zlacker

[return to "Intel x86 considered harmful – survey of attacks against x86 over last 10 years"]
1. n0us+l2[view] [source] 2015-10-27 15:13:48
>>chei0a+(OP)
I really could do without "considered harmful" titles. x86 has been one of the most influential technologies of all time and a clickbait title doesn't do it justice imo.
◧◩
2. wmil+P4[view] [source] 2015-10-27 15:31:50
>>n0us+l2
You should write a paper explaining your views. And title it "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful".
◧◩◪
3. pgeorg+Z4[view] [source] 2015-10-27 15:32:58
>>wmil+P4
> And title it "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful".

http://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html

[edit: clarified context]

◧◩◪◨
4. tptace+76[view] [source] 2015-10-27 15:41:40
>>pgeorg+Z4
This isn't an "essay", nor is it "axe grinding". It's one of the best current available surveys on X86 platform security.

Go to SCHOLAR.GOOGLE.COM and search for "* considered harmful". Most of what Meyer has to say about "considered harmful essays" don't apply to these papers.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. pgeorg+l6[view] [source] 2015-10-27 15:42:53
>>tptace+76
I was merely referring to the 'And title it "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful".' part of the parent post.
[go to top]