apardoe-MSFT
Joined 12 years ago
Joined 12 years ago
Dev manager of Exchange used that line in a talk. Never were more insightful words spoken. Devs will move from C++ where they obsess about every allocation to .NET and they'll totally forget that allocation is expensive no matter what the platform or runtime.
An option considered in one state (Utah?) was to allow mail-in voting, but the mailed ballot could be invalidated if you stopped into a polling place and voted. It adds some complexity but reduces the absolute chance of coercion.
For me, having a permanent bed cover means it's not useful as a truck.
I don't know whether earlier versions of Windows offer this level of control as I've got Win10 on all my machines. I just leave them on automatic update and yet I still only have two ears.
I won't comment on Android. I already got ripped to shreds above by trying to bring up the point that mobile is completely locked into two major players that act exactly like Windows 10.
I'll happily concede this thread and apologize for having brought it up. I really wasn't trying to start a fight. I was trying to give what I thought was an analogous example.
My point, exactly, is that Microsoft is just another tech company these days. They're not the Evil Empire. At best, they are one of Many Evil Fiefdoms.
I understand that people are up in arms about data collection. And I understand that Microsoft tends to bungle any kind of public messaging about data collection. I'm just pointing out that every mobile OS, at least, collects tons of data.
And do you write Microsoft with a $? :)
The 90's are over.
Some divisions change faster than others. And some old reputations are very hard to shake. But Microsoft isn't the company it used to be. There are other companies filling that role now. Example: Even though all you ever hear about is "Windows is spying on me!" I can name three big tech companies that probably know more about you than Microsoft does.
We--as an industry--are learning as we go with Spectre. There's a lot of data that went into the decision to release this switch with its current implementation. And this isn't the last iteration: note in Paul Kocher's writeup that we've asked for feedback as to whether anyone would use a switch that was sound (for known variants) but incurred very large performance regressions.
As evidence that this is an industry-wide issue, I ask that you reread Paul Kocher's post. Also, see Chandler Carruth's tweet this morning about this topic: https://twitter.com/chandlerc1024/status/963995521705627648. Chandler is the guy driving Spectre in LLVM.
Lastly, understand that Microsoft has a lot of customers who rely on our technologies. For their benefit it's often better to say less than to say more, especially when talking about security vulnerabilities.