On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:11 AM, adrelanos <[email protected]> wrote: > [...] > Yes, the more I dig into one topic, the open questions remain and them > stronger the conclusion "we're totally screwed" becomes.
We've always been screwed. I'd say, ever since the 6809 faded away, but what I'd mean is ever since we moved from 8-bit to 32-bit systems. But, no, the problem is not the increased complexity, it's pushing the industry into a range of complexity where we have no tools to deal with the complexity. Don't let it turn you paranoid or cynical, just learn what you can, deal with it as you can, and keep doing what you can. And don't hope there is a magic bullet. With Intel, it's like our star pitcher has been caught trying to throw the game. I could use a war metaphor instead, but the point is not to give up. It's to adjust our ideas about whom we can trust and start adjusting our behavior accordingly. And build tools to help us contain the damage. I'm not sure what we can do concerning the microcode. The tools we need will require going against Intel's shrink-wrap agreements, but I think we can claim unconscionable clauses and such. Probing the microcode and breaking the key for the update mechanism are high-priority. It's a Pandora's box, but the NSA has forced our hand. If the ARM consortium won't help us out here, by avoiding the stupid excesses Intel has gone to, we'll eventually have to develop several industrially viable fully open/libre/free CPU cores. (Several, for specialized target applications, and so that we can avoid the monoculture issues.) -- Joel Rees Be careful where you see conspiracy. Look first in your own heart. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAAr43iMaZQ639ftb0cPmTd3Rv11Vd2-G=F4uu+POqFT6O=i...@mail.gmail.com
