5 ms·

I'm in no way conflating the impact of the two, I'm pointing out that the implication of the original comment "It's just too old for people to be outraged about

I'm in no way conflating the impact of the two, I'm pointing out that the implication of the original comment "It's just too old for people to be outraged about still", is that people shouldn't be outraged at evil things solely because those evil things happened a long time ago. The implication itself is ridiculous. Time does not make evil things less evil. To suggest that I'm contrasting the impact of ME (not the same as vPro) with the holocaust is either blatantly missing the point or a deliberate, bad faith strawman.

Alupis 4y ago
The word "outrage" is problematic. It implies, by it's very definition, that the mere mention of these things brings people into a furry of uncontrollable anger. I would wager people are abusing the word and changing it's meaning to sensationally signal displeasure or disappointment with historical events. Those are not the same. Outrage has an emotional immediacy to it. It's really hard to be actually outraged by events that transpired 40 years ago, 100 year ago, centuries ago or more. I assert there is no human alive today that is actually, really outraged by the Holocaust or any of the other atrocities mankind has perpetuated over it's history. Who would they be outraged with? Hitler - who has been dead for 77 years? It would be quite emotionally immature to be literally outraged with any of this in a modern context...
- kragen 4y ago
  > I assert there is no human alive today that is actually, really outraged by the Holocaust You could hardly be more wrong. > It would be quite emotionally immature to be literally outraged with any of this Your implicit claim to possess superior emotional maturity to those Holocaust survivors who remain outraged is both false and repugnant.
  - Alupis 4y ago
    > Your implicit claim to possess superior emotional maturity I do possess superior emotional maturity over those who wield the Holocaust as a tool in arguments about computer processors for internet points... yes. > Holocaust survivors who remain outraged I think your interpretation of "outrage" needs updating.
- anonym29 4y ago
  This is a fair criticism. That said, I have a hard time believing that anyone was literally brought into an uncontrollable rage over ME even when we first found out about it. Additionally, nobody in the comment section appears to be in such a state. Accordingly, I assumed that the top level comment was using "outrage" defined closer to the most scathing comments posted, perhaps as "unwilling to forget about, or accept". We have no duty or obligation to forget about or accept the risks of unauditable, embedded microprocessors with full, undetectable access to onboard GbE, memory, main CPU registers, PCI devices etc. This subsystem poses extreme risk to privacy. The fact that is impossible to purchase new consumer-grade (not $1,000+ Power9) chips without this subsystem is consistent with what we would expect from an on-chip backdoor should one be proposed (or imposed) by US intelligence agencies, which have a lengthy history of rampant human rights abuses, a mission focused on violating privacy, a history of attempting to impose similar subsystems (clipper chip, MS Palladium), and who have a clear economic incentive to develop access that doesn't require them to keep playing the continual cat-and-mouse game of software exploit development and management. I'm extremely skeptical of the intentions of anyone telling me that I should not be angry about the fact that there is an unauditable subsystem that heuristically matches almost everything needed for the MVP of a hypothetical hardware backdoor, that I cannot freely decide not to have bundled with new hardware, solely for the reason "it's existence has been known for close to a decade". This top-level comment reeks of COINTELPRO-esque efforts to convince individuals to risk-accept a subsystem they have zero incentive to keep, but that intelligence agencies have massive incentive to retain, should it actually be a backdoor.
  - Alupis 4y ago
    While it's a flawed philosophical/psychological model for reality, the seven stages of grief is quite applicable here. Why do people "get over" grief? Time... Grief never actually goes away, but it lessens to the point where it no longer is emotionally painful to think about. Grief lessens after every thought has been thought, every word has been said, every emotion has been felt, over and over to the point where there's nothing left. Time heals all wounds, as it has been said. The reason people are not feverously debating IME anymore is time. All of the arguments have been made... over and over. At this point, people are tired of the same things being said ad nauseam. This is the same reason we see systemd-related comments downvoted and flagged into oblivion. People are tired of it... So, while most of us agree IME is probably not something the average home user wants or needs, and IME is probably something that should be resisted... people are just not going to get worked up about it at the mere mention of IME anymore. That time passed... and therefore the word "outrage" is wildly inappropriate when applied here.

Alupis 4y ago

The word "outrage" is problematic. It implies, by it's very definition, that the mere mention of these things brings people into a furry of uncontrollable anger. I would wager people are abusing the word and changing it's meaning to sensationally signal displeasure or disappointment with historical events. Those are not the same. Outrage has an emotional immediacy to it. It's really hard to be actually outraged by events that transpired 40 years ago, 100 year ago, centuries ago or more. I assert there is no human alive today that is actually, really outraged by the Holocaust or any of the other atrocities mankind has perpetuated over it's history. Who would they be outraged with? Hitler - who has been dead for 77 years? It would be quite emotionally immature to be literally outraged with any of this in a modern context...

kragen 4y ago
> I assert there is no human alive today that is actually, really outraged by the Holocaust You could hardly be more wrong. > It would be quite emotionally immature to be literally outraged with any of this Your implicit claim to possess superior emotional maturity to those Holocaust survivors who remain outraged is both false and repugnant.
- Alupis 4y ago
  > Your implicit claim to possess superior emotional maturity I do possess superior emotional maturity over those who wield the Holocaust as a tool in arguments about computer processors for internet points... yes. > Holocaust survivors who remain outraged I think your interpretation of "outrage" needs updating.
anonym29 4y ago
This is a fair criticism. That said, I have a hard time believing that anyone was literally brought into an uncontrollable rage over ME even when we first found out about it. Additionally, nobody in the comment section appears to be in such a state. Accordingly, I assumed that the top level comment was using "outrage" defined closer to the most scathing comments posted, perhaps as "unwilling to forget about, or accept". We have no duty or obligation to forget about or accept the risks of unauditable, embedded microprocessors with full, undetectable access to onboard GbE, memory, main CPU registers, PCI devices etc. This subsystem poses extreme risk to privacy. The fact that is impossible to purchase new consumer-grade (not $1,000+ Power9) chips without this subsystem is consistent with what we would expect from an on-chip backdoor should one be proposed (or imposed) by US intelligence agencies, which have a lengthy history of rampant human rights abuses, a mission focused on violating privacy, a history of attempting to impose similar subsystems (clipper chip, MS Palladium), and who have a clear economic incentive to develop access that doesn't require them to keep playing the continual cat-and-mouse game of software exploit development and management. I'm extremely skeptical of the intentions of anyone telling me that I should not be angry about the fact that there is an unauditable subsystem that heuristically matches almost everything needed for the MVP of a hypothetical hardware backdoor, that I cannot freely decide not to have bundled with new hardware, solely for the reason "it's existence has been known for close to a decade". This top-level comment reeks of COINTELPRO-esque efforts to convince individuals to risk-accept a subsystem they have zero incentive to keep, but that intelligence agencies have massive incentive to retain, should it actually be a backdoor.
- Alupis 4y ago
  While it's a flawed philosophical/psychological model for reality, the seven stages of grief is quite applicable here. Why do people "get over" grief? Time... Grief never actually goes away, but it lessens to the point where it no longer is emotionally painful to think about. Grief lessens after every thought has been thought, every word has been said, every emotion has been felt, over and over to the point where there's nothing left. Time heals all wounds, as it has been said. The reason people are not feverously debating IME anymore is time. All of the arguments have been made... over and over. At this point, people are tired of the same things being said ad nauseam. This is the same reason we see systemd-related comments downvoted and flagged into oblivion. People are tired of it... So, while most of us agree IME is probably not something the average home user wants or needs, and IME is probably something that should be resisted... people are just not going to get worked up about it at the mere mention of IME anymore. That time passed... and therefore the word "outrage" is wildly inappropriate when applied here.