4 ms·

Pray, why do you think I would expend the effort of deliberately increasing my 'exposure' if I did not notice the effects of these mitigation on my workloads ?

Pray, why do you think I would expend the effort of deliberately increasing my 'exposure' if I did not notice the effects of these mitigation on my workloads ? And they are not particularly unique. Do you understand my risk and load requirements better than I do ? Have you entertained the possibility that the decision to de-mitigate was the result of considered risk and resource management modeling ? But thanks for your concern and all.

coldtea 7y ago
>Pray, why do you think I would expend the effort of deliberately increasing my 'exposure' if I did not notice the effects of these mitigation on my workloads ? You'd be surprised what people would do. Could be just out of some spite ("fuck Intel"). Could not even include any measurable workloads ("I want my machine to go ultra fast"). >Do you understand my risk and load requirements better than I do ? For you particularly probably not, but you'd be surprised how many times a third party can "understand the risk and load requirements" of someone else (even a business) better than they do. E.g. the "No, you don't need a Hadoop cluster for doing "ML" on a 1GB file", phenomenon. >Have you entertained the possibility that the decision to de-mitigate was the result of considered risk and resource management modeling ? Only briefly, cause the tone of the comment made it sound more of a knee jerk reaction ("No I don't give a fuck about the 'risk' this introduces", "until everything is swapped to AMD") doesn't sound like the fruits of rational analysis...
lsofzz 7y ago
> Have you entertained the possibility that the decision to de-mitigate was the result of considered risk and resource management modeling ? What do you mean by `resource management modeling` in this context? Do you mean `capacity planning` or `system scaling planning` or something else altogether?

coldtea 7y ago

>Pray, why do you think I would expend the effort of deliberately increasing my 'exposure' if I did not notice the effects of these mitigation on my workloads ? You'd be surprised what people would do. Could be just out of some spite ("fuck Intel"). Could not even include any measurable workloads ("I want my machine to go ultra fast"). >Do you understand my risk and load requirements better than I do ? For you particularly probably not, but you'd be surprised how many times a third party can "understand the risk and load requirements" of someone else (even a business) better than they do. E.g. the "No, you don't need a Hadoop cluster for doing "ML" on a 1GB file", phenomenon. >Have you entertained the possibility that the decision to de-mitigate was the result of considered risk and resource management modeling ? Only briefly, cause the tone of the comment made it sound more of a knee jerk reaction ("No I don't give a fuck about the 'risk' this introduces", "until everything is swapped to AMD") doesn't sound like the fruits of rational analysis...

lsofzz 7y ago

> Have you entertained the possibility that the decision to de-mitigate was the result of considered risk and resource management modeling ? What do you mean by `resource management modeling` in this context? Do you mean `capacity planning` or `system scaling planning` or something else altogether?