SDL - WTF is that in my paid hardware..

[PKTKS]

The unused cores wouldn't be clocked so they wouldn't consume any power. No daemon is needed to monitor CPU usage, because there are only 4 CPUs. They're not turning it off if you don't pay a subscription because all changes require a cold boot to take effect, and the licenses are written permanently into NVRAM.

You've read nothing.

The problem with FAN BOYs... 

Your naive assumptions are just juvenile wonders...

You trust a bunch of greedy idiots..

Why in the bloody hell they care about you me or anybody else?

go figure
Paul

PS? They want our money - no matter consequences. long period.
  they just do not care as long as (easiest) money comes in.

[PKTKS]

It's not stupidity. It's greed.

That is the point.   Bottom line ...
They use any method cheapest  easiest  profitable.
That includes anything

Paul

[PKTKS]

(..)
Intel are not stupid, just test the water

They never was... they are just too greedy...
and never play the game by rules...

WINTEL is the nastiest player out there..
Just care about easy money

the rest is BANANA

Paul

[Monkeh]

The unused cores wouldn't be clocked so they wouldn't consume any power. No daemon is needed to monitor CPU usage, because there are only 4 CPUs. They're not turning it off if you don't pay a subscription because all changes require a cold boot to take effect, and the licenses are written permanently into NVRAM.

You've read nothing.

The problem with FAN BOYs... 

I am no fan boy, little child, I simpy look at facts, not fears.

[PKTKS]

I am no fan boy, little child, I simpy look at facts, not fears.

It is just about MONEY... money money..

Selling competitive hardware is hard business..
Much much easier to run the extortion algorithms
renting intangible "licenses" over and over and over..
from the same locked thing  - cheaper easier

They will pass this DRM digital lobby .. sooner or later.. don't worry
I've seen their methods dozen times.

Very soon CORPORATE *NIX KIOSKs will be everywhere
I'm already  preparing to departure (again) from what is visible ahead.

The whole thing converged already to 2 or 3 corporate landlords.

You will have your biased ideas soon realized
Paul

[SiliconWizard]

Not to back up what PKTKS says in general, I think he tends to be a bit too extreme in general. But here, your "facts" are only partial.

In this CPU example, sure, unused cores won't be clocked (at least, we sure hope that's what Intel implemented, as it's pretty reasonable). So they won't draw any dynamic power, but unless there's provision in the CPU to completely power down those cores - which I'm absolutely not sure of - they'll still draw static power, and for such large integrated circuits on such CMOS processes, that's not unsignificant. Sure is a lot less than when clocked at several GHz, but that's still useless power consumption.

And then, there's also just the general fact of selling products containing a big part of unused items. That's just a *waste* of material. So however you look at it, this licensing model does have inherent efficiency issues generally speaking.

[Monkeh]

Not to back up what PKTKS says in general, I think he tends to be a bit too extreme in general. But here, your "facts" are only partial.

In this CPU example, sure, unused cores won't be clocked (at least, we sure hope that's what Intel implemented, as it's pretty reasonable). So they won't draw any dynamic power, but unless there's provision in the CPU to completely power down those cores - which I'm absolutely not sure of - they'll still draw static power, and for such large integrated circuits on such CMOS processes, that's not unsignificant. Sure is a lot less than when clocked at several GHz, but that's still useless power consumption.

I'm sure of it, because CPUs are already built this way to bring power consumption to an absolute minimum. This isn't a new technology (unless you're PKTKS).

And then, there's also just the general fact of selling products containing a big part of unused items. That's just a *waste* of material. So however you look at it, this licensing model does have inherent efficiency issues generally speaking.

Again, CPUs are chock full of such things already. It's far cheaper than totally different dies for every product.

[PKTKS]

I'm sure of it, because CPUs are already built this way to bring power consumption to an absolute minimum. This isn't a new technology (unless you're PKTKS).

MonKy I love your diligent tireless efforts to make me look like a funky idiot 

Just 2 simple considerations:
- WINTEL is a MULTI-BILLION dollar buzzz - the proper word *IS* RADICAL
   not ordinary  casual or simple. Shareholders are not fan boys.

- Second usually experience is like toillet paper.
 You never miss it - until you need it

So  I am pretty confident that folks reading this will "trust" and believe
if these  competitive offers  are really fair deals..

I will not manifest bias on what some fan boy think is fair

Up to *you*  think if your money is well paid increasing these
multi-billion game margin gains...

Fair deal?

I always miss you monky 
Paul

[JPortici]

I'd like to buy the most basic CPU and then enable features as needed instead of buying the most expensive CPU right away just in case.

Can also go the other way, the license terms can change and oh, from now on you need to subscribe, and oh, from next month the fee will increase because, and oh, you can't activate because reasons (politicals and otherwise)
this happen in the software world all the time, it's beginning to happen in the car world, why couldn't it happen in the CPU?

[voltsandjolts]

This is all very old news.
Intel was doing this kind of thing over a decade ago in consumer low end i3 systems, perhaps others.
I remember because it annoyed me then.
What was it called...oh, yeh... Intel Upgrade Service.

[Monkeh]

I'd like to buy the most basic CPU and then enable features as needed instead of buying the most expensive CPU right away just in case.

Can also go the other way, the license terms can change and oh, from now on you need to subscribe, and oh, from next month the fee will increase because, and oh, you can't activate because reasons (politicals and otherwise)
this happen in the software world all the time, it's beginning to happen in the car world, why couldn't it happen in the CPU?

This capability does not exist in this proposed mechanism. Could they in the future? Perhaps, but that's not what they're suggesting implementing now.

So  I am pretty confident that folks reading this will "trust" and believe

Why should they trust and believe claims made by someone leaping to conclusions based on their fears, not the data?

[rstofer]

Back in the day, Amdahl 470 mainframes had a dual speed capability

Amdahl also pioneered a variable-speed feature - the '470 accelerator' - on the V5 and V7 systems that allowed the customer to run the CPUs at the higher level of performance of the V6 and V8 systems, respectively, when desired. The customer was charged by the number of hours used. Some at Amdahl thought this feature would anger customers, but it became quite popular as customer management could now control expenses while still having greater performance available when necessary.

Nothing nefarious, just adjustable capability as needs demand.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Amdahl_Corporation

[PKTKS]

Back in the day, Amdahl 470 mainframes had a dual speed capability

Amdahl also pioneered a variable-speed feature - the '470 accelerator' - on the V5 and V7 systems that allowed the customer to run the CPUs at the higher level of performance of the V6 and V8 systems, respectively, when desired. The customer was charged by the number of hours used. Some at Amdahl thought this feature would anger customers, but it became quite popular as customer management could now control expenses while still having greater performance available when necessary.

Nothing nefarious, just adjustable capability as needs demand.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Amdahl_Corporation

20y ago I would say that should be a good deal
10y ago I would consider alternatives..

Today?   geez ... today that is a spherical bad deal..
no matter which side you look at it ..
just meant to promote these "licenses" buz wo competition

Today cheap volume electronics allows us a wide option set...

unless  obviously you are an certified  institutionalized monkey in the flow..

wo need to think using your own pockets..

today that represents the worst possible deal you can make
uc .. we have alternatives
Paul

[Nominal Animal]

This is all very old news.
Intel was doing this kind of thing over a decade ago in consumer low end i3 systems, perhaps others.
I remember because it annoyed me then.
What was it called...oh, yeh... Intel Upgrade Service.

Which boiled down to "pay $50 afterwards to get the features you would have got if you had paid $15 more in the first place."

Like I said, it sounds to me like a salesdrone hoodwinked the PHBs into believing this would make money.

[PKTKS]

More 2 centos of greedy jambo shit

Please WINTEL ... just FUCKOFF!!!

Not only they will make you pay in full a crippled hardware...

But require that you have an ONLINE connection and monitored valid shit.. running all time

Please FUCKOFF!!!

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Intel-SDSi-v2

Paul

[Haenk]

Well, digging around in my brain, I somehow remembered their previous attempt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Upgrade_Service

I wonder if people like that idea better now, now that 10 years have passed and everyone has forgotten about it...

[TomS_]

So  I am pretty confident that folks reading this will "trust" and believe
if these  competitive offers  are really fair deals..

It's hard to take you seriously when your arguments are presented the way they are. It's all conspiracy, and you provide no references to back up your claims.

You look just like any other nutter on Facebook etc trying to sell anti vax and anti 5G conspiracies.

So, no thanks.

[Monkeh]

More 2 centos of greedy jambo shit

Please WINTEL ... just FUCKOFF!!!

Not only they will make you pay in full a crippled hardware...

But require that you have an ONLINE connection and monitored valid shit.. running all time

Please FUCKOFF!!!

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Intel-SDSi-v2

Paul

Nothing in that article or the childishly titled screenshot you secured from it supports your claim of 'online connection' and 'monitored valid shit'.

You feed it a certificate and payload, after a cold boot the functionality is enabled (presumably feeding it a different payload would allow to disable as well). You would not even need to load the driver once the required cert and payload are loaded, because everything happens at boot prior to OS, network, or even the RTC being available.

[PKTKS]

(..)
Nothing in that article or the childishly titled screenshot you secured from it supports your claim of 'online connection' and 'monitored valid shit'.

You feed it a certificate and payload, after a cold boot the functionality is enabled (presumably feeding it a different payload would allow to disable as well). You would not even need to load the driver once the required cert and payload are loaded, because everything happens at boot prior to OS, network, or even the RTC being available.

So *YOU*  say..  as usual.... to make me look like a funky idiot... 

Nothing supports your vague opinion that things will be
or should be like this.. in due time...

The very same way  they have pushed TPM as a KERNEL MODULE...
Things just sum up as experience teach us..
Other modules are being insanely pushed to the low level firmware... (binary blobs)

These folks were never reliable as so hope for the better..
prepare yourself for the odds.

2 cents of a dodgy veteran..

I always miss you monky 
Paul

[Monkeh]

So *YOU*  say..  as usual.... to make me look like a funky idiot... 

Nothing supports your vague opinion that things will be
or should be like this.. in due time...

Nothing other than the code and documentation they've sent upstream..

As usual, you're making yourself look like an idiot.

[PKTKS]

So *YOU*  say..  as usual.... to make me look like a funky idiot... 

Nothing supports your vague opinion that things will be
or should be like this.. in due time...

Nothing other than the code and documentation they've sent upstream..

As usual, you're making yourself look like an idiot.

Don't think so..

Things are summing up and converging a while to prepare
a full binary blob in kernel locked up devices...

INPUT methods.. so called  SECURITY gizmos..
and impossible to handle display firmwares..
and stuff..

Nothing really keeps mind at easy ..
I have already prepared a full change if required from
what seems to be a hostile take over on FOSS..

by using binary blobs like this and others..

Paul

[PKTKS]

It's hard to take you seriously when your arguments are presented the way they are. It's all conspiracy, and you provide no references to back up your claims.

You look just like any other nutter on Facebook etc trying to sell anti vax and anti 5G conspiracies.

So, no thanks.

It is called experience...

I deal with that kind of business over 4 decades..
they have VERTICAL CONTROL of the chain..

Pushing things like this are not mindless...
It just business..

May sound conspiracy .. actually it is just about having
control over the vertical chain...

They already have their own compiler ..
own binary blobs and proprietary firmware..

Soon things should clear on how that will translate
in business ..

As said above..

THEY ARE TRYING TO PUSH THIS.. DECADES SO FAR..

one more try..
Paul