Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!




Last Active
Favorite Role
  • "A raft of flaws in AMD chips makes bad hacks much, much worse"

    All of the attacks require previously having root access to the system in order to do anything.  If your adversary already has root access to your computer, you've already lost.  Anything else that they can do beyond what root normally gives them is kind of irrelevant.  One of the attacks even requires additionally flashing the BIOS.

    The real question is, who is this "security company" and who are they working for.  Real security companies generally give a company 90 days to fix flaws before saying anything publicly, not 24 hours, as the goal is to fix the problems, not just to embarrass the company.  This looks like more a media blitz than a security issue.
  • Why do we get continental lag? Will it ever be solved?

    The laws of physics do not care about your desire for better ping times.

    Light travels at exactly 299792458 m/s in a vacuum.  That number can be known exactly because it's the definition of a meter.  But it does mean that for light to go around the world would take about 140 ms.

    Light travels slower than that in a fiber optic cable, however.  It's bouncing around a lot within the cable rather than going straight, resulting in a net speed of about 2/3 of that.  So you're looking at over 200 ms for light to go around the world in a fiber optic cable.

    And that's assuming that you've got a dedicated cable for the entire route that follows a geodesic along the earth's surface.  Real networks have various nodes along the way, which adds a bit of latency each time, as well as giving you a zig-zaggy path to some degree rather than going straight.

    Add that all up and for communications with an antipodal point, a round-trip ping time of 300 ms would be pretty good.  Now, you're not actually going to the opposite side of the earth, but to go between two random points on earth would on average be 1/4 of the way around each way, in which a ping time of 150 ms would be quite good.

    So why doesn't that seem horribly laggy for phone calls?  Because if you hear the other person talking 300 ms later than he hears himself talking relative to you, that doesn't feel that laggy.  For some games, a 300 ms ping time is terrible, however.

    If you're seeing 500 ms ping times and hoping to get that down to 200 ms, that could happen so long as you're not going to nearly the opposite side of the world, such as from Australia to the US.  If you're hoping for 50 ms ping times to anywhere in the world, it would take a massive revolution in physics to make faster than light data transfer possible.
  • Gaming Laptop Between $600-800

    Quizzical said:
    That fits the thread title pretty well, and checks the boxes on what you'd want in a "gaming" laptop at that price.  A GTX 1050 Ti isn't going to give you great gaming performance, but you aren't going to get great gaming performance on that budget.  Games will run at suitable settings.  You might well be able to max LoL; WoW will be fine at suitably reduced settings.
    That's fine she doesn't care about FPS or anything like that. Just wants it to be able to play WoW/League and watch Kitty/Corgi videos.   Is this something I could install later?

    Is there some reason why she needs more than 256 GB of storage?

    Besides, you're not going to fit a 3.5" hard drive into a laptop.  I realize that the link says you searched for 2.5" hard drives and Amazon gave you a 3.5" one, but Amazon's search function basically doesn't work.
  • Nvidia trying to force companies to stop selling AMD GPUs

    "GPP partners will get early access to our latest innovations, and work closely with our engineering team to bring the newest technologies to gamers."

    That's from Nvidia's announcement of the program.  If only favored partners get early access, then everyone else necessarily gets only later access.

    Here's an explanation of some relevant US laws from the FTC:


    Apparently whether it's a violation of the law depends substantially on how widely applicable the agreements are.  If Nvidia were trying to make it impossible to buy AMD GPUs at all, that would be a clear violation of the law.  If they had just one favored partner to help them get reference boards ready, that clearly wouldn't be.  Nvidia already has a special relationship of sorts with EVGA, as does AMD with Sapphire.

    As I read it, Nvidia is trying to get perhaps half of board partners, most OEMs, and basically all gaming laptop vendors to drop discrete AMD GPUs entirely, or perhaps only to drop the higher end GPUs.  Presumably Nvidia would be fine with partners having a Jaton-like relationship with AMD that avoids the gaming-focused video cards.
  • Nvidia trying to force companies to stop selling AMD GPUs


    Basically, the claim there is that if an GPU board partner (e.g., Asus, Gigabyte, MSI) or an OEM (e.g., Dell, HP) sells GPUs from both AMD and Nvidia, then Nvidia is threatening that they won't get any Nvidia GPUs until the partners that are Nvidia-only have already been able to get all that they want.  When supplies are plentiful several months after launch, everyone will be able to get and sell all of the Nvidia GPUs that they want.  But when there's a short supply at launch, companies that also sell GPUs from AMD will get nothing from Nvidia for a while.

    Intel was forced to pay over $1 billion several years ago for illegally pressuring companies not to sell AMD CPUs.  It looks like Nvdiia wants to repeat that with GPUs, even though they're in a far less dominant position in the GPU market than Intel was in CPUs.

    From a consumer perspective, this is unambiguously terrible.  I don't know if it's illegal, but it sounds like it could be.  Nvidia has proven many times in the past that they don't particularly care about making their customers or business partners hate them, and if the story is accurate, this is one more example of that.