Most people are just concerned about economic and social issues, and the implications this proposal has on freedom of speech and what that means to democracy seems to be unknown to most.
In Portugal, this proposal was not debated nor was it present on most parties' electoral agendas. Furthermore, I got no replies from the MEP candidates I emailed about their opinion on chatcontrol. Even if I wanted to vote accordingly to this proposal, I simply couldn't.
this specific proposal had the benefit of already having had votes on it, so you could've probably found the parties' voting records there. But yeah, there's a broader issue with how european politics is approached since it is always so nationalized that these kind of votes end up as referendums on the national government, which in turn breeds ignorance of what the EU is responsible for and for what it isn't which feeds the vicious cycle of apathy
I'm mildly optimistic it'll get better since the EU and EU politicians are getting more visible. I just hope we don't overshoot and end up where the US is right now where people seem to think the president does everything at all times at all levels
Btw, I'm assuming you meant "MEP candidate" when you say "deputy candidate", in english as far as I can tell deputy lost the meaning of "legislature member" in common use, that remained common in Latin languages (italian here, we use the same term)
Just an FYI that it might confuse some people (like it did with me before I switched to thinking about it in italian) why you were asking the deputies of a candidate instead of the candidates themselves
Aren't you vulnerable to this regardless of whether wether you're using this tool? The vulnerability in question relies on untrusted code being able to lower voltages to very low levels, causing the cpu to malfunction. Using this tool or having it installed isn't a relevant factor. If you have untrusted code running on your PC, it's already game over, and any malicious tool can use the same api this tool uses to control voltages.
Not exactly. The promise of SGX and secure hardware enclaves is that the code that executes there should run with access to protected encrypted memory pages (enforced by the CPU VMM), and the state of the enclave can be remotely attested. Basically, it's designed to run a secure application in an untrusted computing environment as long as you trust the hardware to implement the features correctly.
But that's something that Signal implements on their own backend, not something that runs on consumer devices, so it's not really relevant to a discussion about the risks of undervolting your CPU.
I was directly replying to the parent's question of whether there were any uses of SGX that were not anti-consumer. Signal's use of it, is very much in line with my thinking of what constitutes pro-consumer.
I agree though, we're all getting slightly off topic
SGX is actually deprecated on client devices like PCs, so it is rather difficult to use it in anti-consumer ways now (and as mentioned in a sibling thread, makes this rather irrelevant to the topic of undervolting your own PC).
In my experience (working in the field at Anjuna), SGX and other Confidential Computing are quietly used on the server-side in enterprises a lot. It's a part of defense-in-depth, often to protect critical secrets and cryptographic keys, or the systems that manage them.
> We were able to corrupt the integrity of Intel SGX on Intel Core processors by controling the voltage when executing enclave computations
> If you are not using SGX, no actions are required. If you are using SGX, it suffices to apply the microcode update provided by Intel to mitigate Plundervolt.
It's not nothing, but that seems minor to irrelevant to most people.
In all likelihood this tool does not work for most users, specifically in response to this vulnerability. If you're on the latest microcode, undervolting is no longer possible due to Intel's mitigation: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advi...
Which is a pity because my i7 Lenovo laptop is acoustically and thermally some kind of jet turbine in a case, because I was foolish enough to believe a review, and I really wish I could undervolt it so it can make it to lunchtime on a charge.
I was actually wrong about that, it turned out to be possible on my 11th gen Intel CPU but it was definitely not as easy as it should've been.
I used https://github.com/datasone/setup_var.efi to modify the UEFI variables. The README has all the info you'd need. It turns out that both a BIOS and microcode update is required to kill off this feature, and you could just configure the BIOS to not lock it.
Wow, I never considered a power attack from software of an untrusted OS. Ring -1 and SGX and the like lead to some very harsh security environments for modern processors. IMO if you want cryptographic security, you should probably use an external component that you control, but that isn't always possible and is never the cheaper option.
From an ethical perspective, tech monopolies aren't a very good idea. However, from a purely economics standpoint, tech giants make up a not insignificant part of the US's GDP.
The classic argument for laws regulating monopolies/abuse of power is that overall this worsens what consumers and countries care about. Both that it lowers quality for consumers (lack of true competition) and slows growth by eliminating the push for new things/efficiencies.
> However, from a purely economics standpoint, tech giants make up a not insignificant part of the US's GDP.
Yes. It would surely be better to have a large field of non-giants competing for customers taking up the same proportion of GDP though right?
Large scale - in some things - allows for higher quality at lower prices since you divide the costs of designing and building between more people. For many complex things you have to be a large enterprise to build it. Building a reliable engine that meets modern emissions standards isn't possible for a single human, or even a small group - a large (monopoly) can make that investment and divide those costs between many customers and so the price is cheaper than a small company that would have to divide the costs between many less customers. Tech tends to be similarly complex and so needs are large investment in R&D to be acceptable, which in turn means that they need to be large to make the costs divided between all customers acceptable.
The real question is where do those competing considerations meet up. A monopoly is bad, but you can go too far in the other direction as well. I don't know how to decide what the best answer is (I'm not even aware of anyone who has made a useful argument for any particular compromise)
Those things are not linked. Large and monopoly are very different. Your example of engines is good, there isn't afaik a monopoly on building engines. Even a small number of huge auto makers are still competing against each other.
> A monopoly is bad, but you can go too far in the other direction as well. I don't know how to decide what the best answer is (I'm not even aware of anyone who has made a useful argument for any particular compromise)
I agree, I think the general aim with the EU makes sense which is about use of power in one field to control another. So google are good at search but that doesn't mean they get to make their own shopping attempt rank higher than others. If they have 90% of the search market then fine if that came from being better than everyone else but their shopping offering has to be better than others.
Disruptive tech monopolies upset entire existing industries for the sake of their owners/shareholders/employees, which is usually tiny compared to the said industries.
(Think of FB/Google advertisement centralisation as the end of other media providers.)
From an economics standpoint, does that make tech giants good, or does it make the US's GDP weaker since so much wealth is concentrated among so few players?
I keep wanting to push back on whether GDP is the best way to measure an economy, but most of the articles I find bring in concepts like "[GDP] doesn’t meaningfully account for successful management of priorities like public health, economic equity, climate action, or racial justice."[1] But you're making it clear you're talking from a purely economics standpoint. So pushing back on the ethics of applying GDP doesn't even apply.
> tech giants make up a not insignificant part of the US's GDP.
Indeed. So could the US reliance on these monopolies and tax-avoiders have anything to do with the US's relatively unimpressive growth compared with the EU?
But most of the US tech giants don't produce anything of value. They just suck out adverting money from companies that actually produce wealth. Its the same as the Germans 1944 GDP or Russians current. The numbers go high when you burn a tremendous amount of money.
There's lots of value in being able to influence huge portions of the population. The fact that you consider it morally wrong does not make it invaluable to others.
Agreed. Also just so you know, invaluable is one of those weird words that is intensified with in-, not negated. It means even more valuable, not worthless
Don't be so literal, it's a weak contribution. I think OP's sentiment is clearly along the lines of "disproportionate little value to humanity in regard to their economic power".
Ad companies like Google actually produce negative economic value, because advertising is a Red Queen's Race with no upper bound and every dollar wasted on advertising is a dollar that the company must recoup by increasing the price of the product, at absolutely no benefit to the consumer.
>But most of the US tech giants don't produce anything of value.
That doesn't really matter at the end of the day when you're discussing finances. All that matters for people, countries and governments in capitalism is that they have more money in their pockets than the rest, not how ethically that value gets generated or if their work produces much social value to society.
They only need to delete personally identifying data. That means they could probably just remove the username from your post, but leave the post text there attributed to "anon".
yes, and if they cannot, they are violating the GDPR and have to pay fines.
This is why datasets are rarely sold as massive CSV's in the modern world - instead companies with data sell access to API's, with the expectation you'll query for what you need in real time.
Neon is SIMD so I would presume these instructions let you vectorize those calculations and do them in parallel on a lot of data more efficiently than if you broke it down into simpler operations and did them one by one.
Yes, but the part that got me was the halving of the result followed by the clamping. SIMD generally makes sense, but for something like this to exist usually there's something very specific (like a certain video codec, for example) that greatly benefits from such a complex instruction.
It's probably not about avoiding extra instructions/performance, but making the range of the result more useful and avoiding overflow. Or in other words, the entire instruction may be useless if you don't do these things.
The halving and clamping is nothing particularly remarkable in the context of usefully using fixed point numbers (scaled integers) to avoid overflow. Reciprocal square root itself is a fundamental operation for DSP algorithms and of course computer graphics.
This is a fairly generic instruction really, though FRSQRTE likely gets more real world use.
But charging through many ports requires extra circuitry to support more power on every port, while booting from multiple ports just requires the boot sequence firmware to talk to more than one USB controller (like PC motherboards do, for example)
Have fun trying to sue an Israeli malware company into compliance. The reason so many malware companies operate out of Israel is because the Israeli government shields them from consequences.
Support for PHP7 has been discontinued. It's a matter of security, and performance is a plus. Upgrading systems has its cost, but the cost of data loss or leakage, exploitable through software that will not be patched anymore, will cost you even more.
