According to the translation I read, the security-related complaint in CSAC’s post is mainly about Intel Management Engine. And you know what? They’re right. It is a back door, and it is a security risk. Not a new or obscure one, though, and not just for China.
The risks imposed by Intel Management Engine and AMD’s Platform Security Processor have been known for several CPU generations. Obviously, a lot of us are unhappy about this and would like a way to disable them.
Instead, these components have been made more and more integrated with core system functionality, making the prospect of disabling them less and less practical. I fear it may take legislation to give us back control of the computers we supposedly own.
Government comprises many departments and organizations, which do many things. It’s not a single blob of all good or all bad.
I don’t remember saying the contrary. When one part of the government does something, it was still the government.
not all back doors and CPU bugs are government-imposed
Don’t remember saying every single backdoor is government-imposed. Fact is there’s at least one backdoor that is for the government, whether there’s 1 or 5 doesn’t really matter.
I can only speak for myself, but abandoning x86 isn’t something that I could have done if I hadn’t first cleaned my hands of my old gaming habit.
On the technical end, if you’re already using some Linux distro, you’re already half way there. Just use the installation media for ppce64el or riscv64 instead of the usual amd64.
Those suffixes in the installation images denote for which CPU architecture the image’s binaries had been compiled for. In short, yes, they will only install and run on their respective hardware.
Unless you just want to fire them up in a virtual machine simulating the relevant CPU architecture.
People online were making fun at my old PC still running an FX 8350. That one was released before all this. Who’s laughing now? I’m only partially kidding lol.
I’m online, and I commend you for continuing to use your hardware for as long as it does the job, instead of adding to the world’s energy, material, and e-waste problems. Well done.
Your hypothetical energy savings from new hardware is nothing but a wild guess since you don’t know his actual usage, and meaningless anyway unless you subtract from it the energy use from manufacturing and distributing a new system, as well as that from disposing of the old one.
Also, you haven’t addressed the other problems mentioned at all.
Why would I need to know his usage? Whatever it might be, a newer CPU can do the same amount of work as an old CPU for a fraction of the energy.
meaningless anyway unless you subtract from it the energy use from manufacturing and distributing a new system, as well as that from disposing of the old one.
You mean the CPU that was already manufactured years ago and won’t magically disappear due to you refusing to upgrade to it? Whether you use it or not the energy to create it was already spent.
you haven’t addressed the other problems mentioned at all
And I didn’t mean to. I simply corrected you when you congratulated him for using less energy, which is not true.
According to the translation I read, the security-related complaint in CSAC’s post is mainly about Intel Management Engine. And you know what? They’re right. It is a back door, and it is a security risk. Not a new or obscure one, though, and not just for China.
The risks imposed by Intel Management Engine and AMD’s Platform Security Processor have been known for several CPU generations. Obviously, a lot of us are unhappy about this and would like a way to disable them.
https://support.system76.com/articles/intel-me/
https://hackaday.com/2020/06/16/disable-intels-backdoor-on-modern-hardware/
Instead, these components have been made more and more integrated with core system functionality, making the prospect of disabling them less and less practical. I fear it may take legislation to give us back control of the computers we supposedly own.
The government is the reason why you have backdoors built into your computers and routers.
Government comprises many departments and organizations, which do many things. It’s not a single blob of all good or all bad.
Also, not all back doors and CPU bugs are government-imposed.
I don’t remember saying the contrary. When one part of the government does something, it was still the government.
Don’t remember saying every single backdoor is government-imposed. Fact is there’s at least one backdoor that is for the government, whether there’s 1 or 5 doesn’t really matter.
Jump ship from x86 to something that isn’t hostile to users.
RISC-V
OpenPOWER
Well that happens to be what China is pushing for indeed.
I am a braindead normie… How feasible is to even make that switch at this point?
I can only speak for myself, but abandoning x86 isn’t something that I could have done if I hadn’t first cleaned my hands of my old gaming habit.
On the technical end, if you’re already using some Linux distro, you’re already half way there. Just use the installation media for ppce64el or riscv64 instead of the usual amd64.
Can install it on regular processor or does it require new hardware?
Those suffixes in the installation images denote for which CPU architecture the image’s binaries had been compiled for. In short, yes, they will only install and run on their respective hardware.
Unless you just want to fire them up in a virtual machine simulating the relevant CPU architecture.
People online were making fun at my old PC still running an FX 8350. That one was released before all this. Who’s laughing now? I’m only partially kidding lol.
I’m online, and I commend you for continuing to use your hardware for as long as it does the job, instead of adding to the world’s energy, material, and e-waste problems. Well done.
He is adding to the world’s energy given that an FX 8350 is slower than something like a Ryzen 5600 at twice the TDP.
Your hypothetical energy savings from new hardware is nothing but a wild guess since you don’t know his actual usage, and meaningless anyway unless you subtract from it the energy use from manufacturing and distributing a new system, as well as that from disposing of the old one.
Also, you haven’t addressed the other problems mentioned at all.
Why would I need to know his usage? Whatever it might be, a newer CPU can do the same amount of work as an old CPU for a fraction of the energy.
You mean the CPU that was already manufactured years ago and won’t magically disappear due to you refusing to upgrade to it? Whether you use it or not the energy to create it was already spent.
And I didn’t mean to. I simply corrected you when you congratulated him for using less energy, which is not true.