Sudo apt remove *microcode*; reboot

Both companies have their own microcode updates

It's just an intel problem

So you don't need to purge AMD microcode?

Wait I thought it was fucking debian that was getting more bloated, my boot time went from 4 seconds to 12 after stretch came out.

let me test this

intel-microcode
Startup finished in 7.626s (kernel) + 8.908s (userspace) = 16.535s
apt-get autoremove --purge intel-microcode
Startup finished in 6.237s (kernel) + 8.335s (userspace) = 14.572s

Wow, such a difference

Not sure, I don't deal with microcode. I remove it just in case.

>my computer is 12% slower
>who cares!

>my computer is vulnerable to remote attacks but at least it boots 2 seconds faster when i restart my machine once a month

>vulnerable
Prove it.

google meltdown
then google spectre
even if there is no malware in the wild, your machine is still vulnerable and will stay vulnerable until you install the patch.
you absolute mong.

Attached: .jpg (640x480, 109K)

>disable Hyperthreading
This cripples a dual core CPU, e.g. old Thinkpads.

>startup is a measure of performance
The microcode has to be loaded at boot, yes. Not a valid metric, do some actual benchmarks. Chances are, any performances decrease is caused by the kernel.

Also, microcode is important to correct CPU bugs, not just these recent vulnerabilities.

Yeah I see some supposedly working demo software, but I have none of that on my machine, so my machine is not vulnerable to anything.

>google
gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Google

Please read and educate yourself.

>search
Where, the library? The bathroom?
>DuckDuckGo
Shills

you don't seem to understand the meaning of the word 'vulnerable' and are confusing it with 'already infected'.

And you're a Google shill, what's your point?

Any code you, or anyone else, runs on your machine can elevate to root.

>please stop using words that are in the dictionary because it hurts my feefees
no, i will not.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/google

Don't worry goyim. Intel will release new, fixed CPUs next year. They'll be expensive and require a new socket but you should be used to that by now

What's the difference, I literally do not run any unconfirmed software on my machine.
My point is google has earned its place as a household verb and "GNU dot org" has not.

a..user....I

what will you do when a website you browse or software you run and trust gets compromised and infects your machine? even youtube served cryptominers before.
do you audit the software you run and every update yourself or do you trust 'other people' to do that for you? what if those 'other people' get paid by someone to overlook an exploit? what if there's an exploitable bug in whatever software you're using?

the difference is that your machine is vulnerable to severe exploits that have been public knowledge for almost a year now and will stay vulnerable until you install the patch, while my machine is not vulnerable to these publicly known vulnerabilities. that's all.

enjoy your 2 seconds faster boot

"Search" is also in the dictionary and predates "Google", and describes the same thing in a nonpartisan context. Basically, you have to be retarded and/or ignorant to use it, so jokes on you and not mine or anyone else's "feefees".
>why don't you just [advertises a giant company for free and propagates that only one search engine exists] it?
Absolutely disgusting.
>a monopoly has earned anything because it's been adopted into popular language by ignorant consumerists

google autism

>what will you do when
That's an 'if', not a 'when'. Answer is don't know don't care.
>my machine is not vulnerable
Mine isn't either, since I don't install weird software on it.
>>a monopoly has earned anything because it's been adopted into popular language by ignorant consumerists
This but unironically. Alternatives simply aren't worth it.

>search describes the same thing
No, it doesn't. It has no context.

>Mine isn't either, since I don't install weird software on it.
again, you do not seem understand the meaning of the word 'vulnerable'

>leave front door unlocked and go on vacation
>nothing gets stolen
>this means my stuff was safe all along!!1!
this is you.

the reality looks like this
>leave front door unlocked and go on vacation
>nothing gets stolen
>i got lucky that no one noticed the unlocked door and stole all of my belongings

and for me it looks like this
>lock front door so there's no easy way into my house and go on vacation
do you see the difference?

But I don't go on vacation in the metaphorical sense. I have a few bouncers at my front door.
Sure, my back door is unlocked but I can grab my shotgun as soon as I hear noise.
You're severely overestimating the dangers of spectre and meltdown. They only work if you're explicitly targeted.

Good thing context can be trivially inferred, or made explicit.

>my back door is unlocked
then you are vulnerable. end of story.
it does not matter how unlikely an attack is, you are still vulnerable.
how hard is it for you to understand the meaning of this word?

>trivially inferred
Nope, subjective.
>made explicit
>google vs "search using a search engine"
Wew

>he doesn't know

Attached: AGCuu9p.jpg (1024x576, 79K)

>Mine isn't either, since I don't install weird software on it.
It's not simply enough to not install weird software, you must not EXECUTE weird software. Among other things this means you will need to disable all javascript in the browser and never open a pdf (which can contain arbitrary executable code)

>disable all javascript
lol
>(which can contain arbitrary executable code)
LOL

>>disable all javascript
>lol
agreed, it's fucking retarded

>(which can contain arbitrary executable code)
>LOL
actually if you open a pdf with adobe reader it actually is potentially dangerous.