While geniuses are rare, running into a person (even if only with a curtain in-between) that is at the very bottom of the capability scale for understanding things is even more rare. (With the exceptions of politicians, of course.) Are you sure they were not pulling a prank on you?
The idea that technology can fix stupid crops up frequently though (no surprise, there are a lot of stupid people that really want it to): - Programming languages. No, if you cannot code worth shit in one language, another one will not fix that. - Operating systems: If you are a luser in one OS, you will still be one with a different one. True, some OSes take pains to hide your true skill from you. - Convenience-food: No, that magic deep-frozen package will not make you appear to be an expert chef. - Personal style: No matter how "high-tech", or expensive or "Channel" things are, if you do not have style the only fix is to let somebody else dress you. - Games: No, that aim-bot or other cheating-software will not make you superior. It will just make you look utterly pathetic. - Driving: No amount of high-tech will turn you into a good driver. Exception: The fully self-driving car. And so on.
Idiots are a fact of life. The problem starts when they refuse to accept what they are.
Not the same. An email needs some thought and some coherence put into it. That is a big advantage of written communication. My take is that these "Quarz" morons have so little respect for those they "communicate" with, that they do not want to invest the effort. (Or maybe they are functionally illiterate?) In any case, messages like that will get exactly the respect from the they demonstrate on the part of the sender, namely none.
It is one of the negative sides of the Internet that even completely stupid narcissists get public exposure for their "ideas" when a moron "editor" thinks he has seen something "revolutionary".
Couldn't agree more. These self-absorbed idiots apparently think it is fine to put the work of figuring out what they mean on others (for whom it is far more effort and also they often will be more than one person, multiplying the wasted effort even more). The only way I will listen to voice-mail is at my full consulting rate and even then only by prior agreement. Any other voice-mail goes straight to/dev/null. I really have no use for illiterate morons that think rambling on is acceptable.
I mean, the only reason I would want to get the "emotion" behind a message is if I find myself unable to comprehend the written word and instead of facts try to "solve" things in an "emotional" way. But even then this is stupid, because to get a reasonable estimation for how somebody feels, you have to be in the same room and talk face-to-face to them.
My take is that this is a protest from people that failed to master the art of the written word. It may be a good idea to disregard any advice they give.
That is complete nonsense. You are _really_ clueless. First, you do comparisons at the same clock, anything else is unprofessional. The actual clock-rate does not matter. And second, for this type of architecture-benchmark, you always go for a "round" clock figure. Fortunately, the target for these benchmarks is people with an actual clue.
No x86 CPU requires Win10. The only process where MS support for a specific CPU has some impact is on installation, which may run a bit slower without that support. After that, just install the manufacturer driver to have all the support that makes a difference.
The thing about "CPU support" MS is claiming is just more FUD for the clueless to force them onto the wholly unappealing and badly broken Win10.
Actually, I disagree. The main problem Intel has is that CPUs have not had significant speed improvements for years and that the high prices Intel asks (and apparently needs to ask) have less and less of a basis in reality. AMD however seems to have started to change to be able to survive in a commodity-market some years ago, while Intel has not even begun to do that. When it finally dawns on the last moron that Intel is asking way too much for their products, they will be in serious trouble. also because they, unlike AMD, have the actual chip-making still in-house and that has got to be pretty expensive.
You AMD-haters are really the most stupid morons around. Don't you realize that the only thing that AMD folding will do is that Intel improvements will vanish and Intel prices will skyrocket? Or maybe you people are into self-abuse?
And you know that how? The facts is that they know today that there was a problem with a design that went into production several years ago. We do not know (and in fact have no indication) that they knew back then when the decision to go productive was made.
That will go well. A good example why the police must be severely limited in what they are allowed to do, as otherwise they will turn into a gang of thugs that stomp hard on anything even slightly amiss in their eyes.
The problem is that if you let the police make the law, you get a police-state. By their very mind-set, most police-persons cannot help it and will place individual rights and freedoms second to law enforcement. In a free society, the police must _not_ be able to deal with all crime. Instead they must be limited to the minimum necessary to keep society functioning reasonably well. That idea is alien to most members of the police (if all you have is the law, everybody looks like a criminal...), yet it is critical to keep society free.
Hence while I understand why they are asking for this, it must not be granted to them and they must be put into their place forcefully. Anything else will result in a catastrophe.
Remember that all enforcement (including law enforcement) is evil by its very nature and unless it is necessary to fight a significantly larger (!) evil, it must not be done.
They sure can try and do a lot of damage to you in the process. And since they will not be able to prove that you have that password (as they cannot), you will have to prove you do not have it instead (which you cannot) or be presumed guilty. It is the old authoritarian idea that anybody they do not like is to be regarded as guilty until proven innocent. Yes, that is as immoral and repulsive as it sounds.
If you do it right, they cannot. But a) many people mess this up and b) what does it help you if you get released from prison after a few years as innocent after all and get some shitty non-compensation for the life-time they stole from you?
Zero applications. This is a stunt. Even if it works (and that is a big "if"), it does not improve anything, but it may be less secure than traditional techniques.
Slashdot Mirror
Your thinking is flawed. Less security does not mean "breakable", just the same as more security does not mean "unbreakable".
Well, maybe entertain the notion that the problem is on your side? Because to everybody else that is rather obvious at this time.
While geniuses are rare, running into a person (even if only with a curtain in-between) that is at the very bottom of the capability scale for understanding things is even more rare. (With the exceptions of politicians, of course.) Are you sure they were not pulling a prank on you?
Indeed. Technology cannot fix stupid.
The idea that technology can fix stupid crops up frequently though (no surprise, there are a lot of stupid people that really want it to):
- Programming languages. No, if you cannot code worth shit in one language, another one will not fix that.
- Operating systems: If you are a luser in one OS, you will still be one with a different one. True, some OSes take pains to hide your true skill from you.
- Convenience-food: No, that magic deep-frozen package will not make you appear to be an expert chef.
- Personal style: No matter how "high-tech", or expensive or "Channel" things are, if you do not have style the only fix is to let somebody else dress you.
- Games: No, that aim-bot or other cheating-software will not make you superior. It will just make you look utterly pathetic.
- Driving: No amount of high-tech will turn you into a good driver. Exception: The fully self-driving car.
And so on.
Idiots are a fact of life. The problem starts when they refuse to accept what they are.
Not the same. An email needs some thought and some coherence put into it. That is a big advantage of written communication. My take is that these "Quarz" morons have so little respect for those they "communicate" with, that they do not want to invest the effort. (Or maybe they are functionally illiterate?) In any case, messages like that will get exactly the respect from the they demonstrate on the part of the sender, namely none.
It is one of the negative sides of the Internet that even completely stupid narcissists get public exposure for their "ideas" when a moron "editor" thinks he has seen something "revolutionary".
Couldn't agree more. These self-absorbed idiots apparently think it is fine to put the work of figuring out what they mean on others (for whom it is far more effort and also they often will be more than one person, multiplying the wasted effort even more). The only way I will listen to voice-mail is at my full consulting rate and even then only by prior agreement. Any other voice-mail goes straight to /dev/null. I really have no use for illiterate morons that think rambling on is acceptable.
I mean, the only reason I would want to get the "emotion" behind a message is if I find myself unable to comprehend the written word and instead of facts try to "solve" things in an "emotional" way. But even then this is stupid, because to get a reasonable estimation for how somebody feels, you have to be in the same room and talk face-to-face to them.
My take is that this is a protest from people that failed to master the art of the written word. It may be a good idea to disregard any advice they give.
Well, if Intel produces "speed ups" as they did for the last few years, they will be at most 10% faster with those 2 "generations".
You seem to be stupid, because they just _did_ match Intel clock-for-clock.
That is complete nonsense. You are _really_ clueless. First, you do comparisons at the same clock, anything else is unprofessional. The actual clock-rate does not matter. And second, for this type of architecture-benchmark, you always go for a "round" clock figure. Fortunately, the target for these benchmarks is people with an actual clue.
You have no clue how engineering works. This is exactly how you do a professional benchmark.
No x86 CPU requires Win10. The only process where MS support for a specific CPU has some impact is on installation, which may run a bit slower without that support. After that, just install the manufacturer driver to have all the support that makes a difference.
The thing about "CPU support" MS is claiming is just more FUD for the clueless to force them onto the wholly unappealing and badly broken Win10.
Actually, I disagree. The main problem Intel has is that CPUs have not had significant speed improvements for years and that the high prices Intel asks (and apparently needs to ask) have less and less of a basis in reality. AMD however seems to have started to change to be able to survive in a commodity-market some years ago, while Intel has not even begun to do that. When it finally dawns on the last moron that Intel is asking way too much for their products, they will be in serious trouble. also because they, unlike AMD, have the actual chip-making still in-house and that has got to be pretty expensive.
You AMD-haters are really the most stupid morons around. Don't you realize that the only thing that AMD folding will do is that Intel improvements will vanish and Intel prices will skyrocket? Or maybe you people are into self-abuse?
CPU speeds have hit a wall some time back. You may notice that Intel cannot fulfill your expectations speed-wise either.
And you know that how? The facts is that they know today that there was a problem with a design that went into production several years ago. We do not know (and in fact have no indication) that they knew back then when the decision to go productive was made.
That will go well. A good example why the police must be severely limited in what they are allowed to do, as otherwise they will turn into a gang of thugs that stomp hard on anything even slightly amiss in their eyes.
The problem is that if you let the police make the law, you get a police-state. By their very mind-set, most police-persons cannot help it and will place individual rights and freedoms second to law enforcement. In a free society, the police must _not_ be able to deal with all crime. Instead they must be limited to the minimum necessary to keep society functioning reasonably well. That idea is alien to most members of the police (if all you have is the law, everybody looks like a criminal...), yet it is critical to keep society free.
Hence while I understand why they are asking for this, it must not be granted to them and they must be put into their place forcefully. Anything else will result in a catastrophe.
Remember that all enforcement (including law enforcement) is evil by its very nature and unless it is necessary to fight a significantly larger (!) evil, it must not be done.
They sure can try and do a lot of damage to you in the process. And since they will not be able to prove that you have that password (as they cannot), you will have to prove you do not have it instead (which you cannot) or be presumed guilty. It is the old authoritarian idea that anybody they do not like is to be regarded as guilty until proven innocent. Yes, that is as immoral and repulsive as it sounds.
That does not work in reality. You have seen too many bad movies.
If you do it right, they cannot. But a) many people mess this up and b) what does it help you if you get released from prison after a few years as innocent after all and get some shitty non-compensation for the life-time they stole from you?
This is a fascist idea, plain and simple.
Zero applications. This is a stunt. Even if it works (and that is a big "if"), it does not improve anything, but it may be less secure than traditional techniques.
Leave it to an AC to say the most naive thing possible. Remember "we kill people based on meta-date"?
And the award for "biggest ego" goes to.... you!
You actually have no idea what I have, because I do not share it with low-lives like you that are in it solely to put others down.