From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Your computer will be slllowwwwing dooowwwnnnnnn....
Full headers:
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Your computer will be slllowwwwing dooowwwnnnnnn....
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:47:37 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <180120181447377118%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <> <p3qk14$e58$> <180120181346488163%nospam@nospam.invalid> <p3qrbp$3a7$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="2cbe69805f4244eea02152d38dc8db7e";
logging-data="19332"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19sczn7nmAWQb/9Ru5NnaHm"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:p+cwaBJHt8X9io6kS29np8GIsWc=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article <p3qrbp$3a7$>, Mayayana<mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

> | >  Not susceptible to
> | > Meltdown and Spectre is not a critical issue, so long
> | > as I don't enable script in the browser while visiting
> | > attack sites.
> |
> | if only were it that simple.
> |
>  | <
> | et-meltdown-and-spectre-patched/>
>   That doesn't say much, except to confirm
> that patches are risky. 

everything is risky.

> AMD themselves have explained
> that they're not vulnerable to meltdown. 

yet microsoft released a patch for both.

> There's
> also this, from a trusted source that Windows
> users may be familiar with:

yep, except that it gets flagged as malware. :)

>   So people can test for themselves. Since you don't
> bother to find the facts and don't understand them,
> anyway, you'd save everyone a lot of confusion if
> you'd just wait for Timmy Cook's "gift patch" for
> your Mac and let Windows/Linux users, who actually
> might have AMD CPUs, worry about their computers.

ad hominem.

you also might want to take your own advice about finding the facts,
since just about everything you say about apple (as well as other
companies) has little to no basis in fact.

>   This isn't a joke for your usual wiseacreing. People are
> having their computers fried with funky patches, despite
> very low risk in terms of security. 

nothing is perfect. 

the alternative, ignoring patches, is worse.