
Intel Responds to Complaints About Microcode Benchmarking Ban - jsheard
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-cpu-microcode-benchmark-mitigation,37684.html
======
kev009
How do you gaffe this bad? How is someone that incompetent in the decision
making loop? Some random engineer creating the ucode or uploading it to the
web doesn't come up with this kind of idea to change license language. These
are edicts from management. I'd love for that conversation to leak in full.

~~~
cesarb
I saw a tweet somewhere (IIRC in the anandtech sidebar, unfortunately I'm not
finding it right now) where the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a
beta version of the microcode which leaked into the final version.

~~~
geezerjay
> the poster speculated that it was the EULA for a beta version of the
> microcode

I don't see how this changes anything at all.

~~~
Sohcahtoa82
Because people are irrational and clickbait runs rampant.

If they contract testing of the beta to a 3rd party, they don't want them
running benchmarks because if they get released, news organizations will jump
on it, broadcasting the performance hit.

This matters because when later beta versions improve performance, the news
about the improved performance doesn't spread nearly as much. Even if it does,
the first impression sticks, and there's nothing Intel will be able to do
about it.

~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
Amazing how many people are _still_ doing mental gymnastics to give Intel the
benefit of the doubt. This should have stopped being the default position a
while ago.

------
jeswin
Kudos to the debian team for their uncompromising stand - this may have set a
precedent otherwise.

------
notmyname
Here's the update: [https://01.org/mcu-path-license-2018](https://01.org/mcu-
path-license-2018)

found via
[https://twitter.com/imadsousou/status/1032680311753072640](https://twitter.com/imadsousou/status/1032680311753072640)

------
dmitrygr
No explanations, no apologies, just this:

 _We are updating the license now to address this and will have a new version
available soon. As an active member of the open source community, we continue
to welcome all feedback._

~~~
eahman08
Would it change anything if they said "we are sorry"?

~~~
mikeash
A proper apology is not just “sorry,” but includes an acknowledgment of what
they did wrong and that they’ll avoid doing the same thing again. Showing that
they realize the nature of the problem and will at least pretend to not do it
again would be good.

------
reacharavindh
Curious, if Intel stood by their "no benchmarking" rule, can someone post the
detailed benchmark results anonymously via say pastebin or something? Sure,
you can't trust it like you from something like phoronix, but the results can
then be freely shared on social media right?

What am i missing?

~~~
jplayer01
The problem is trust though. Benchmarks are only worth considering if the
source is reliable. Unknown sources by definition aren't, because it's easy to
fudge the numbers and give fake methodology. There's no consequences for the
unknown benchmarker if he intentionally misleads. Anandtech et al. have
reputations to protect.

------
djsumdog
So has anyone broken the currently EULA and published benchmarks with the new
microcode updates anyway?

~~~
m_st
Intel has. Here are some benchmarks:
[https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-
tec...](https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-
technology/l1tf.html)

~~~
anonymousDan
So basically the fix is to disable hyperthreading?

------
acd
From a legal point of view can you limit free speech through a end user
license agreement? Free speech is protected by the first amendment, many
countries basic legal laws. If some challenged it and it went to the high
court how would it likely judge?

~~~
monocasa
Free speech is a protection that the government can't take away, but you can
give it away of your own volition.

Think NDAs.

~~~
richrichardsson
I'm not a US citizen but I seem to be more aware of what the 1st amendment
actually entails more than a seemingly large proportion of actual citizens,
surely you guys learn that stuff at school? Is it just presented really dryly
and so kids don't pay attention?

~~~
phyller
This argument has been repeated so much, I'm going to try to explain. I'm not
a lawyer, but this is what _I_ learned in school in the US. There are numerous
examples of voluntarily giving up your right to free speech. In the United
States there are criminal and civil suits. You won't be criminally charged by
the government for your free speech about CPU benchmarks, but if you actually
agreed as part of a contract to not disclose benchmarks in order to get
something, then you can be successfully sued by an organization or individual
in a civil suit. They can't throw you in jail but they can take your money.

I highly suspect the same thing is true in most first world countries,
otherwise a lot of companies wouldn't be able to do business because it would
be illegal to keep trade secrets. What did they tell you in school?

~~~
richrichardsson
I'm originally from UK, we don't learn about US Constitution, but my
understanding is the 1st is about the _government_ not being allowed to
restrict your right to free speech, however a lot of people seem to be under
the impression this means _no-one_ is allowed to restrict your speech.

------
jrockway
I have trouble believing this was anything other than some random employee
selecting the wrong license. I'm glad they fixed it.

------
xvf22
This seems like someone testing the waters. I fear as they fall further behind
the behaviour may become more desperate.

~~~
Aloha
I think Hanlon's razor is more correct here.

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

~~~
TangoTrotFox
"I", as a multinational multi billion dollar corporation could then carry out
the most vile acts, but as long as I can feign 'oops' I ought never be held to
account as if my acts had intent? I mean come on, they're killing their
processor performance due to their own security vulnerabilities and oopsie
daisy we just accidentally included a 'no benchmarking' clause? I've got a
better razor for - Occam's.

~~~
Aloha
I've worked for multinational multi billion dollar corporations - a certain
level of institutional incompetence is honestly the norm.

------
paulie_a
But at the end of the day who would have given a shit about the license on a
cpu? It would have been ignored.

~~~
kardos
People who play by the rules in this space, which includes (many) open source
developers. Flaunting the ill-conceived license is one choice, getting it
fixed is a better choice.

