News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by throwaway4590 on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @01:18AM (#15390355)
There needs to be a marrying of software and hardware -- and processor instructions to support that. This is hierarchical reconfigurable cache-based architecture I designed a while ago at Intel; I doubt they have touched it but they do own it.

https://www.google.com/patents/US20170153892

Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by mankash666 on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @02:33AM (#15390594)
Just a thought - I suppose you wanted to post with a throwaway account, but claiming to be the inventor of the patent gives your identity away
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by chaosite on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @02:52AM (#15390666)
Sure, but this way his main account is not linked to his name.
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by amelius on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @04:44AM (#15391047)
Otoh, he could have just written "I've found this patent" and nobody would have known he was the author.
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by BoorishBears on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @10:02AM (#15392457)
But no one would know the author was referencing his own patent and thus knowledgable about the subject if one wanted to conversate on it
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by justinjlynn on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @11:56AM (#15393296)
It's still terrible opsec. Of course, as always, it depends on the threat model. Still, linkage and contamination are deadly - why give up more information than absolutely necessary for your adversar[y|ies] to use against you in the future. All it takes is one mistake or a few 'almost mistakes'.
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by BoorishBears on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @11:58AM (#15393313)
What does it have to do with opsec?
Re:Intel Gears Up for FPGA Push by burntrelish1273 on Tuesday October 03, 2017 @01:44PM (#15394360)
Transmeta code-morphing? VLIW?