[107726] in Cypherpunks
CDR: Intel cpus & privacy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Thu Jan 21 19:39:33 1999
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 01:21:28 +0100
From: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
To: cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com
Reply-To: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
At 06:32 PM 1/21/99 +0100, Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
>Jim Burnes - Denver wrote:
>> Non-intel, PCI bus compatible systems will proliferate if
>> Intel starts playing games like this.
>
>Since Intel chips has a substantial share of the market, there
>is a corresponding impact. Because of the privacy issue that was
Anyone pondered the fact that you can run an emulator on
another machine? And that unless you're playing RT games,
it doesn't matter? Especially should your connectivity b/width
not be able to fill your cpu pipes.. which is likely the case
for a while.
>pointed out, it has disadvantage, but I don't exclude that the
>benefits might outweigh. (Tracking persons is already possible
>with handys anyway.)
Therefore why bother, just love Big Bro? :-<
Not everyone carries a portable brain-tumor generator with them...
or has it on all the time. If anything, one's reaction to intrusions
should be more resistance, not less.
>> Keep crypto where it belongs -- in source code where I can
>> see it.
Because your OS and every other code you might have installed
can muck with it too. Embedded/closed systems don't have
this problem. Read the Walsh report; read the "Inevitability of failure"
report by the NSA boys.
