* Posts by LOL123

162 posts • joined 26 Aug 2010


Just when everyone thought things might be looking up, Dido Harding admits interest in top job at NHS England


It's actually the wrong link for the GP opt out. There are now two opt-outs.

The GP one is called type 1.


It has to be done in writing.

There will be twenty opt out types soon.

It's been an Honor serving with you but you're our 'competitors' now, Huawei tells its sawn-off mobile limb


Re: "It's been an Honor serving with you but you're our 'competitors' now"

strawman - do those competitors have a structure with an aggressionist governmental in control?

Didn't think so.

You are the same people who will call the govt muppets for letting China in, if a breach occurred.

"What the fuck did they think China would do? It's like letting the fox into the coop!"

Who watches the watchers? Samsung does so it can fling ads at owners of its smart TVs


Re: Good reason not to upgrade

>> Some Smart TVs now bypass your local DNS, to avoid DNS based blocking

Indeed.. I've had to redirect all port 53 requests to my dns proxy client, and block all DoH and DoT servers with iptables on my router. A cron job has to run regularly to update the lists

So far it's been holding - the volume of activity in the blocked log is startling.

Florida man might just stick it to HP for injecting sneaky DRM update into his printers that rejected non-HP ink


It's the Gillette model though where the printer hw is sold at a loss - the price of the ink itself is not the point.

Perhaps there should be two price tiers - the fully costed purchase that accepts third party inks and the gillette model one where the printer is sold at loss but only takes the manufacturer cartridges.

It will be interesting to see how this goes - there was no advertised assurance that other catridges would work from the printer manufacturer. The purchaser took on that risk here.

The terms of sale he assumed were from the third party catridge manufacturer. If anything the third party cartridge manufacturer should be sued, they are the ones who, as part of the sale, told him their catridges would work in lieu of manufacturer catridges, it wasn't HP.

If you used the thrid party engine oil, and the car stopped working, who would you sue?

LG announces bold new plan for financial salvation: Trying to actually make phones people want to buy


Re: Here is a phone I want to buy

Component cost is not everything.

Development, certification and interoperability costs come with it.

3.5 mm jack is an additional opening to waterproof, takes out board area.

Rpi is not a consumer electronic product. It is something like a dyi product. Sdcard interop and certification is a pain because of cheap ass cards out there that joe and Jane public buy. Performance of storage, including external storage, can also impact overall os behaviour requiring more r&d work.

Removing the notch costs more - people want bezel less designs for ooh aah and not buying the same thing again. Coming up with a way to have the external sensor through the display glass actually is more complicated. We’d be having bezeless and notchless phones from day 0 of the first smartphone if your imaginations were true.

In summary, there’s a lot more to those feature asks at the product/market level, that soldering a component on. There are so many manufacturers desperate to sell in this segment, so if any these were *actually* easy wins for the whole market, they’d be doing it already.

These little “what I want in my phone” indeed reaffirms how small a demographic this is in the consumer smartphone space, a demographic fixated on “cheap” components, when the reality of what it takes to make a difference to millions is quite starkly different.

Boeing, Boeing, gone! CEO Muilenburg quits 'effective immediately'


I correct myself in Russia meaning Soviet Russia/USSR.

PS: Competing in the free market has nothing to do with Communism? Just that those companies are owned by the state.

In any case you seem to be affirming my point as a counter argument.

The original comment says "greedy capitalism" is at fault.

China has *laws* that make it illegal. It isn't their economic system that created those laws.

So it has nothing to do with capitasm or communism or socialism or any economic system.

Lots of comments like the one above blame "greedy capitalism" whenever a corporation is found to be doing crap. These comments are annoying because it is just an emotional response. The real reasons turn out to be plain incompetence, to no laws that actually make such actions illegal.

This Boeing case is the fault of corrupt American politicians who do not make laws that make this illegal, and allow experimentation with people's lives.

It perhaps would be a different story today if American civilians had died. I don't think the CEO being fired would have sufficed.

PS: The white collar criminal rubuttal is a poor shot - those small business owners are hardly a comparison for the head of a $190Bn company, responsbile for a lot of tax revenue, political sponsorships and jobs in the US. Show me that sentencing in China or Russia ;) Those russian oligarchs are filthy criminals and pretty open about it.


Are you implying that other cultures from the “money grabbing capitalist culture” guarantee safety and “nice” businesses.

Non capitalist - communist Russian and Chinese companies are even less accountable - all practical communist regimes have devolved to tyranny. Russian flight safety is very bad.

Maybe all this is just the USA wanting to become more like China in a hurry!

Bad government regulation, poor safety, authoritarian ruler, media control/dismissal, bully/exploitation tactics, fallguy for the sacrifice.

In summary bad apples will fall, the problem here is that the regulatory body was effectively bribed through government lobbying and the system of checks and balances lost. Blaming the economic structure is silly and an emotional argument not a factual one.

This is yet another excellent example of how the US governance structure is broken, and how law makers can be bought over there. You want Boeing to be responsible, sure, but the reason it is just a dismissal is because your American lawmakers haven’t made anything Boeing did illegal. Shouldn’t it be?

What I do Grant is Boeing is now perfect counter argument to those who believe in low/no regulation and self governance of private entities offering public use goods. This has been a very expensive experiment, both in money and lives, of the US Congress, who I believe are actually to blame. They decimating the FAA in funding and responsibilities. That in turn is supported by a system called ”lobbying”, which Boeing exploited.

At least other countries, even China, get my respect because they all call it bribery.

Brother, can you spare a dime: Flickr owner sends mass-email begging for subscriptions


Re: What about auto-updates?

You have a Youtube clone site?

WTF are you doing on these forums then....

One man's mistake, missing backups and complete reboot: The tale of Europe's Galileo satellites going dark


Re: It's a glorious metaphor.

In short, the UK is a classic British venture: a great idea with (some) talented people that has turned into a bureaucratic mess in which no one wants to take the blame for problems caused by unnecessary organizational complexity.


Sounds like we need UKxit by the same logic..


US foreign minister Mike Pompeo to give UK a bollocking over Huawei 5G plans


>>is on course to totally fail by re-election time

You're applying rational thinking and reasoning to the population deciding how to vote. It doesn;t work that way, he is on course to be a re-elected..

Having AI assistants ruling our future lives? That's so sad. Alexa play Despacito


Re: F@$% the creapy stalker tech

ermm all your examples are cases of things being replaced by more efficient technology and so is cheaper.. Everything has something good and bad about it, and older tech being more expensive than newer more efficient tech - the efficiency is correctly being costed..

That's exactly as it ought to be. I don't expect snail mail to be cheaper.

Do not confuse having choices across multiple vendors for new technology with not adopting new technology at all. That is a valid problem Alexa might be creating - the only voice assistant tech.

Huawei’s elusive Mr Ren: We’re just a 'sesame seed' in a superpower spat


Re: Luddites = Non Sequitur

>> Have we actually seen *any* evidence of wrongdoing by Huawei

You miss the point that Huawei the company is happy to stick to "soft" responses via press releases and chinese government commentary.

I think Huawei could have had an independent third party audit done but they haven't done that.

There is more to this I think. I'd imagine a company with nothing to hide as claimed would be open about proving it. They would have done things to prove their independence from the chinese government and their device security and close the matter. This is usually the response when your brand is affected by "fake news".

There is significant revenue here that any normal company usually takes concrete actions to protect.

They aren't doing anything concrete to close the matter. Which begs the question - why not?

This must be some kind of mistake. IT managers axed, CEO and others' wallets lightened in patient hack aftermath


Re: What about auto-updates?

Even if a top politician was involved, it just needed someone to get fired.. it didn't have to be management, scapegoats have always sufficed.. It's like the Gatwick drone thing, it just needs to be shown that action has been taken.

The difference here is that the right action has been taken; The commendation is gratuitous too, but has happened so this cannot be just because a politician was the target..

I cannot say if it is cultural or they have some other checks to ensure such investigative outcomes. It is a worthwhile case study.

Peak Apple: This time it's SERIOUS, Tim


Re: Too late

To be fair, what they will release is keeping the rest of the market on top. Things come with the good and bad, so yeah no headphone jack. But touch devices, generous data plans, music services, tablets, you have to give it to them. I doubt graphics cores and cpus from competitors would have improved without the threat of the next Apple release. They could have released CPU and GPU with only marginal benchmark improvements. (I do wish other companies would follow them on their device lifespans.)

PS: I also think this is normal of *all* companies - the customer talks and if they are willing to pay for just the brand, the company should charge for it. Why not? Of the companies out there, given what apple have done for their device lifespan, I think they are actually the least greedy (in a relative sense). I don't think the points about build quality have merit.

Customers are now walking away so now that the brand has been milked I'd expect the products to start improving.

I don;t want Apple to go, their halo effect is the key driver for other manufacturers to create replica devices at lower prices - which is what I want to buy..

Attention all British .eu owners: Buy dotcom domains and prepare to sue, says UK govt


Re: Wow, it's almost...

Your representatives are capable of undemocratic actions and decisions.

Your logic is very faulty.


Re: Wow, it's almost...

Hmm are referendums democratic?

Democracy is about representative government.

Referendums arguably move the decision making away from representatives to people.

A representative (assuming they were voted in for qualities of leadership) would be arguably making decisions that are unlikely to be assuaged by knee jerk fear, lies and would be in a better position to balance the pros and cons out.

A referendum perhaps makes sense to change how the representative government itself is chosen - I get the first past the post vote being a referendum.

This I do not get. For something that is so complex in how it affects so many areas in direct and indirect ways, how can the question be posed to the general public?

What is populist is not always the right or correct thing - there is a difference between the two.

Would you have the decision for your medical treatment put out to a referendum? No you would at best put out the choice of the doctor to a referendum.


Re: Wow, it's almost...

>> shunning anti-democratic institutions

But it isn't - you have a eu parliament with MEPs voted for by the electorate.

What is actually your argument (that is being conflated with "anti-democratic" is that the UK/UK MEP wish does not always pan out at the european level - because it is representative.

How is this different from say your UK MP that you voted for putting out a bill that does not see through the UK parliament? Or your MP asking for additional local council funds that are ignored?

Or for eg Scotland or London now having to leave the EU too? They didn;t vote for it and now their "sovereignty" is being stolen by the north.

By your argument a loss of "soverenity" is happening right now on the British Isles?


Equifax how-it-was-mega-hacked damning dossier lands, in all of its infuriating glory


Re: "Such a breach was entirely preventable"

Again confusing economic models with corruption, politics and fair democracies.

America is I think among the worst here, where you can legally bribe and influence an election under the term lobbying.

A pile of turd by any other name still stinks.

Boom! Just like that the eSIM market emerges – and jolly useful it is too


Re: pick a side

Because SW uses the fricking thing in both cases. The physical version is still a store of a borrowed set of keys, the SIM isn’t making phone calls the modem does.

If a phone is eSIM carrier locked, it can be physical SIM carrier locked the same way.

If malware hacked a phone to block eSIMs, it can block physical SIM interaction just the same.

If you plug in the physical SIM on another phone, you can remote provision another phone with the eSIM.

The eSIM implementation like TPM or encryption is not pure SW and involves a secure element.

So no I still don’t get the comments about security being better with physical SIMs.

I don’t get the point about “carrier issues new series”. The keys are carrier verified, otherwise the dialling number would keep working even if bills weren’t paid. Your SIM card is directly not linked to your dialling number, it gives the IMSI that your carrier makes your dialling number.

That is why number porting happens without the SIM changing.

Please give a example of an eSIM specific subterfuge that cannot be done with a physical SIM.

Either this pure paranoia conceived from the letter “e” or there is a genuine example available that actually understands how SIMs (e and physical) work.

Now Europe wants a four-million-quid AI-powered lie detector at border checkpoints


Re: £4m doesn't go far

It might be just an integration project too:


anyway the point being commenters(commentards?) here are leaping to this being the total spend on a production system.

Epistemic arrogance?


Re: £4m doesn't go far

What makes you think this is for an actual system and not just for a proposal or feasiblity study?

£4 million will go a long way to get a concept proposal out i.e. paperware.


look at the cost splits - this is not for a production system, the headline is click and commetard bait.


What has been done with the money this far.

People here are leaping to the assumption that the £4m is for a working field ready system.

Core blimey! Apple macOS update lifts boot from MacBook Pro neck


Re: "those defaults are unsuitable for MBP laptops."

>> You got this completely wrong. People (including the blogger reporting the problem originally) have re-run their tests with the software fix.

>> It is definitely a bug going below base clock for sustained loads, it is not a bug that it does not stay at turbo for sustained loads.

So they fixed the bug. And the blogger gets my point.

Go to redditt or the comment I replied to above, who complain that the issue is that the cooling system and power regulation is not up to scratch. Because it isn't *staying* at the turbo clock that they paid for.


Re: This does seem interesting...

whatever your youtube channel can get


"Using spftware to cover hardware gaps is a cludge."

Why is it a cludge? It lowers costs, gives better bang for you buck, is flexible and is a non-critical application.

Meltdown, spectre, this all were mitigated because HW is now more SW programmable. Saved some landfill too.

>>design, develop specs,, add a safety buffer, meet specs

A spec does not maketh a perfect design.


Re: "those defaults are unsuitable for MBP laptops."

A lot of people are confusing base clock and turbo clock with the maximum performance. The *base clock* is what the processor TDP is rated for. The max turbo boost clock cannot be used for sustained load - it would need the same additional cooling as an overclocked processor (i.e. running outside of manufacturer spec).

ALL processors with an unlocked multiplier *will* hit a point where it overheats for a normal cooling system. The design makes sure that the cooling system meets the tdp rating, not an arbritrary number.

It's like complaining that notebooks haven't got liquid nitrogen coolers.

It is definitely a bug going below base clock for sustained loads, it is not a bug that it does not stay at turbo for sustained loads. This is explicitly enabled by Intel with their cTDP feature amongst other things. Read the data sheet. That is why it is marketed by Intel as Turbo "Boost" i.e. temporary.

Also both the mobile i7 and i9 have the *same* TDP. So *Intel* (and not Apple/Dell etc) assures the system integrator that the same cooling/power system is enough.

I'm no Apple fan, but it makes no sense to have a reality distortion field that irrationally amplifies their negatives just because it's Apple. That's just as bad.

BT's Patterson keeps his £1.3m wheelbarrow of bonus cash after all


Re: try further out then...

Uber is subsidised pricing and potentially predatory..

So it is expected to be close to other less convenient transport options, and lower than the equivalent or better options.


>>The average wage in Poland is still 1/3 of that of the UK

But that could also mean that UK wages are too high? Or somewhere in between i.e. Poland needs wages to go up but UK needs wages to go down.

When is a wage unsustainably high? Or is no wage too high?

It's the thing I don't understand about wage discussions for unskilled and skilled labour, which gets conflated with the differences in wages between the "rich" and poor. I define poor here as someone who can't make ends meet with their wages or no disposable income after the basics, with the rich being really everyone else with a disposable income after the basics. "Basics" are cultural and subjective.

Minimum wages are needed, but those are really for the unskilled. A bump in minimum wages will bump up the average cost of living.

Which now makes that revised minimum wage less of a living wage. Which then means the wages need to go up again. It's a loop. You'd never reach the point ever where the wage is "fair".

You'd need to keep increasing this, but that cannot be sustainable.

Meanwhile, the other key factor, uplifting the skills of the labour force is ignored, which really is the crux of the problem.

Whether a free market/capitalist/socialist, if you want to talk about the human elements in an economy what really matters is what skills are given value, and whether the policies created are sustainable. The other alternative is to have an economy that secure incredibly valuable resources of the time (oil, technology, etc) to support the unskilled labour force and wages rises. This latter thing is not an option for most countries today if we are interested in peace.

So the capitalist vs socialist discussion I find flawed because neither secure upskilling of the resource pool of the economy - whether human or material. The discussions mostly is about which is better at kicking the ball down the road - not about solving anything.

India tells WhatsApp to add filters, ASAP


Re: I seriously disagree with you

BTW, "Education is the answer" is almost always quoted by those who consider themselves "educated" (a set of learnings that came from their run of "education" and subsequent life experiences) and prescribe it to those they consider less so. These "lesser" folk very likely have a wealth of knowledge in other areas, just not what the prescriber considers useful and pertinent.

Which means someone wiser that the prescriber (a different set of learnings that came from their run of "education" and subsequent life experiences) will be saying the same thing , this person isn't educated enough - when the contexual situation changes and the prescriber behaves irrationally.

Which mean everyone will always needs an "education". Which means no one is in this perfect state of "educated".

I agree learn as much, build as many base skills as possible. But that makes it a necessary condition, not a sufficient one, as is alluded here with "education is THE answer".


Re: I seriously disagree with you

Again with "the" answer. Education is but a tool. One at that. It is not the same as learning. It is blinding to the thought process to treat education as a panacea, "the answer".

You compare with reading and writing - there is no subjectivity of the individual here - it is a rote action once learned. Critical thinking isn't, to compare it would be the equivalent of education creating shakespearean grade writers out of everyone or every literate being able to figure out an encrypted piece of text - they could "read" it, but not all will understand it. Some might. Application of skills cannot be prescriptive, thus a free, critical thinker cannot be prescriptively created.

So an education - time bound and thus requiring a select set of experiences in that time, has never shown to create this absolute state of the critical thinker - objective, balanced unbiased and rational - in any and all areas, topics, situations; known and unknown. You can at best instil some base skills and hope life experiences improve things.

That still means the post "educated" population will not approach all situations rationally. One might have had a travel experience that makes them understand better than another who didn't. That is the learning it continues after your "education", a structured phase.

Don't confuse government incompetence with some "blind obedience" conspiracy. The outcome of "the Education" described by you exists no where and never has. It is an utopian ideal, time is finite.

Meanwhile you need a solution or even a workaround for the real world until you get there.


the panacea that is "Education"

To those proposing education as the answer - an "educated" person is a relative term - there are things that one knows and understands and things that one does not know or understand.

The corollary of this is that everyone therefore will have an issue where their response is not going to be rational - because the unknown creates fear.

This irrational response is now happening everywhere in the world in various contexts.

Without question this is being accelerated and catalysed by the new social media platforms - it has never been as cheap and anonymous to spread falsehoods in mankind's history.

So this isn't about India, the 3rd world and so - these are all straw man responses. There is a problem here and it is happening everywhere.


I see a satellite of a man ... Galileo, Galileo, Galileo, Galileo, that's now 4 sats fit to go


I don't get it.. Why do people think former colonies even want to trade with the UK, over the EU, US, China? The UK is simply too small. It does not have its own access to those desirable markets anymore and does not make anything of global and infungible value.

That India will sign an exclusive trade agreement, better than what it offers the EU, for what exactly? What are people smoking?

I'll need that to survive Brexit.

Chief EU negotiator tells UK to let souped-up data adequacy dream die


Re: What about auto-updates?

>> It's a game, the politicians are the players & we're the game tokens...

Like I said the UK cannot get a special position (vs the member states and all other WTO nations) that you allude to as the outcome of "negotiations". This "negotiation" and "posturing" is a pretense of the UK government for the British electorate's entertainment.

You seem to believe a genuine negotiation is happening. The fat chips are on the EU side, and the UK has a bad hand as well.. To top that the UK chips are not worth very much on the Brexit negotiation table so even a bluff from the UK is worthless.

I think the game the UK politicians played is actually over with and the dirty ones won - when Gove, Farage, Johnson and such played with the British electorate. It's one thing to spew differing opinions and arguments, it's quite another to willfully mislead and undeniably the lot literally lied to get to their end.

They've sweeped the table of the worthwhile chips now, none are committed to UK anymore and they're all past the peak of their political careers. None of these Brexiter politicians have anything to lose, and are well heeled in the EU and the US.

Corbyn just goes wherever the wind and the gutters take things..


Re: What about auto-updates?

I'm a bit amazed and worried about how people don't seem to understand the role of regulators or even how governments work.

Michael Barnier was appointed by elected EU ministers - all 27 of them agreed.

Do they expect every single decision maker in government to be a directly elected person and therefore a politician? Are they expecting every single position in government to be voted for by the electorate?

This is ridiculous.

I don't understand why these leavers expect the EU to show, what they put in so many words, is actually nothing more than charity. It makes no sense to disadvantage the whole EU bloc for this one country called UK. What on earth does the UK offer that would want them to offer this special treatment to the UK to the detriment of all the other 27 member states and to the dissatisfaction of all other countries outside of the EU (US, Canada, Australia).

Even if you argue as a leaver that the UK is leaving the EU for such "uncharitable" behaviours of the unelected EU, you cannot in another breath expect charity. The argument given here by the leavers come from an emotional thought process, not a rational one.

You can blame the EU how much you want, but at the end of the day the incompetence of the UK in handling this process cannot be ignored. It is solely on the UK to own the problem they chose to face. It is for the UK to solve this, not to whine about not getting their bidding.

If this is the best that can come out of the phase that the politicians actually are supposed to good at, the talking and the deal making, then I fear for the phase after brexit, where the talking isn't going to do anything.

Thus far it would seem that British politicians are only successful at fooling British people - Farage, Johnson, Corbyn...

Facebook CEO snubs UK parliament, but attends US congress and the EU parliament - a prelude to where the UK actually stands. Actions speaking louder than words and all that.

Here's to one of Farage's speeches from a Trump retirement golf village in Spain easing the post brexit hurt and pain until the UK starts selling to.. somebody else (TBD)...


Re: Well, duh

>> I wish I could up-vote this more...

Totally.. it so succinctly summarises the brexiter's arrogance and double standards.

Yay, you've won your Fitbit lawsuit, folks. But, lawyers, about those filet mignon expenses...


Re: LOL123

@Michael Habel

Ah yes another one - where every debate or discussion reduces to the good/bad left and/or good/bad right rant.

"It's so obvious FFS you stupid lefties!!!" "How dumb can these right-wing morons get!!"

I think you need to use that bit between your ears more.

This isn't worth anymore of my time - you're offering nothing more than a vapid rant.

“Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies." - Friedrich Nietzsche


Re: 'Plenty of notices'

This seemed very unreasonable and ripe for abuse, but reading through it, it would appear the other side of it is "Leges instituuntur cum promulgantur" - Laws are instituted when they are promulgated.

So in the context of "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse/not a legal Defence", the existence of a bill in itself does not make it a law, it has to be shown that it has been promulgated as well.

So the next time someone quotes this, I know there is a defence. It isn't an edict in itself.


Re: 'Plenty of notices'

>> Ignorance of the Law, is no excuse.

People keep quoting this as a fact. But really? It's one of those opinions masquerading as fact.

Are individuals supposed to go through parliament/senate/congress meeting notes every day and figure out all the nuances of what has changed in the law? What has been repealed? What has been amended?

"You didn't know that coughing in public is a death sentence now?? Tough. This law might be unreasonable, you can fight to change it, but until then the law is the law! Ignorance of the law is not excuse. Happy hanging!"

And it isn't an excuse, it is a fact. Ignorance of the law exists, I for one certainly cannot claim I know all and every bit of it. Can you?

The term "excuse" is also chosen to give it a pejorative flavour - it could have been "ignorance of the law is no defence" but no, shame up coz I'm better than you ignorant person...

And what about innocent until guilty? Her statement is very likely true, that it is in an apple of US origin. Therefore she was not importing it.

America has really fucked up - the very values apparently being protected in all those wars and missions are being trampled upon on their own soil.

The terrorists might not have won the battle on backward values, but they seem to have won the war. :(

Ultimately fairness has failed here. So you know what? Quoting "ignorance of the law is not an excuse" is not a valid excuse for failing to serve justice.

Broadcom moves to the US: CFIUS-inspired redomiciling makes for happy voters


>>All it means is the company become liable to US tax

No that is an naive view - it means the company becomes liable to US law.

It brings the company under US jurisdiction legally and that matters.

What passes off as OK in Singapore won't be anymore. Taxation is just one of the areas affected.

Taxation just happens to be the one with publicity today but is really an issue with tax legislation.

Credit where due. Trump certainly understands the ramifications of this far better with his various companies.

Openreach ups investment plans: Will shoot out full fibre to 3 million premises


Re: History of fibre optics.

>> That drop in intensity is worse than starting with the mass of the whole universe and ending up with one atom.

Hmm, this I think is a hyperbole..

Here come the lawyers! Intel slapped with three Meltdown bug lawsuits


Re: MINIX anyone ?

If the NSA is involved, a FISA court will dismiss this in a heartbeat.


Re: What didn't I know and when didn't I know it?

Those are strong words - should, must, etc

A paper stating "it must be secure" has little value. Any more than one saying "steps must be taken to ensure world peace."

It has to be paper that is practical, specific to the issue and peer cited so that it is isn't an obscure one.

i.e ensure that during OoO execution all HW access protection rules are honoured and considered. Even saying "HW access protection rules must be honoured" on its own is no good. There has to be something specific that constrains the attack surface so that the development cost is sensible. That is a valuable paper, because that is the challenge to get secure designs. i.e. when you have a 100 million lines of code, how do you make it secure?

"Professionals are meant to be masters of the body of knowledge in their profession. Lawyers, for example. And chip designers."

Fact - All major vendors affected - Intel, AMD, ARM, Apple, Qualcomm, etc i.e. This issue was not typical of the knowledge of the profession. All face the issue in different manifestations.

From Intel T&C of sale, their caps, emphasis mine


That's the Intel lawyers being masters of their profession. By the same logic, if Intel lawyers are masters of their profession, there is no court case. But that is not proven yet either.

Both (chip designers and lawyers) have taken step typical of their profession, this is what the present evidence says.


Re: What didn't I know and when didn't I know it?

"can only be solved by software"

The "only" is a garnish there, that is not stated. Any more than it can "only" be solved by hardware, for a lawsuit.

"all qualified computer scientists, of which the chipsters must employ hundreds if not thousands."

So a lawsuit needs to show that Intel does not hire qualified people, or that those scientists raised the issue and were ignored and this was a promised product feature.

"the solutions to Spectre and Meltdown are now known to be partially or entirely hardware"

Not quite. The HW "accelerated" versions are, yes in HW. If there was no sw solution, yes it can get into faulty HW territory depending on what was promised. This is not the case.

Was there wilful negligence.. i.e. it was common knowledge for OoO CPU design or Intel was informed and ignored it. This was what the original source cited implied - it implies this was known for *HW OoO CPU design* since 1971.

If common knowledge, it should have been only Intel, but that is not so.

If Intel was informed and still neglected subsequent design.. ok but no evidence yet. So innocent for now.

If Intel specifically claimed guaranteed security, but knew of the weakness. Again no evidence.

If Intel show in their design flow that they have taken reasonable steps to review designs etc, and that their design process is typical for the industry (or better), and that the problem was not recognisable, then it isn't a legal problem. It is a PR problem.

It just becomes a lesson learnt in CPU design and engineering. As with all human created endeavours CPUs are imperfect too.

The lawsuit seeks to assign guilt, but the verdict seems to be already here if you read the comments and articles. "Intel guilty" - I find this irrational.

It is a fact that every product has bugs and so this line of thinking which is equating a bug to guilt would mean every manufacturer is guilty of selling faulty products. This is not a tenable stance.

There needs to be more evidence than just finding a bug.


Re: What didn't I know and when didn't I know it?

Erm this is a SW guideline, so your evidence actually is exactly what Intel, AMD and ARM will use.. the SW didn't use the HW right inspite of guidance since 1971.

If you have ever worked with bare metal and custom ASICs, you'd know this is rather common. One side is blamed, the fence is between HW and SW.

When a workaround exists, SW is at fault. Because the HW people will just say the workaround was always the right method... (you can't use the HW that way you were for performance unless you are willing to take the security risk, we'll improve documentation for next time...)


Re: We have only ourselves to blame

>>Intel did not take any lessons learned from its experiences with other chip architectures

which architecture for example?? This has nothing to do with processor ISAs.. Architectures and the implementation of an architecture are two different things. AMD's implementation of x86_64 architecture is better when evaluated on this specific criteria. It might be worse on others. So could ARM8. Better and worse.

>>Intel did not take any lessons learned from its experiences with other chip architectures

On which of their other implementations did they make the same mistake to learn from and corrected it there but chose to ignore "the lesson" for their out of order CPUs?

This is becoming an Intel withhunt - lots of comments but little fact.

"Intel knew all along I tell you.. all along! The CEO must be burned alive! Burn Intel.. off with it's head.."

"I'm afraid to enter my password.. Am I alive? Is my money safe? Can I fly? My phone! Will the internet stop? Bitcoin wallets are insecure causing market crash.. It's all intel's fault I tell you!"

"Everyone should have used <favourite vendor of the week != Intel>. That's what I've been telling to you all.. Told ya..."

I mean at what point does one state that The Register is spewing "fake news". If it became obvious in a few years that the commentary didn't hold or other cpus have even more fatal flaws, does The Register become a fake news outlet for what it printed ingood faith today??

Prove Intel's bad faith...


Re: What about auto-updates?

I don't get the comparison to aircraft, they are specifically sold with safety assurances and hence as commented use a different development process.

The CPU is a part, and it is the procuring entity/system manufacturer that is responsible for assessing suitability and fitness for purpose.

If Intel claimed suitability this is a different matter. No one has pointed to any evidence of this.

You can ask why do SW like linux and windows store critical data in such a fashion to gain performance? Intel will say this is not a secure implementation and the OS vendors mis-represented performance by compromising security.

The corollary here is that insecure CPUs are illegal to be sold. Who said so? Which law forbids this??

Bad PR for Intel yes, but this is not remotely the same as being illegal.

Meltdown, Spectre: The password theft bugs at the heart of Intel CPUs


Re: football punditry?

Well for it to be gaffe it should be an embarrassing mistake, a mistake made rarely/by a few.

For it to be a "mega-gaffe", it would have to be a obvious oversight, made by no-one and blindingly obvious.

So I see a mega-gaffe as a mistake made on the very obvious. And obvious this isn't.

I mean what is "mega-gaffe" about it? "Mega-gaffes" don't take a decade to find which is my point.


football punditry?

>>This is, essentially, a mega-gaffe by the semiconductor industry.

This is a bit rich I feel.

It has taken the world a *decade* to find this on what are the two most popular architectures (x86, ARM) which are open on the details of the involved HW (out of necessity for SW use).

The number of technical people and engineers who have seen this is not insignificant over that decade.

Yet it has taken so long to identify it.

Hindsight might be 20/20, but to call this an obvious gaffe is contrary to a decade of evidence.


Re: Colour me surprised ....

>> Now will people believe me ?

There's nothing to believe... there is no such thing as perfect security which means every subsequent discussion claiming it is moot. There is no perfectly secure OS, perfectly secure silicon, perfectly secure system operator.

Perfectly unintelligent claims do look possible.



Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021