|
leper khan posted:I somehow doubt that AWS makes extensive use of IME for administration. Like I said, I honestly don't know. Just that changing from one hardware supplier to another can have an associated cost that is non-trivial even if what they are selling is very similar, though I don't come from an IT background so I'm not sure what would be involved here. Edit: nvm this line of discussion is moot, AMD is affected by a similar problem apparently. Edit2: but not as serious by the looks of it? Also the performance hit to intel processors is being reported as high as 29% for an i7-6700 and 34% for an i7-3770S. MagicBoots fucked around with this message at 08:28 on Jan 3, 2018 |
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 04:39 |
|
|
MagicBoots posted:Edit2: but not as serious by the looks of it? Also the performance hit to intel processors is being reported as high as 29% for an i7-6700 and 34% for an i7-3770S. Goddamn. Anyway, do we know if Amazon has a specific contract with Intel vs AMD? I don't see why they (or any of the others) wouldn't have a combination of the two. Intel and AMD processors both support virtualization. Edit- AMD claimed that this doesn't affect their chips. Not sure about the older ones, but the new series based on their "Zen" architecture boasts two features that appear to make this a non-issue for them, especially "SEV" in regards to cloud computing. From Wiki- quote:Enhanced security and virtualization support LiterallyAnything fucked around with this message at 11:27 on Jan 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 10:36
|
|
|
This issue has my AMD calls hard, ROCK HARD
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 14:25
|
|
|
Maybe it's because I don't feel well, but wtf does all this mean in leyman's terms?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
Is there any chance Intel will benefit from this whole thing by selling even more processors to make up for the performance problems?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
jvick posted:Maybe it's because I don't feel well, but wtf does all this mean in leyman's terms? Intel's x86 processors contain a serious security vulnerability, patches to operating systems are being developed quickly so as to prevent it from being exploited. However, the patch will necessarily result in a performance hit of a few % to the 34% quoted further down in the thread. It affects basically every x86 CPU produced in the last several years and everyone, particularly major cloud providers, will have to apply the patch so as not to allow the vulnerability to be exploited (a potential exploit, for example, would allow AWS customer A server to gain knowledge or access of customer B).
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
jvick posted:Maybe it's because I don't feel well, but wtf does all this mean in leyman's terms? I'm sure someone else here understands this more fully and can articulate it better than I can, but I'll give it a shot- An operating system is loaded on top of a "kernel" which is responsible for handling data passed from the operating system layer to your base-system (hardware). The hardware does what it is told to do and returns the result of the data back to the operating system. The OS, and any applications that run on it, don''t have direct access to this data (or rather, they shouldn't), and so these calls to the system hardware from software take time but are necessary for speedy sending and retrieval of this data. To facilitate this, Intel created a way to make the data accessible to the software layer while still "hiding" it. This data is stuff that is behind the scenes on your machine, such as your saved passwords in Windows, and only are exposed when necessary, ie- when you open up Outlook a connection is created with your e-mail provider for authentication, but the end-user never sees this going on and Outlook itself does not actually "know" the username and password, but instead makes a call to retrieve it and directs the hardware to pass it through to the necessary process so that Outlook never has to "see" it. Intel believed the answer was to distribute this data in random locations in memory so that only the hardware would really know where it was. However, this method of randomly hiding the data isn't sufficient. It seems that someone has found a way (surprise) to query for and piece together the results of these calls in order to decipher where the data is stored, allowing it to be viewed and possibly manipulated by any application. This would typically result in a "page fault" (application accessing/setting memory that belongs to another process) but is allowed, via this method, on Intel-based systems for performance purposes as mentioned above. AMD went a different route and does not allow software to retrieve this data in the same manner as Intel. I don't know how it's different fundamentally or how their previous processors prior to the Zen series dealt with it, but whatever design they used allowed them to develop another way to go about this. " Secure Memory Encryption (SME)" allows the hardware to encrypt and decrypt the page file data in real time, so while an application can fetch this data it's never* able to view it in an unencrypted format, thus there's no need to randomly "hide" the data in different locations in memory like Intel does. "Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV)" builds upon this concept for virtualization (running multiples "instances" of an operating system on a single physical box - essential for cloud computing) by having the hardware itself, not the software, create and associate individual keys to each of the guest virtual machines, meaning no one instance is able to utilize its own key to access another instance's data. So not only is this a non-issue for AMD from the start, but they also have security protocols built into the hardware specifically to prevent this type of thing from happening, without relying on a pseudo-random method of virtual hide and seek like Intel. The more I think on it the more it seems Intel's design is a legacy thing that they never went back and touched on, believing it to be safe. It really feels like that Intel's way of doing it is more of a "workaround" while AMD's method is a true solution to an issue that's been apparent for over a decade. Edit- My biggest losses last year were from AMD shorts. Prior to this I considered myself an Intel guy through and through. Even a 5% hit in performance is a big loving deal. On another note- Is it too much of a stretch to believe this could affect natural gas/energy futures, considering how much power is consumed by data-centers and all the consumer PCs? Editx2- Shameless plug for the Goon Trading Discord channel- https://discord.gg/CP9fQVp Editx3- Intel officially comments and claims this is not a design "flaw" and that it's not unique to Intel. The wording seems to imply that it's just MOSTLY Intel. I'd also say their definition of "flaw" is, well, flawed. Awaiting comment from AMD. quote:"Recent reports that these exploits are caused by a 'bug' or a 'flaw' and are unique to Intel products are incorrect," the company said in a statement. "Based on the analysis to date, many types of computing devices — with many different vendors' processors and operating systems — are susceptible to these exploits." https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/03/intel-says-its-working-to-fix-security-issue-promptly-and-constructively.html LiterallyAnything fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Jan 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
It seems to me that people just figured out Intel's architecture, but haven't yet done so with AMD's. That doesn't mean they won't in the future, and I wonder how many IT folks are going to completely jump ship on Intel because of it. If I had to guess, it probably won't be too many.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
LiterallyAnything posted:Intel sucks Thanks for the great explanation. So part of the hugeness of this is that AWS runs mostly on Intel hardware, and this issue will require major patching, which will in turn reduce the processing performance. To me, someone with very little IT knowledge, this seems like a pretty major security flaw. Which surprises me that $AMZN isn't dropping rapidly today along with $INTL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 20:36
|
|
|
Wow! Look at TWMJF go!
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 22:05
|
|
|
.
melon cat fucked around with this message at 06:59 on Mar 16, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 22:36
|
|
|
Yeah weed stuff up double digits again, ACB up 20%, when do I jump off this bitcoin bandwagon I wonder
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Weed crashed hard on Friday before rebounding. I could easily see that stuff falling 20% in the blink of an eye.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
Investing in weed is the best way to invest in your future.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
LLCoolJD posted:Weed crashed hard on Friday before rebounding. I could easily see that stuff falling 20% in the blink of an eye. didn't that turn out to be one dude cashing out? lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2018 23:39
|
|
|
jvick posted:Thanks for the great explanation. So part of the hugeness of this is that AWS runs mostly on Intel hardware, and this issue will require major patching, which will in turn reduce the processing performance. To me, someone with very little IT knowledge, this seems like a pretty major security flaw. Which surprises me that $AMZN isn't dropping rapidly today along with $INTL. From infosec thread (twitter reads bottom to top because it is garbage): Diva Cupcake posted:Embargo is lifted. MagicBoots fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Jan 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
e: oops wrong thread.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:That transaction was planned two quarters ago, and Intel is up 2.5% today on the news How far 2 quarters ago? Because the Meltdown vulnerability was disclosed to Intel in June.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
Spectre... I knew it. Blofield is responsible for this...
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 01:55
|
|
|
*not me* Namaste market bulls 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 07:08
|
|
|
What do I need to do to buy some stocks? Yes I"m a total newbie but I see that the OP hasn't been updated since 2010. Looking to pick up a few long term and low risk basics and maybe have fun with some of these new WEED pennystocks. Is e-trade still considered good/easy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 13:19
|
|
|
Robinhood is good because there are no fees, and it's way better to not have a constant price on bad decisions, especially if there isn't relatively much to begin with. The downsides are that you can't buy OTC (WEED) stocks, and the platform is very basic. If you need more features, I believe most large brokers like e-trade and TD Ameritrade offer similar features all at around the same price.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
https://apnews.com/19f6bfec15a74733b40eaf0ff9162bfa?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=APquote:WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Jeff Sessions is going after legalized marijuana. Sessions is rescinding a policy that had let legalized marijuana flourish without federal intervention across the country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
Ahhh, gently caress that. gently caress this us government
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
So I guess the question is if that's going to spook the pot market. I think the horse is out of the gate on legalization either way but we might see a the pot rally get blunted today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
Omnicarus posted:So I guess the question is if that's going to spook the pot market. I think the horse is out of the gate on legalization either way but we might see a the pot rally get blunted today. I don't think weed stocks are going to go up in smoke any time soon. Probably this kind of risk is already baked into the price.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
Because of government restriction, we still don't know much about the effect of marijuana on the brain longterm or how it affects developing minds. So I'm okay with slowing things down a bit until we have more information. People can still choose to do smoke pot but need to be aware of the risks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:33
|
|
|
Don't think the states will take kindly to their new tax windfalls being taken away by the clown administration but the news is hitting MJX already Also, Canada gives no fucks about that little imp Sessions
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:34
|
|
|
Lol, well done you cretins, please attack weed. It's like these idiots want to be reviled and run out of office as soon as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:44
|
|
|
dougdrums posted:Robinhood is good because there are no fees, and it's way better to not have a constant price on bad decisions, especially if there isn't relatively much to begin with. The downsides are that you can't buy OTC (WEED) stocks, and the platform is very basic. Do I need any of these features? Why would I pay 5-7 bucks to do a trade when I could do it for free? Research? "Customer service"? I guess for international investments and not-basic stuff I'd probably want one of the big-boy accounts, yeah? And after doing a little research it seems that fidelity might be best? Also: Is there any advantage to opening an account that can be seamlessly linked with other accounts like TD or Merrill (BofA) or Ally?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 15:52
|
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:Do I need any of these features? Why would I pay 5-7 bucks to do a trade when I could do it for free? The free ones typically rake your trades by altering the price iirc
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
For what you're doing I doubt you'd need anything at all really. Trading OTC stocks is the only downside, but I'm assuming you can still buy weed ETFs and what not on Robinhood (I can't have it due to my firm's restrictions so someone else will have to answer that one). If all you're doing is picking a few mutual funds or sector funds and then buying random one of stocks then you should be fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:04
|
|
|
leper khan posted:The free ones typically rake your trades by altering the price iirc Last time I looked RH added like 0.0007 cents to each share by changing the bid/ask. Still it's perfect for new traders. However the only weed security you can buy is MJX (no otc = no Canadian weed)
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
I trade Vanguard because 35 (x2, = 70) bips on my positions is worth not having to open another brokerage account.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
.
melon cat fucked around with this message at 06:59 on Mar 16, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
LLCoolJD posted:Weed crashed hard on Friday before rebounding. I could easily see that stuff falling 20% in the blink of an eye. edit: -40%  then again after yesterdays dumbass parabolic candles no one should really be surprised
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
STO weed, buy back eod maybe tomorrow, free money imo e: someone tell chronos to crash and burn harder i want better prices
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
I knew we flew too close to the sun, -17% on TWMJF and ACBFF right now. Time to take profits I guess
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:What do I need to do to buy some stocks? What's your initial investment? Robinhood is probably your best bet if it's not a large amount, because transaction fees will kill you if you're not investing a lot. If you're investing, let's say $5k, and you're putting most of it in ETFs (as you should be), then you're looking at what, $1k to gently caress around with on weed stock? A $10 transaction fee each way is 1%, that's going to loving kill you over time. I use Ally, because I used to use Tradeking and they became Ally, and I used Tradeking because I used to use Zecco and Zecco became Tradeking, and I used to use Zecco becuase Zecco used to be free.99 I stick with Ally because I like the interface, and the fees aren't bad. It's not worth it for me to wring my hands over a couple of dollars. You don't really need any of the baller features like options and margin until you have a significant amount in your account. These are also dangerous features if used improperly. But they're also pretty great to have access too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 17:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 04:39 |
|
|
Intel's CEO optioned and sold like $40M in stock in November and left himself with the minimum required number of shares for a CEO, before the news of the critical processor flaw was revealed.  https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/intel-ceo-reportedly-sold-shares-after-the-company-already-knew-about-massive-security-flaws.html https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/12/19/intels-ceo-just-sold-a-lot-of-stock.aspx
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2018 17:08
|
|