Richfags of /g/, for your consideration.
https://raptorengineeringinc.com/TALOS/prerelease.php
If you express interest, and fund this upon release, you're paving the way to affordable, open, workstation grade hardware for the rest of us.
power was always the safest architecture
i'm surprised that the nsa uses mostly x86 processors
>>53864111
This is relative to my interests.
>>53864253
Relevant?
We appreciate all the help we can get.
>>53864267
That was more a bump, I'm a poor CS student at the moment and contrary to stereotypes I don't think I'm going to be earning enough to drop 3.7G USD on a main board in the next 2 years.
Project looks awesome though, is there a release date yet? or at least an approximation,
Why has this piqued so little interest?
>>53864111
What do they mean by owner controlled, and how isn't x86? Genuinely curious here.
>>53864696
Because its not a phone thread.
>>53865049
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Active_Management_Technology
https://www.amd.com/en-us/innovations/software-technologies/security
>Full security solutions that locks you down, not in
>they literally advertise it like that
>>53865191
>AMT
Can be permanently disabled. When disabled, it initializes and then powers down when you boot up. Also, if you're designing a motherboard like these guys are, you can control what's in the BIOS, use libreboot and entirely omit the AMT blob. Then AMT will do nothing at all.
Haven't looked into the AMD one enough to tell how much you can disable it or control what it runs.
And if we're considering stuff that's out of your control because of firmware designers' choices, how in fuck is x86 less in user control than ARM? Most ARM devices have locked bootloaders and you have to use exploits to even gain root access within the OS they come with, and cannot replace the OS with anything more different than a customized version of the same.
>>53865115
Do you think it's worth cross linking the TPG and FLT threads? No offence OP but you chose a crap image and OP.
I for one would love to see more BTFO and suicide watch threads if there was another consumer chip competitor besides Intel and AMD.
>>53865383
I'm OP and I'm not >>53865115. I've never felt sorry enough for myself to be that passive-aggressive.
>>53865497
That was my fault, I knew >>53865115 was not OP, the second sentence was addressed to OP though, I should have quoted.
Why is there so little interest in the new power8 though?
>>53865558
This is, by all means, a niche product. Privacy concerns just aren't as mainstream as we hoped the Snowden leaks would make them, and where they are, for now it's small victories like encrypted messengers.
>>53865558
To continue >>53865742, beyond privacy, x86 has one hell of a stranglehold. People aren't interested in architectures that don't support legacy compatibility.
>>53864111
Who would be manufacturing the power8 chip?
