― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 12 February 2004 16:36 (twenty years ago) link
― Bryan (Bryan), Thursday, 12 February 2004 16:44 (twenty years ago) link
― Jarlr'mai (jarlrmai), Thursday, 12 February 2004 16:45 (twenty years ago) link
For a sec reading this, my inner geek was excited. Faster connections are affected for various reasons as it is. Getting a lab-built modulator to move a billion pulses is easy enough in a controlled setting. However, tis bound to slow down if mass users worldwide are trying to use a limited amount of fiberoptic cables to access the Net.
This is bound to hike up the costs of the next batch of computers too, since what's new and shiny is always expensive for the first couple of years til it gets mass marketed.
(ending spiel of cold water)
― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Thursday, 12 February 2004 16:54 (twenty years ago) link
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 12 February 2004 17:02 (twenty years ago) link
― Nichole Graham (Nichole Graham), Thursday, 12 February 2004 17:03 (twenty years ago) link
― Dale the Titled (cprek), Thursday, 12 February 2004 17:13 (twenty years ago) link
― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 12 February 2004 17:13 (twenty years ago) link
― Dale the Titled (cprek), Thursday, 12 February 2004 17:14 (twenty years ago) link
― Markelby (Mark C), Thursday, 12 February 2004 18:23 (twenty years ago) link
True. On the other hand, shiny Apple G5 dual processor CPUs will be available for a few hundred bucks. I know my computing needs don't require light-based processing--I'll be happy to scoop up the suddenly obsolete machines.
― webcrack (music=crack), Thursday, 12 February 2004 18:29 (twenty years ago) link
― nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 12 February 2004 18:34 (twenty years ago) link
Excellent
― ModJ (ModJ), Thursday, 12 February 2004 18:53 (twenty years ago) link
― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 12 February 2004 18:55 (twenty years ago) link
― Dan I., Thursday, 12 February 2004 19:16 (twenty years ago) link
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
this is a massive fuck up innit?
― 龜, Wednesday, 3 January 2018 12:49 (six years ago) link
The effects are still being benchmarked, however we're looking at a ballpark figure of five to 30 per cent slow down, depending on the task and the processor model.
― pee-wee and the power men (bizarro gazzara), Wednesday, 3 January 2018 12:52 (six years ago) link
security flaw could allow hackers to zzzzzz ASLR by default has only been widespread for about a decade so I expect to see these types of issues to keep coming tbf
― El Tomboto, Wednesday, 3 January 2018 13:31 (six years ago) link
Intel don't want you to know that this ONE WEIRD TRICK to speed up CPU performance through speculative execution is now a potential security flaw!
― 2018 has to be better (snoball), Wednesday, 3 January 2018 21:45 (six years ago) link
I sure am looking forward to the next Patch Tuesday! As if the computers at work (all HP Intel based, natch) aren't slow enough already!
― 2018 has to be better (snoball), Wednesday, 3 January 2018 21:47 (six years ago) link