Looking out for number 1 - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2018, 09:08:55 pm
content: You guys may already aware of the CPU bug known as Meltdown and Spectre which could enable one app from accessing data from other apps. Affecting Apple, Android, etc., etc...Business Insider (BI) January 3, 2018:Intel was aware of the chip vulnerability when its CEO sold off $24 million in company stock"Intel CEO Brian Krzanich sold off a large portion of his stake in the company months after Google had informed the chipmaker of a significant security vulnerability in its flagship PC processors —but before the problem was publicly known." [bold added]http://www.businessinsider.com/intel-ceo-krzanich-sold-shares-after-company-was-informed-of-chip-flaw-2018-1To be fair, since this is deep in the article that some may not have seen: he knew in June and the stock was sold in November so he waited a while. But still, it is only this last week that the bug became public knowledge (dates according to BI). So, it is insider-only knowledge when he did the stock transaction. The subject said it all, "Looking out for number 1" here.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 03:32:43 am
content: It is important to understand the terms and conditions of stock options (assuming these were options). In most cases they can't be exercised before a certain date and in others they must be exercised before a certain date.I'm not saying that this applies to the CEO's options or even that they were options (but why would he buy stock when he is granted options?) but there is a possibility that the press doesn't know what they are talking about.It could be a simple matter of the options expiring at the end of 2017. It's not like the CEO didn't know that the imagery was all wrong and it's not like the transaction won't be in the SEC filings. But there's no reason to leave a bunch of money on the table either.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 04:50:29 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 06, 2018, 04:33:59 amSome people will choose to do this, and some of these people will go to prison for it. Real prison. Not the best environment for white collar villains.Let's put it this way: if you already have millions in the bank and in investments, and you stand to take a hit, but avoiding it could mean losing your luxury life and going to jail. Would it still the same choice?

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 04:52:27 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on January 06, 2018, 03:32:43 amShares are not options, and any business magazine is aware of the difference. Exercising options is also not selling anything: it is a stock purchase for the strike price of the option.Quote from: rstofer on January 06, 2018, 03:32:43 amOptions are usually granted to employees of pre-IPO startups as an incentive to stay with the company. To realize any value from an option you need to pay the strike price to own the stock. (When a company's stock price declines, it could trade for less than the strike price: in this case the options are said to be "underwater" and are completely worthless.) Mature companies have other tools to incentivize employees: you can find articles online that show Intel replaced options with restricted stock grants in 2006.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 05:16:09 am
content: The people who do that kind of thing habitually are now in control, so I wouldn't hold my breath.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 05:30:53 am
content: I'm sure if there was political upheaval in other countries the crooks from around the world could count on getting asylum here. Lots of dictators have done that, actually.Many have gone to Hawaii. They can keep all their wealth and live like kings. Sometimes they have to leave quickly and don't get to pack their things.Like the Marcoses. Imelda had to leave 2700 pairs of shoes behind.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 05:36:17 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 06, 2018, 05:21:12 amBeing smart isn't enough, and thinking you can play the system isn't either. Some get away with it, but others get to be an example. You don't want to be an example.

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 05:59:51 am
content: Quote from: helius on January 06, 2018, 04:52:27 amTrust me when I say this, I know EXACTLY how stock options work. I have exercised a bunch of them. Not in the millions, obviously, but in the several tens of thousands.Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, can exercise their stock options for the strike price. To buy out $20M worth of options usually involves a short term loan of $20M (by the company) to purchase the options which is repaid out of the sale of the shares. It's done all the tiime...I went to work for a company and they gave me a bunch of options with a $50 option price. A year later, when they could be exercised, the stock was trading at $26. To their credit, the company renegotiated all of the options issued the year I was hired.Start-ups do a lot with options but there is the risk that the entire venture goes down the drain. Established companies also try to motivate key employees with options. The company does well, the employees do well. A side issue is that the options can't be exercised before a certain date - helps with retention when the share price is higher than the option price.There is no way a CEO buys stock in his own company out of his own pocket. Part of his compensation package will include a bunch of options. If the CEO drives the company upward, the options are part of his compensation and motivation.I don't know exactly how the CEO of Intel is rewarded but I would bet that there is company stock grants or options involved somewhere. Nobody works for wages at that level.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 07:07:26 am
content: There were changes in accounting practices some years ago that forced many companies to change how they give out options. I think the gist of it is that options now have to be counted as liabilities against the company's balance sheet, because the holder can exercise them to purchase stock for less than its par value.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 07:54:20 am
content: and this is why I buy the latest top of the line PC.. when it is 3 to 5 years old, and avoid all the Intel hardware BS that goes onBesides, the multicore AMDs sell for cheap and work just as wellif not betterThe Intel INSIDER grabbed the cash and did a runner while the getting was goodPerhaps he'll be brought to justiceby Batmanand share a cell with Hillary and others... in 3018 AD

author: nidlaX
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 08:02:27 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on January 06, 2018, 07:54:20 amThat makes absolutely no sense in this context. 20 years of processor architecture are affected by these bugs. On the other hand, would you wait 3 to 5 years to buy a design that's fixed?

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 08:27:47 am
content: I've done side by side comparisons with AMD and Intel across many 'generations', and both will run operating systems, software and surf the internet with the same efficiencyI have yet to cop a processor 'bug' from either that caused issues, and suspect it's always been just more scare sh!t to keep consumer bunnies freakedand spending/upgrading/going Mac/Linux whateverand something to blab about at gamer and security forums

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 04:22:17 pm
content: If you read a better accounting of what happened, you will see that the transaction was planned and executed under terms set by Intel specifically to avoid being accused of insider trading. There is an SEC filing that discloses everything there is to know about the transaction.Some of the stock sold was from an options plan and some was personally owned.https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/04/intel-ceo-reportedly-sold-shares-after-the-company-already-knew-about-massive-security-flaws.htmlQuoteEvery time a CEO exercises options, there is the appearance of insider trading. The thing is, these sales are fully disclosed to the SEC in the various company filings. The appearance of insider trading goes a lot farther down the chain of command than just the CEO.There's nothing to see here... Except the bit where the CEO now only has 250,000 shares, the minimum allowed by Intel. That sounds like a guy getting ready to retire. Or he is expecting another grant.The share price of Intel may have taken a little hit on the disclosure but, overall, the stock is at the high end of the 3 month trading range. Not the absolute high but very high on the range. No real damage to stockholders of which I am one.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 11:33:02 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 06, 2018, 08:13:22 amI don't know where you got your information from, but it seems to be the opposite of what the benchmarks said after the release of Ryzen. The average framerate in games was lower on Ryzen, but Intel chips showed more variance in the framerate. Many reported a smoother experience on Ryzen, despite the traditional numbers suggesting something else.This was right after the release of Ryzen, so I expect things to be more optimized on the AMD side of things by now. There were a few obvious kinks that needed to be worked out.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 11:35:59 pm
content: Quote from: rstofer on January 06, 2018, 04:22:17 pmI think the realization that other brands are hit too, and that many companies will need or want to buy new hardware has softened the blow. It's not as if people are suddenly going to go to another manufacturer for their server hardware, though both AMD and the sales of the relatively new ARM servers might benefit.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:26:47 am
content: blueskull, you likely see the pictures, but the rest just see the message in Chinese. Likely something like images should not be linked.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:35:18 am
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on January 06, 2018, 11:33:02 pmEarly Ryzen benchmarks certainly do not hold well. Many games got patched, but most importantly, bios updates had drastic impact on gaming performance. Also RAM support greatly improved since then and most sticks can be run just as fast as on intel.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:46:55 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 07, 2018, 01:06:46 amPUBG is very unoptimized, actually it left early access on Dec 22, so that test most likely is outdated. Performance sucks on any hardware but it especially ir doesn't like Ryzen. With most other games minimum fps on Ryzen is not any worse than on intel.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:59:53 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 07, 2018, 01:42:24 amIsn't that last bit obvious? These modules were tweaked to work well on Intel platforms when that was the only performance platform, of course you aren't going to pop them in any Ryzen system and expect similar performance. Manufacturers are still catching up.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 02:09:56 am
content: If you look at mid range, like $220-$250, Ryzen beats intel in gaming performance. Only if you take the expensive end, then intel is ahead in gaming (not always).

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 02:11:59 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 07, 2018, 02:01:19 amRyzen is better at this, it keeps low frame time in many situations when intel lags.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 02:17:47 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 07, 2018, 02:01:19 amIntel had a marginally better IPC performance of up to 10% depending on the application. However, the mitigation of Meltdown may very well decimate that difference and hand AMD the crown. The recent AMD offerings are really suprisingly competitive and now the little advantage Intel had may have evaporated. The market is still adjusting, but it's obvious Intel is sweating it.You're right that Intel plays their marketing right, but there too AMD seems to have caught up. Of course, Intel has traditionally played all sorts of nasty tricks, which is probably one of the reasons they're still ahead. I doubt they cleaned up their act completely, but they can expect a lot more scrutiny than before for sure.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 02:45:54 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on January 07, 2018, 02:21:44 amBoth are bad news for the server market. No one sensible will overclock a production server and database, file and and hypervisor tasks seem hit relatively hard by Meltdown. That's basically the three main tasks of modern servers.In regards to gaming it's good to note that it is AMD's first generation of this chip. Good overclocking capabilities are typically something that comes from understanding the manufacturing process properly and that comes with experience. The more you tinker with producing something, the better the yields typically are and tge better performing the chips will be.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 03:00:13 am
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on January 07, 2018, 02:45:54 amYep, gaming servers got a huge hit by meltdown patch.Quote