Incidentally, the original "study" (long since found to be scientific fraud) the anti-vaxxers like to use for their "arguments" did not claim that either. It claimed that a specific competing product had that flaw but their own did not. Hence there never actually was a study that claimed that in general measles vaccination cause autism.
But anti-vaxxers do not live in this reality. They cannot recognize a fact when it stares them in the face.
In addition, the job of law enforcement _must_ _not_ be easy. If it is, you end up with a police-state and eventually full-blown Fascism. Law enforcement is a dangerous tool that must be carefully monitored, controlled and, above all, limited in what it can do. It attracts entirely the wrong type of people to be trustworthy.
Opening envelopes takes work for every individual one. For encryption backdoors, it just takes a bit of electricity once the software is written. People like this one believe that they finally have victory in sight in their war on civil liberty and freedom. They want to make sure everybody is afraid to say what they think in any circumstances, because everything can be under surveillance all the time, no safe spots.
Well spotted. And that is exactly what is going on here: We cannot have true freedoms for citizens, everybody must fear to be observed and controlled all the time.
There is now a large and well documented body of scientifically and technologically sound evidence why this is a very bad idea. It is as if people like this one are unable to read and think. This is on the level of a 5 year old that insist on getting something he cannot have and then throwing a tantrum.
Medicine is still a lot of brute force over ignorance, though we'd rather not admit it.
And that not admitting it part is what I call hubris. I do agree that this is a personal opinion and that you can very well have a valid different opinion.
I did not miss your statement. While AMD has some of the Spectre type issues, they are far harder to exploit on Intel due to implementation differences, to the point that some researchers doubt they can be practically exploited on AMD at all. To be fair, they are already pretty hard to exploit on Intel.
So saying that they don't use the artificial one either isn't news.
Oh, yes. Recently did a consulting job for an "AI" startup. What we should have told them is "Your idea is shit and anything solid you actually have is 20 years old." They had no clue about the state-of-the-art and were bumbling about incompetently. Surprisingly they had investors.
Indeed. The whole term "AI" is a marketing lie. It has gotten to prevalent that researchers are now using "AGI" (Artificial General Intelligence), which essentially means the same thing but has not yet gotten corrupted by the marketing scum.
Incidentally, there is no "learning" in machine learning either. It is just calculating parameters of statistical classifiers from data-sets. Calling that "learning" is about as wrong and dishonest as calling statistical classificators "AI". "Learning" and "AI" both imply insight. Insight is something machines cannot do and may well never be able to do.
More "Black Hats with good lawyers", but definitely Black Hats. They make money of illegal and immoral attacks and operate themselves in the grey area created by state-owned and state-sponsored hacking groups like the NSA. Terrorism is peanuts compared to this.
They have a part of the issues, but they also come with it being a lot harder to exploit than on Intel, on some so hard that it is not even clear whether they can be exploited at all. (No such doubts on Intel). Denying that AMD now has a significant security advantage is just blind.
I am with "Intel has been exceedingly careless" here. Their tech has been inferior to AMD for quite some time, all they have (had) is better speed. And I think they pushed that one advantage without care and mercy.
It is not really fundamentally flawed. It need care both in its implementation and on the side of the coders using it and there needs to be special support to do some things non-speculatively, but it well can be and will remain part of any fast CPU. This is not so different from other speed-enhancing technologies. The main problem here is that Intel seems to have stopped caring at all a long time back and went to speed as the only goal and AMD had to follow at least partially to get reasonable speeds. But that there are serious dangers here was clear a long time ago and it was discussed in CPU conferences wayyyy back.
And it is also possible that AMD just fucked up a lot less than Intel. Remember that technologically, AMD has been ahead for quite a while (e.g. integrated memory controller, far better multi-core support, etc.), just speed-wise they lagged behind. We do now know where Intel got a significant part of that speed. So while AMD will have some vulnerabilities, it is quite possible that they have a lot less and that what they have is often a lot harder to exploit. This is the verdict on Spectre and Meltdown and there are good reasons to believe this is not an accident, but a systematic difference.
Well, the only thing you are demonstrating is that you are likely one of them and hate yourself for it. Basically only gays that are not at peace with what they are are violently and aggressively anti-gay.
Slashdot Mirror
Incidentally, the original "study" (long since found to be scientific fraud) the anti-vaxxers like to use for their "arguments" did not claim that either. It claimed that a specific competing product had that flaw but their own did not. Hence there never actually was a study that claimed that in general measles vaccination cause autism.
But anti-vaxxers do not live in this reality. They cannot recognize a fact when it stares them in the face.
Ah, sorry. There are just too many idiots around that would actually say what you did and be dead serious about it.
Indeed. It is like these people are not only unable to read, they are utterly dumb and are unable to think.
In addition, the job of law enforcement _must_ _not_ be easy. If it is, you end up with a police-state and eventually full-blown Fascism. Law enforcement is a dangerous tool that must be carefully monitored, controlled and, above all, limited in what it can do. It attracts entirely the wrong type of people to be trustworthy.
You know, the original meaning of "Terrorism" is a form of government where the citizens are kept in line by fear. He very much seems to want that.
Opening envelopes takes work for every individual one. For encryption backdoors, it just takes a bit of electricity once the software is written. People like this one believe that they finally have victory in sight in their war on civil liberty and freedom. They want to make sure everybody is afraid to say what they think in any circumstances, because everything can be under surveillance all the time, no safe spots.
That's "Bruce Schneier".
Well spotted. And that is exactly what is going on here: We cannot have true freedoms for citizens, everybody must fear to be observed and controlled all the time.
There is now a large and well documented body of scientifically and technologically sound evidence why this is a very bad idea. It is as if people like this one are unable to read and think. This is on the level of a 5 year old that insist on getting something he cannot have and then throwing a tantrum.
"Cured" and "can be successfully managed long-term" are very different things. Seriously.
ACs that actually contribute anything worthwhile exist, but they are exceptionally rare. I wish /. has a "don't show me any AC postings" setting.
I agree to most of what you say.
Medicine is still a lot of brute force over ignorance, though we'd rather not admit it.
And that not admitting it part is what I call hubris. I do agree that this is a personal opinion and that you can very well have a valid different opinion.
Well, I would give you a "+1 Funny" for that if I could.
I did not miss your statement. While AMD has some of the Spectre type issues, they are far harder to exploit on Intel due to implementation differences, to the point that some researchers doubt they can be practically exploited on AMD at all. To be fair, they are already pretty hard to exploit on Intel.
Most startups probably don't even use the "I".
So saying that they don't use the artificial one either isn't news.
Oh, yes. Recently did a consulting job for an "AI" startup. What we should have told them is "Your idea is shit and anything solid you actually have is 20 years old." They had no clue about the state-of-the-art and were bumbling about incompetently. Surprisingly they had investors.
The marketing scum cannot help themselves. They will corrupt any and all meaning of language if it means they potentially get one more sale.
Indeed. The whole term "AI" is a marketing lie. It has gotten to prevalent that researchers are now using "AGI" (Artificial General Intelligence), which essentially means the same thing but has not yet gotten corrupted by the marketing scum.
Incidentally, there is no "learning" in machine learning either. It is just calculating parameters of statistical classifiers from data-sets. Calling that "learning" is about as wrong and dishonest as calling statistical classificators "AI". "Learning" and "AI" both imply insight. Insight is something machines cannot do and may well never be able to do.
More "Black Hats with good lawyers", but definitely Black Hats. They make money of illegal and immoral attacks and operate themselves in the grey area created by state-owned and state-sponsored hacking groups like the NSA. Terrorism is peanuts compared to this.
About as moral. These activities need to be outlawed and banned globally.
Some people just do not get it. As if vulnerabilities only exist if somebody is looking.
They have a part of the issues, but they also come with it being a lot harder to exploit than on Intel, on some so hard that it is not even clear whether they can be exploited at all. (No such doubts on Intel). Denying that AMD now has a significant security advantage is just blind.
I am with "Intel has been exceedingly careless" here. Their tech has been inferior to AMD for quite some time, all they have (had) is better speed. And I think they pushed that one advantage without care and mercy.
It is not really fundamentally flawed. It need care both in its implementation and on the side of the coders using it and there needs to be special support to do some things non-speculatively, but it well can be and will remain part of any fast CPU. This is not so different from other speed-enhancing technologies. The main problem here is that Intel seems to have stopped caring at all a long time back and went to speed as the only goal and AMD had to follow at least partially to get reasonable speeds. But that there are serious dangers here was clear a long time ago and it was discussed in CPU conferences wayyyy back.
And it is also possible that AMD just fucked up a lot less than Intel. Remember that technologically, AMD has been ahead for quite a while (e.g. integrated memory controller, far better multi-core support, etc.), just speed-wise they lagged behind. We do now know where Intel got a significant part of that speed. So while AMD will have some vulnerabilities, it is quite possible that they have a lot less and that what they have is often a lot harder to exploit. This is the verdict on Spectre and Meltdown and there are good reasons to believe this is not an accident, but a systematic difference.
Well, the only thing you are demonstrating is that you are likely one of them and hate yourself for it. Basically only gays that are not at peace with what they are are violently and aggressively anti-gay.