AnyOldName3 @ AnyOldName3 @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

357

Joined

2 yr. ago

Is that enough to mitigate how much worse bare Google is than it was ten years ago, back when they were winning against SEO bots? In my experience, it hasn't been, but I've not done enough AI-aided web searches to have a good sample size.

If you give a chip more voltage, its transistors will switch faster, but they'll degrade faster. Ideally, you want just barely enough voltage that everything's reliably finished switching and all signals have propagated before it's time for the next clock cycle, as that makes everything work and last as long as possible. When the degradation happens, at first it means things need more voltage to reach the same speed, and then they totally stop working. A little degradation over time is normal, but it's not unreasonable to hope that it'll take ten or twenty years to build up enough that a chip stops working at its default voltage.

The microcode bug they've identified and are fixing applies too much voltage to part of the chip under specific circumstances, so if an individual chip hasn't experienced those circumstances very often, it could well have built up some degradation, but not enough that it's stopped working reliably yet. That could range from having burned through a couple of days of lifetime, which won't get noticed, to having a chip that's in the condition you'd expect it to be in if it was twenty years old, which still could pass tests, but might keel over and die at any moment.

If they're not doing a mass recall, and can't come up with a test that says how affected an individual CPU has been without needing to be so damaged that it's no longer reliable, then they're betting that most people's chips aren't damaged enough to die until the after warranty expires. There's still a big difference between the three years of their warranty and the ten to twenty years that people expect a CPU to function for, and customers whose parts die after thirty-seven months will lose out compared to what they thought they were buying.

It wasn't me who you replied to originally - I agree that it's most likely AMD are just being super cautious given historically how many times bad news for their competitors has been falsely equated by the press as equivalent to a minor issue they've had, and the delay moving things after the microcode update and therefore making launch-day benchmarking more favourable is just a bonus.

You've misunderstood. The original release date was set, then Intel announced the microcode update, which was after the original release date, then AMD announced that they'd be delaying the release date, and that new release date is after the microcode update.

Yes. Every time, it's gone less well than opening a banana from the stem end, unless the banana was horrendously underripe. I've never had the problem the alternative approach is claiming to fix unless I've intentionally opened the banana badly on purpose to prove a point about the problem really being people opening from the stem end incompetently.

A) The peel becomes easier to tear faster than the inside gets softer. You don't need to snap it, it doesn't need nearly enough tension to count as a snap once it's ripe.

B) The banana's been selectively bred to want to be as delicious as possible. It only wants you to be happy.

Bananas are the way they are through millenia of selective breeding, so there's no reason to think that monkeys know anything we don't. If pinching the bottom is easier than bending the stem, your banana isn't ripe yet and doesn't want to be eaten until later.

Note: this technique cannot be transferred to single-player games. I have tested the hypothesis thoroughly.

If anyone's in this thread because they're looking for a new mail client after Microsoft killed the old Mail app, and haven't been happy with the typical suggestions of using each email service's web interface or Thunderbird, I found I don't hate Mailspring (with the fancy features disabled - I just want my email client to do email well and don't want extras that provide clutter).

They're not supposed to have trust. That's why they're only allowed fully anonymised data under this scheme. They do pay the bills, though, so they can't be completely banished until there's an alternative source of money.

Coal, not oil, but it's still an interesting fact.

It's at least common on forums as bots love making accounts with non-megacorp email addresses on PhpBB and MyBB forums. Typically, there aren't people signing up the same services with business emails as personal ones, so if ones expecting not to be used by businesses want to fight spam, it's generally pretty effective and consequence-free to block email providers not known to have effective anti-bot measures built in.

That would be annoying for people who work on files with a double extension for legitimate reasons, e.g. .tar.gz, and (this can't be stressed strongly enough) Windows users do not pay attention to warning popups, so it wouldn't actually help. Despite it being eighteen years since Windows Vista released, and therefore vanishing unlikely that any given software was written assuming that Windows didn't have a permissions system, it's still most people's first troubleshooting step to try and run things as admin, and you still get loads of people (including ones who should know better, e.g. ones who also use Linux and would never log in as root) who disable UAC as one of the first things they do when setting up a windows install, and end up running everything as the equivalent of root just to suppress the mildly annoying pop-up when something asks for elevated permissions.

So, your proposed popup:

• would be annoying including for legitimate uses
• wouldn't help as anyone who already ignores the smart screen popup that shows up when running a dodgy application will ignore the new popup, too
• would be disabled by huge swathes of users anyway

It does ask, but often the Yay, thanks for changing my setting that I didn't ask you to change button is much more prominent than the Wtf I didn't ask for this put it back how it was button, so people think they're being told rather than asked and just confirm it without realising they had a choice. Also, a lot of people just click the Next/OK button without reading and are surprised by the consequences. It's not a major difference than just changing the setting of people don't realise they're being asked to opt in and can therefore opt out, but it is a bit of a difference.

They banned someone for a few weeks who'd comment Dub time on dubs after some weirdos got irrationally angry about it and mass reported her. There'd also be a meaningful comment on the actual episode from the same user, but it wouldn't be upvoted as much, so wouldn't be displayed as prominently. Before the ban and after it was reversed, there'd typically be an argument in the replies to the Dub time comment between people angrily ranting about it and other people defending it.

So there clearly was some moderation, but beyond an automated bad word filter, and I guess something blocking URLs, it was done sparingly and reluctantly.

Better have comments on Crunchyroll than make me go to R*ddit to find out if I missed something in an episode, especially as anime subreddits typically start permitting episode spoilers before the dub for that episode is out, so there's often nowhere except the dub comments on Crunchyroll that's safe to look for dub watchers.

Super useful for something like Overlord, where scenes with background information were cut and there'd be someone saying what else you'd know by this point in the manga, or if you'd forgotten something since watching a previous season and needed a reminder.

Typically Windows applications bundle all their dependencies, so Chocolatey, WinGet and Scoop are all more like installing a Flatpak or AppImage than a package from a distro's system package manager. They're all listed in one place, yes, but so's everything on FlatHub.

Your spoiler tag isn't working.

A vote for neoliberals is a vote to not have fascism for four more years. America's voting system doesn't allow the never-have-fascism votes to be pooled with the delay-fascism votes, so unless there's a decent chance for a mass swing of voters from delay-fascism to never-have-fascism, trying to encourage a small-scale swing only makes immediate fascism more likely by weakening the only thing with a chance to delay it.

If the plan is to try and encourage the Democrats to have primaries that actually have the power to move the party left, now is not the time to withhold a vote in protest as there's a good chance that even if it did convince them, there'd never be another election that wasn't rigged so they'd lose it no matter how popular they were.