Thinking about it, the SoC idea could stop at the southern boundary of the chipset in x86 systems.
Include DDR memory controller, PCI controller, USB controllers, iGPU’s etc. most of those have migrated into x86 CPU’s now anyway (I remember having north and south bridge chipsets!)
Leave the rest of the system: NIC’s, dGPU’s, etc on the relevant busses.
I’m both surprised and not surprised that ever since the M1, Intel seems to just be doing nothing in the consumer space. Certainly losing their contract with Apple was a blow to their sales, and with AMD doing pretty well these days, ARM slowly taking over the server space where backwards compatibility isn’t as significant, and now Qualcomm coming to eat the windows market, Intel just seems like a dying beast. Unless they do something magical, who will want an Intel processor in 5 years?
I haven’t wanted an Intel processor for years. Their “innovation” is driven by marketing rather than technical prowess.
The latest batch of 13900k and again with 14900k power envelope microcode bullshit was the final “last” straw.
They were more interested in something they could brand as a competitor to ryzen. Then left everyone who bought one (and I bought three at work) holding the bag.
We’ve not made the same mistake again.
Intel dying and its corpse being consumed by its competitors is a fairy tale ending.
I also haven’t wanted an Intel processor in a while . They used to be best in class for laptops prior to the M1, but they’re basically last now behind Apple, AMD, Qualcomm. They might win in a few specific benchmarks that matter very little to people, and are still the default option in most gaming laptops. For desktop use the Ryzen family is much more compelling. For servers they still seem to have an advantage but it’s also an industry which requires longer term contracts that Intel has the infrastructure for more so than it’s competitors, but ARM is also gaining ground there with exceptional performance per watt.
Amazing how long it took them to figure out that this is an actual risk. Now if they actually want to mitigate risks for the people on the net, they should make the software vendors out there fix the gaping security holes that their three-letter agencies are hoarding for their own gains.
Inherently, even if they proved themselves to be bad actors in the worst way, the US would be unable to prosecute them. I don’t know that it justifies an embargo, but, as el reg notes, it’s not like this move hasn’t been telegraphed for over 5 years now.
Kaspersky reported a major iOS exploit to Apple in recent years. They discovered it and helped unravel the details of how it worked. I understand the US decision, but it seems unlikely that they’re bad actors through and through. I guess the Russian state could lean on them to do their bidding though and that potential is enough to consider them a threat.
The lad is concerned for his privacy, how come the word traitor has ever appeared in your comment at all?! I surely hope you had completely changed topics by then, and replied to the wrong comment.
Yeah, let’s face it, AI will be used to make sure the super-wealthy pay even less tax than they already do. Neither AI nor its carbon emissions will ever be taxed.
The article more or less covers it. Asian countries without a credit card culture mostly transitioned to QR because it was easy with minimal equipment changes required. Those with widespread credit cards accept tap and QR (e.g. Taiwan widely accepts QR payments, Google pay, Apple pay, credit cards, and transit cards).
Since the western world has been on credit cards for decades that is the solution that is accepted there with QR payments being almost exclusively in businesses that have a customer base from Asian countries. Even then the US is odd compared to other countries since they never really adopted chip and pin.
In Canada it’s tap to pay for ~8 years now, never saw a QR code to pay. However when I go in USA, every stores is tap to pay, except one, there’s one store in USA where there is no tap, it’s Walmart, inconcevable.
Tap to pay was pretty well established when they went with scan to pay, they just hoped the Walmart name was large enough that they could cut out all the middlemen inherent with traditional payment processors and keep a bigger piece of the pie. Specifically they were in a spat with Visa over merchant fees at the time so they wanted an option that allowed them to cut Visa out of the picture. They thought that having their own scan to pay system would allow them to do that, but they eventually reconciled with Visa and got the merchant fees discount they wanted and that aspect of the scan to pay system sorta dropped out of focus.
Brazil ended with a third system: Pix. It boils down to the following:
The money receiver sends the payer either a “key” or a QR code.
The payer opens their bank’s app and use it to either paste the key or scan the QR code.
The payer defines the value, if the code is not dynamic (more on that later).
Confirm the transaction. An electronic voucher is emitted.
The “key” in question can be your cell phone number, physical/juridical person registre number, e-mail, or even a random number. You can have up to five of them.
Regarding dynamic codes, it’s also possible to generate a key or QR code that applies to a single transaction. Then the value to be paid is already included.
Frankly the system surprised me. It’s actually good and practical; and that’s coming from someone who’s highly suspicious of anything coming from the federal government, and who hates cell phones. [insert old man screaming at clouds meme]
Brazil's PIX is revolutionary, really. It's instant 24/7 transfers that don't depend on which bank you're using and does not need a third party app. Pretty much if you have a bank account, you already have PIX.
Yeah, it’s actually good. People use it even for trivial stuff nowadays; and you don’t need a pix key to send stuff, only to receive it. (And as long as your bank allows you to check the account through an actual computer, you don’t need a cell phone either.)
Perhaps the only flaw is shared with the Asian QR codes - scams are a bit of a problem, you could for example tell someone that the transaction will be a value and generate a code demanding a bigger one. But I feel like that’s less of an issue with the system and more with the customer, given that the system shows you who you’re sending money to, and how much, before confirmation.
I’m not informed on Tikkie and Klarna, besides one being Dutch and another Swedish. How do they work?
This is stupid cause it will simply cause Firefox to be banned. The devs should just host it somewhere else and teach the user to run external extensions.
theregister.com
Hot