Author Topic: INTC - Intel  (Read 52930 times)

globalfinancepartners

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1464
Re: INTC - Intel
« Reply #220 on: October 22, 2018, 05:41:24 AM »
Thanks Liberty - that's a good source.  I had not heard of the semiaccurate site before

https://semiaccurate.com/2018/10/22/intel-kills-off-the-10nm-process/


Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10371
  • twitter.com/libertyRPF
    • twitter.com/libertyRPF
Re: INTC - Intel
« Reply #221 on: November 06, 2018, 06:01:14 AM »
"Most haystacks don't even have a needle." |  I'm on Twitter  | Interesting podcast on aging research

Jurgis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4072
    • Porfolio
Re: INTC - Intel
« Reply #222 on: November 06, 2018, 10:55:54 AM »
This should be able to run Crysis.

LOL.
"Before you can be rich, you must be poor." - Nef Anyo
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"American History X", "Milk", "The Insider", "Dirty Money"

walkie518

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
Re: INTC - Intel
« Reply #223 on: November 06, 2018, 12:32:04 PM »
Intel's handling of spectre and meltdown is putting intel first and customers last

b/c the software patches are expensive on compute resources, and they aren't going to recall willingly the last 20 years of faulty chips, intel is now requiring that the os opt-in to new security features, whereas old chips are not by default secure.

worse, the "new" security features are actually the old security features...intel is passing the buck

now, customers have to choose between performance and security

net net, cloud providers will win on the security front as they can do more distributed computing across different kinds of chips whereas individuals using hybrid or on-premise systems will likely remain most vulnerable

ethically, this seems like the wrong move

legally, this evades blame and liability

business-wise, maybe intel can get away with this and is taking that risk, but I bet sales decline as cloud providers try to distribute work loads further in the future via software rather than rely on one architecture with flawed instruction sets

attached is intel's "mitigation" specs