512
AMD won't patch all chips affected by severe data theft vulnerability — Ryzen 3000, 2000, and 1000 will not get patched for 'Sinkclose' (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 3 months ago by TheHolm@aussie.zone to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
183 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Here we are - 3600 which was still under manufacture 2-3 years ago are not get patched. Shame on you AMD, if it is true.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com -3 points 3 months ago

I'm not buying hardware that doesn't suit my needs as an investment hoping maybe it eventually will.

You were misrepresenting things. Your needs have nothing to do with things not being functional. Something can be perfectly functional and not meet someones needs. Nobody said you should buy it as an investment.

[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago

My interpretation was by far the most generous to your position, because it's the only way it's coherent.

If people bought [this hardware that doesn't actually provide anything anyone can realistically use at a reasonable price] it might eventually not suck. That's treating a current purchase as an imaginary investment in maybe eventually being able to buy something useful.

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com -2 points 3 months ago

My interpretation was by far the most generous to your position, because it's the only way it's coherent.

You’re entitled to your opinion, I guess.

hardware that doesn't actually provide anything anyone can realistically use

Thats misrepresenting reality and making assumptions while clearly showing lack of expertise

at a reasonable price

Thats completely arbitrary. If a price is reasonable or not depends on many factors. Obvious oversymplification.

That's treating a current purchase as an imaginary investment in maybe eventually being able to buy something useful.

This shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. Small companies and open source projects depend on people buying their products instead of cheaper, sometimes better performing products of big conglomerates for other reasons than price alone.

[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago

Value is absolutely not arbitrary.

"Reasonable" means comparable with x86/ARM at the same performance level. Anything more is, by definition, not capable of being reasonably priced.

You're again advocating for an imaginary investment in a bad product.

[-] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 0 points 3 months ago

Yeah no. Forget it. We‘re not speaking the same language.

this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
512 points (95.7% liked)

Selfhosted

40383 readers
457 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.world
HybridSarcasm@lemmy.hybridsarcasm.xyz