Nobody has access to whatever the NSA collects except the military, and they don't do law enforcement.
Nobody knows what the NSA records, that includes you and me.
Kinda "cute" that you believe you have knowledge of secret activities beyond merely that secret activities might be happening.
And it is unlikely they collect that shit from cars in the US, it doesn't have any military value. If a war breaks out, they can simply start collecting it. You really do not appreciate the information glut that they likely have. It is useful to track vehicles in countries where the US could use special forces to apprehend an enemy of the State, or places where you can drop a missile on their head. You can't do any of that in the US, and NSA doesn't do law enforcement. They're military.
It says over and over in that article that they weren't spying, they had to get a warrant. In one case, it was a rental car. Remember, when you rent a car, it isn't your car.
You think Tesla isn't collecting every aspect of your driving?
Tesla is not the government.
What happens when the government comes with a warrant?
Look bozo, we're not concerned about it because we're worried that the mean cops will arrest you for knocking off a liquor store. People who are concerned about this are interested in civic liberties not some kind of moronic anarchism.
When the government has to get a warrant, that is known to be different than if they don't have to have one. It is as simple as that.
Its worst case response time would still be as bad an 8 bit microcontroller. You would not match the response time of a mid-range ARM chip running at 180Mhz.
But ARM-based laptops with no speculative anything do just fine running one application at a time.
It is more about major appliances and consumer electronics than SD cards. Most of those have cloned ASICs. Even if they stole the IP, they wouldn't make it into the statistic.
Could a desktop CPU run the code running on the ARM chip at the same speed? No. Not even close. The worst-case latency of that desktop CPU is so bad, if you used it to power your keyboard you'd be missing keystrokes.
It is just a constant stream of "squirrel!" and "whatabutt?"
You were making an accusation against ARM. I pointed out it wasn't true. Now you're talking about desktops.
Yes, lots of people use ARM chips in desktops and servers, but no, that doesn't have anything to do with which chips are vulnerable to spectre.
I'm seriously considering funding a development of the wireless light switch done right - it'll behave like a regular switch but will have a mechanical actuator to flip it remotely.
That's not even close to "done right." It is wasteful, and has fire-starting failure modes. Worse, any low-cost models will have high peak current that will throw people's circuit breakers. The actuators will use more power than the lights!
If you want those features without it sucking, you need to build a separate power distribution system into the home, that just does the lighting, has limited power, and uses solid state relays, and soft switches. You can't use the solid state relays on circuits that support full power, and you can't have mechanical actuators+fire safety without also spending a lot of money. And you probably don't even want AC; maybe a 12V lighting circuit, controlled directly by the digital meter. And so then the control system would be an addon to the meter, instead of to the switch.
There is special UL testing for lighting; it is super-cheap. It gets tested, because insurance, but it is excepted from most rules.
They wrote the rules so that when you build an LED light bulb, even though it has a circuit board with computers on it, it doesn't get any of the emissions testing for electronics; it is tested the same way that an incandescent bulb is tested. It has a power supply in it, you can't run LEDs without one, but it doesn't get the testing normally required for power supplies where they intentionally make it fail to make sure it doesn't catch on fire; nope, it is only tested like a light bulb; it has to be plugged in and operated for a certain amount of time without incident, it doesn't get failure mode testing.
Convenient/Secure are direct tradeoffs, so you only listed two things. And obviously you can't have them both.
That only gets you to choosing between making it cheap, or getting to select the security/convenience tradeoffs.
In the standard formulate, "fast, good, cheap; choose two" they're talking about the development process more than the product. All the product traits are bundled into the "good" part; if you want a good product, you have to either take a long time to engineer it, or else spend a lot of money, but if you try to do both it will come out crap anyways.
If you want the product to successfully give you the tradeoff you want between security and convenience, that means you've already chosen "good." And it is a new product niche, so if a business wants to make any money, they have to do the engineering fast. Which already means it won't be cheap. You won't get convenience and security at the same time, you can't pick "good" twice unless you want it to be double expensive, AND done long after the market is reduced to commodities.
If you want to sell a well-designed system, you have to spend a lot of money AND it will be late to market. It isn't enough to just give up privacy; that's already bundled into the "well-designed" part. If you want it to be cheap and get to market on time, it already has to be NOT-well-designed.
A low or medium priced home is going to have a pretty standardized price, adding small things won't actually change the value. It would need to be one of the things on the list of things that contribute to value, like flooring, heating, roof, etc.
And a higher priced home, those details will likely get replaced by the buyer.
Fancy switches aren't going to increase home value. The value is in the convenience you get.
WTF is this shit? What does it do? You sure as hell can't tell from the names.
It is like if a car advertised that it can run on pavement, gravel, dirt, even blacktop! Except, instead of saying that, they listed 5 companies that build roads, and said they were compatible with those.
If they were using quality components, it already wouldn't generate a lot of heat.
Heat = inefficiency, and it implies they used a low cost, wasteful method of generating the low voltages they need. At quantity it would cost them 50 cents more per unit to use an efficient buck converter; so they don't.
This is a new industry = early adopters = you can't have quality parts unless you agree to pay for 300%+ gross margin for the brand. That's just not going to happen for these types of devices, the convenience they add is too minimal.
It isn't going to become common until they start building it into homes, with the control integrated with the power distribution.
You can't expect Zetas to understand that Betas select the Alpha from their own numbers, and that you have to be a Beta before you can be an Alpha, and you have to also have support from the other Betas.
They're so far below all that, the Alpha just looks like a Godhead to them. So they worship.
Zetas also rarely get to breed, so they don't have experience with the other sex and they get really distracted by their presence. This is one of the (many) reasons why the Zetas are chased off before the Betas get down to making decisions.
Testing won't help, he just needs to be kept at a safe distance from important work, and monitored as a potential mass-murderer.
Only a very tiny part of ARM offerings has that stuff, and it seems they licensed most of it just to produce high end designs for specific customers.
I have dozens of ARM processors within 10' of me, across multiple families, and none of them have out-of-order speculative blah-blah, they're all pretty standard RISC chips. The deepest pipeline is 4 stages, in-order.
Airbus and Boeing don't reeeally compete if you look at the way they position their airplanes. The planes stair step each other in capacity never really competing head to head.
Then why does Boeing have models with overlapping capacity from the 737 all the way up?
The only "stair step" is that Airbus has a giant monstrosity bigger than anybody wants. But for the whole range of planes that actually sell, everything is competing with multiple other offerings.
It sounds like concerning competition for the 737 until you realize that the design has long outlasted what was intended, and they're only doing small amounts of R&D for the new models. And even though it uses a lot more fuel than the regional competition, it also gets lower insurance rates because of its service history. It is easy profit for Boeing.
Lots of western companies with quality manufacturing are competing, and Boeing mostly wins due to trust. I don't doubt airlines who simply can't afford Boeing or Airbus will buy this new thing, but yeah... heavy manufacturing confidence isn't built with a promotion campaign, like you say they need decades of proof before people with a choice will even consider them. In China they mostly won't have a choice, they'll be flying whatever this thing turns out to be.
Given that china still owns a significant amount of our debt, we're surely in trouble.
That could actually be worse for them than it is for us.
There's a saying: if I owe you a thousand dollars, I have a problem. If I owe you a trillion dollars, *you* have a problem.
Well, that is actual debt though.
Holding bonds isn't the same as giving a loan, though; you get no power over the bond issuer. Defaulting only means people wouldn't want to buy that bond in the future.
Also, the US government issues the bonds, and they all get purchased. What the market does with them after that doesn't even affect the US Government. There is no reason for the US Government to care who buys them. Only a country that has limited demand for bond purchases would need to care about that stuff.
What are they going to do, send their leader to stand outside the embassy waving bond certificates in the air? Holding lots of US bonds just means that if their economy collapses, there will still be a core of foreign denominated income for them that is safe in the future. They get paid when the bonds mature, or when they sell them, same as everybody else.
It is merely a wise investment, not a source of power or control for either side.
Intel's "10nm" is the same as 7nm. In fact, one of the dimensions is even 7nm, and they could have just measured from that side and called it 7nm. The numbers don't have meaning.
You're conflating chip design with process design. Obviously, the company that owns the fab has to do the process design. And that is separate from the design of the chips.
You were wrong as soon as you decided to start with the word "nope." Obviously, Intel does R&D for process, and for the chips they make, so they're doing a lot more R&D than a company that designs a comparable process, but not the chips. The difference in business models, and the fact that they're both competing on the latest generation of process, guarantees that Intel must be doing more R&D.
The mystery in your comment is why you single out microcode to represent the whole chip design process.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody has access to whatever the NSA collects except the military, and they don't do law enforcement.
Nobody knows what the NSA records, that includes you and me.
Kinda "cute" that you believe you have knowledge of secret activities beyond merely that secret activities might be happening.
And it is unlikely they collect that shit from cars in the US, it doesn't have any military value. If a war breaks out, they can simply start collecting it. You really do not appreciate the information glut that they likely have. It is useful to track vehicles in countries where the US could use special forces to apprehend an enemy of the State, or places where you can drop a missile on their head. You can't do any of that in the US, and NSA doesn't do law enforcement. They're military.
In USA, Your Card IS Talking To the Government: https://www.forbes.com/sites/t...
It says over and over in that article that they weren't spying, they had to get a warrant. In one case, it was a rental car. Remember, when you rent a car, it isn't your car.
You think Tesla isn't collecting every aspect of your driving?
Tesla is not the government.
What happens when the government comes with a warrant?
Look bozo, we're not concerned about it because we're worried that the mean cops will arrest you for knocking off a liquor store. People who are concerned about this are interested in civic liberties not some kind of moronic anarchism.
When the government has to get a warrant, that is known to be different than if they don't have to have one. It is as simple as that.
Its worst case response time would still be as bad an 8 bit microcontroller. You would not match the response time of a mid-range ARM chip running at 180Mhz.
But ARM-based laptops with no speculative anything do just fine running one application at a time.
It is more about major appliances and consumer electronics than SD cards. Most of those have cloned ASICs. Even if they stole the IP, they wouldn't make it into the statistic.
If it understands semantics, it would know a lot.
Don't get confused about the difference between process and product.
It is a three-dimensional shape, with orthogonal T sections. Any number you choose between 7 and 15 is equally valid and imprecise.
Could a desktop CPU run the code running on the ARM chip at the same speed? No. Not even close. The worst-case latency of that desktop CPU is so bad, if you used it to power your keyboard you'd be missing keystrokes.
It is just a constant stream of "squirrel!" and "whatabutt?"
You were making an accusation against ARM. I pointed out it wasn't true. Now you're talking about desktops.
Yes, lots of people use ARM chips in desktops and servers, but no, that doesn't have anything to do with which chips are vulnerable to spectre.
I'm seriously considering funding a development of the wireless light switch done right - it'll behave like a regular switch but will have a mechanical actuator to flip it remotely.
That's not even close to "done right." It is wasteful, and has fire-starting failure modes. Worse, any low-cost models will have high peak current that will throw people's circuit breakers. The actuators will use more power than the lights!
If you want those features without it sucking, you need to build a separate power distribution system into the home, that just does the lighting, has limited power, and uses solid state relays, and soft switches. You can't use the solid state relays on circuits that support full power, and you can't have mechanical actuators+fire safety without also spending a lot of money. And you probably don't even want AC; maybe a 12V lighting circuit, controlled directly by the digital meter. And so then the control system would be an addon to the meter, instead of to the switch.
There is special UL testing for lighting; it is super-cheap. It gets tested, because insurance, but it is excepted from most rules.
They wrote the rules so that when you build an LED light bulb, even though it has a circuit board with computers on it, it doesn't get any of the emissions testing for electronics; it is tested the same way that an incandescent bulb is tested. It has a power supply in it, you can't run LEDs without one, but it doesn't get the testing normally required for power supplies where they intentionally make it fail to make sure it doesn't catch on fire; nope, it is only tested like a light bulb; it has to be plugged in and operated for a certain amount of time without incident, it doesn't get failure mode testing.
Convenient/Secure are direct tradeoffs, so you only listed two things. And obviously you can't have them both.
That only gets you to choosing between making it cheap, or getting to select the security/convenience tradeoffs.
In the standard formulate, "fast, good, cheap; choose two" they're talking about the development process more than the product. All the product traits are bundled into the "good" part; if you want a good product, you have to either take a long time to engineer it, or else spend a lot of money, but if you try to do both it will come out crap anyways.
If you want the product to successfully give you the tradeoff you want between security and convenience, that means you've already chosen "good." And it is a new product niche, so if a business wants to make any money, they have to do the engineering fast. Which already means it won't be cheap. You won't get convenience and security at the same time, you can't pick "good" twice unless you want it to be double expensive, AND done long after the market is reduced to commodities.
If you want to sell a well-designed system, you have to spend a lot of money AND it will be late to market. It isn't enough to just give up privacy; that's already bundled into the "well-designed" part. If you want it to be cheap and get to market on time, it already has to be NOT-well-designed.
Most of it I'd pay $200 to have removed. ;)
A low or medium priced home is going to have a pretty standardized price, adding small things won't actually change the value. It would need to be one of the things on the list of things that contribute to value, like flooring, heating, roof, etc.
And a higher priced home, those details will likely get replaced by the buyer.
Fancy switches aren't going to increase home value. The value is in the convenience you get.
Plus.... ZigBee, Z-Wave, Orchard Supply, Alacrity, Iris ??
WTF is this shit? What does it do? You sure as hell can't tell from the names.
It is like if a car advertised that it can run on pavement, gravel, dirt, even blacktop! Except, instead of saying that, they listed 5 companies that build roads, and said they were compatible with those.
If they were using quality components, it already wouldn't generate a lot of heat.
Heat = inefficiency, and it implies they used a low cost, wasteful method of generating the low voltages they need. At quantity it would cost them 50 cents more per unit to use an efficient buck converter; so they don't.
This is a new industry = early adopters = you can't have quality parts unless you agree to pay for 300%+ gross margin for the brand. That's just not going to happen for these types of devices, the convenience they add is too minimal.
It isn't going to become common until they start building it into homes, with the control integrated with the power distribution.
You can't expect Zetas to understand that Betas select the Alpha from their own numbers, and that you have to be a Beta before you can be an Alpha, and you have to also have support from the other Betas.
They're so far below all that, the Alpha just looks like a Godhead to them. So they worship.
Zetas also rarely get to breed, so they don't have experience with the other sex and they get really distracted by their presence. This is one of the (many) reasons why the Zetas are chased off before the Betas get down to making decisions.
Testing won't help, he just needs to be kept at a safe distance from important work, and monitored as a potential mass-murderer.
Only a very tiny part of ARM offerings has that stuff, and it seems they licensed most of it just to produce high end designs for specific customers.
I have dozens of ARM processors within 10' of me, across multiple families, and none of them have out-of-order speculative blah-blah, they're all pretty standard RISC chips. The deepest pipeline is 4 stages, in-order.
LOL you're one of those fossils who still think that if you get rid of sexism, everybody throws their money in the air and starts doing drugs?
You know the 60s happened, right? You were there, I can tell by the sound of your dribble. And you know the world still exists, right?
The 1950s might not have actually been the paragon of enlightened culture. I know, I know, too shocking to consider.
Airbus and Boeing don't reeeally compete if you look at the way they position their airplanes. The planes stair step each other in capacity never really competing head to head.
Then why does Boeing have models with overlapping capacity from the 737 all the way up?
The only "stair step" is that Airbus has a giant monstrosity bigger than anybody wants. But for the whole range of planes that actually sell, everything is competing with multiple other offerings.
It sounds like concerning competition for the 737 until you realize that the design has long outlasted what was intended, and they're only doing small amounts of R&D for the new models. And even though it uses a lot more fuel than the regional competition, it also gets lower insurance rates because of its service history. It is easy profit for Boeing.
Lots of western companies with quality manufacturing are competing, and Boeing mostly wins due to trust. I don't doubt airlines who simply can't afford Boeing or Airbus will buy this new thing, but yeah... heavy manufacturing confidence isn't built with a promotion campaign, like you say they need decades of proof before people with a choice will even consider them. In China they mostly won't have a choice, they'll be flying whatever this thing turns out to be.
Given that china still owns a significant amount of our debt, we're surely in trouble.
That could actually be worse for them than it is for us.
There's a saying: if I owe you a thousand dollars, I have a problem. If I owe you a trillion dollars, *you* have a problem.
Well, that is actual debt though.
Holding bonds isn't the same as giving a loan, though; you get no power over the bond issuer. Defaulting only means people wouldn't want to buy that bond in the future.
Also, the US government issues the bonds, and they all get purchased. What the market does with them after that doesn't even affect the US Government. There is no reason for the US Government to care who buys them. Only a country that has limited demand for bond purchases would need to care about that stuff.
What are they going to do, send their leader to stand outside the embassy waving bond certificates in the air? Holding lots of US bonds just means that if their economy collapses, there will still be a core of foreign denominated income for them that is safe in the future. They get paid when the bonds mature, or when they sell them, same as everybody else.
It is merely a wise investment, not a source of power or control for either side.
Did you know that Russia was always building aircraft? Apparently not.
They always cost less to buy, too. And yet. ;)
Expect that plane to be very popular; in China.
Intel's "10nm" is the same as 7nm. In fact, one of the dimensions is even 7nm, and they could have just measured from that side and called it 7nm. The numbers don't have meaning.
You're conflating chip design with process design. Obviously, the company that owns the fab has to do the process design. And that is separate from the design of the chips.
You were wrong as soon as you decided to start with the word "nope." Obviously, Intel does R&D for process, and for the chips they make, so they're doing a lot more R&D than a company that designs a comparable process, but not the chips. The difference in business models, and the fact that they're both competing on the latest generation of process, guarantees that Intel must be doing more R&D.
The mystery in your comment is why you single out microcode to represent the whole chip design process.
What if swearing at the camera is the content?
It may be that the videos are already heavily edited, you just didn't understand the specific production values that are popular now.
Or, maybe you're just not very good at selecting videos you will then enjoy?
And you still use it.