit the definition of "asset" used by regular people. It is unlikely to fetch much at an liquidation either.
The whole point of a media center pc is the Tivo-like functionality. Why would you waste your time buying a glorified DVD player? It is pointless for you to deny that the "substantial number" (meaning a number greater than ten) represents a significant percentage.
The fact that you are unaware of other uses for a media pc (note, not a ms-windows branded "media center pc" which is a crippled thing in comparison) pretty much indicates that your level of understanding of the topic is entirely juvenile. Here's a hint - read the htpc forum at avsforum, it gets about 10x more traffic than any other forum there, generally 100+ new threads per day. That's far and away more than your personal anecdote of "absolutely zero." Your ignorance does not support your arguments. Especially since the context is playback from disc, not personal recording.
No, get your troll ass off the seat and prove me wrong. (hint: search for "aacs" and "managed copy", then note about how "support" for this feature is always referenced as something the player does)
1) A disc can't do anything by itself, thus your inference that such wording means the player has some hard-coded phone-home routine is specious
2) AACS is not even finalized yet, so clearly you are just making stuff up, which is why you tried to turn a call to back up your own claims into more shouting and hand-waving.
Get a clue; this isn't a DVD with "pc content" we're talking about. Managed copy is part of the AACS specification (used in HD-DVD & Bluray).
You want to be an ostrich and ignore the risks, go right ahead, but just keep quiet about it because trying to shout down those who can actually think these things through does not help anyone, not even yourself.
Then they're failing contractual obligations under the HD-DVD standard, and in doing so open themselves up to a class action lawsuit (among other things).
You gotta lot of faith in a contract written by only one side. My money says any such contract completely and totally eschews any liability under any condition because they've got no incentive to do otherwise. And, if the company goes bankrupt their ain't nobody left to sue anyway.
So that program guide data comes out of thin air does it?
1) No program guide data is required to play a DVD -- "MediaPC" does not necessarily mean "tivo replacement."
2) There are many non-internet sources of program guide data - usually embedded in the blanking interval of certain stations' broadcasts
3) Some people choose to move program guide data on a weekly basis via USB-fob sneaker-net.
4) Its pointless trying to deny that there is a substantial number of "media pcs" that are offline, go to avsforum.com and you'll find plenty of people who run that way.
The "phone home" option isn't a random program the producer of the HD-DVD launches.
You are making that up. Let's see some supporting evidence for your claim.
Even today there are DVD's with "PC content" on them that want to phone home as part of their "unique interactive experience" if you play them on a PC. Guaranteed there will be similar things on HD-DVD if a large enough proportion have internet connectivity and a scripting language that can access it.
Yes you can. You just can't threaten to do it. Just like you can't threaten to do it with anyone else. The only difference is that he's got his own security force actively looking for threats and running them down while most everyone else won't even know they've been threatened unless you do it to them directly and they have to go to the police and courts themselves.
I don't know how the managed copy functionality is implemented or what 'features' it supports, so I can't say what those terms and conditions may be, but it is still better than what you get with blu-ray.
It doesn't matter what the terms are - phone home means they can be arbitrarily changed. Just look at the guys who bought Terminator-2 with the WMV-HD edition on the 2nd disc. The box says nothing about phone home, but it requires phone home to enable at least once per week and if you are phoning from outside the USA, you will be refused activation. If the company backing the phone-home functionality goes out of business (say Artisan gets sold to another studio who doesn't like Micorsoft as much as Artisan did, and the new owner stops funding the phone home service) then even officially legit USA purchasers are dead in the water.
And who the hell has a media center pc without a net connection anyway?
1) Lots of people, isolation from the net means not having to worry about attacks that come in from the net.
2) It isn't necessarily the ability to phone home that is the problem, it is the conversation. Since there is effectively zero protection of personal data in the USA, anyone with even a hint of wanting to preserve their privacy knows what phoning home opens them to all kinds of data-exposure risks.
I watch streaming video on Fox News website all the time.
And unlike watching fox news on most televisions, when you watch it via streaming, Fox watches you back. You could be getting 'customized' news already and wouldn't even know it.
Managed copy makes it possible to legally copy content onto, say, a pc or portable device.
Possible, but not necessarily reasonable given that it has to phone home in order to authorize the "managed copy" and thus any number of terms and requirements can be affixed, and worse changed on the fly.
Personally, I don't want to see Java as a mandatory requirement because it will probably be used to augment DRM. When the DRM gets cracked, they will start coming up with ad-hoc DRM implemented in Java. Sony and others are already doing that today with current DVDs via the very limited scripting language used for menus - they try to enforce region coding and more recently include non-readable sectors on the disc and use the menu control software to skip the sectors on playback, expecting ripper software to just read all the sectors straight through and get stuck on the non-readable ones.
Why not come up with something like "H-Fizzle to DV-doubleDizzle".
That'll make it waaaaaaaaay cooler!
Borrowing from 90's rap:
H-to-the-D-to-the-DVD.
You down with HD-DVD?
A friend saw one of those weddings on TV where the vows were "... as long as we both shall love..." What a joke.
What, you got a problem with honesty? Or perhaps you think masochism is the way to a healthy life? Staying married for marriage's sake is a huge mistake. If you are truely out of love, not just having a spat, then of course you should both move on.
Most of our tax revenue comes from those corporations anyway, you know
m plate.cfm?Docid=407&Topic2id=90
You are so wrong.
In 2003, personal income tax accounted for almost an order of magnitude more US federal revenue than corporate income tax. (8.7x times more to be precise)
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/TaxFacts/TFDB/TFTe
More to the point, those "huuuuuuge" companies provide jobs and livelihood to a lot of people.
You can just as easily say that the people provide manpower and the livelihood to all corporations. The big difference is that without corps, the people would continue to exist but without people the corps would be nothing.
Most people agree that copyright is largely a good thing.
Or is it really that most people believe that because they are unaware of any alternative?
Today, financing a creative work is an investment with high risk - you have little guarantee that the end product will sell enough to recoup the investment, much less make a profit.
Long before the invention of the printing press, most creative works were financed by patrons - they were works for hire. The artist got paid for the effort of creation and the patron owned the end result. No need for copyright laws at all.
In today's world, the Internet brings people together. It should be possible to bring together thousands, even millions of interested 'patrons' to hire an artist - or an entire production company - to create works of entertainment. The benefit to the artist is that creation is no longer a financial risk, the money is in hand (or in an escrow account) and the benefit to the 'patrons' is that the creative work is released to the public domain so they can share it with anyone and everyone without breaking the law - they literally own it.
This kind of business model is a perfect example of a free market because the consumer is directly paying for the produced goods, no middle-men (like advertisers or distribution companies) to distort the market and no need for government regulation (ala copyright law). An artist that is popular will be able to charge progessively higher prices for each new work, thus quality work (or at least popular work) will be justly rewarded, and the goal, as stated in the US constitutionm to further the progress of science and the useful arts will be realized.
Ah well.
Thankfully you did not design linux.
Hey, random invective boy, fortunately you did not design linux either because then there would be no way but your broken way.
You just keep proving my case.
No, you just lack enough experience doing software Q&A to understand the magnitude of the issue.
It is far easier to fix a bug once than hundreds of times.
You choose to see only half the picture. The most accurate statement is that, "It is far easier to make a change once than a hundreds of times." As long as you ignore the fact that an untested change can cause problems, you are only addressing half of the issue.
Ask any sysadmin with a production server what he thinks of installing a patch, for, say Oracle that has been thoroughly tested against Oracle but will also modify his mail server which has received no testing against the patch. He'll tell you that no way in hell is that patch going on his system until ALL apps have been thoroughly tested against it.
Given you were the one who was talking about difficulty of maintenance, this is becoming a sad refusal to admit that programmers know what they are doing when they implement shared objects.
Yeah, boofookinghoo, I'm so sad, cry me a river. Keep the random invective to yourself, ok?
And lets not forget the advantage in memory savings with loading it once, etc.
No, let us. Because any runtime linker of any sophistication should be able to prevent duplication of identical code with a decent versioning system.
So, you see, the AMD design is in fact a real dual-core design. The current Intel dual-cores, on the other hand, share nothing on-chip.
Uh yeah, both AMD and Intel are true dual core. I never said otherwise. However, you seem to be implying that since AMD has an xbar and intel just has a bus that somehow means something relevant to being a dual core or not. It doesn't.
In fact, if you want to be picky about it, since a single core AMD64 chip has a single memory controller onboard, a completely dual implementation would involve 2 memory controllers instead of just one behind a xbar. Since Intel's chips have no onboard memory controller, it doesn't matter since 0*2 is still 0.
Not that I would make that argument, but it makes just as much sense as saying "since AMD designs share a memory controller and Intel designs share nothing, the AMD designs are true dual core and Intel is not."