Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/19/2001 10:20:30 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

"even if this back-slapping is based on bogus data reported here by a screwdriver shop camel jockey." Why is it bogus? Any facts at all? I mean, the data is from Intel's own datasheets, unless you are claiming they have printed the wrong data in their sheets. And that would be a curious claim at best... As far as your other stuff, cut the crap. If you want to sling insults, go somewhere else. I'd be happy to move this to the unmoderated thread and we can trade insults there. Assuming you have the guts for that...

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/19/2001 10:22:14 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Tim, If this thread is so terrible, why are you wasting your time reading it, and posting here? I suspect that you find this thread valuable. It became more valuable now, at least to me, since it takes a lot less time to read. If you do indeed find this thread worth reading, I would encourage you to make a positive contribution, with information or analysis. This would make you an asset (as a poster) rather than a liability. Joe

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/19/2001 10:33:14 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 275872

tcmay,"..even if this back-slapping is based on bogus data reported here by a screwdriver shop camel jockey." Ha, you are funny, Timmy. So, official Intel specifications are "bogus data", as you phrase it? If you still have doubts that "my method" of leakage current estimation is incorrect, read the paragraph 2.2.6, page 15: ftp://download.intel.com/design/PentiumIII/datashts/24965702.pdf It says: "Stopping of the BCLK input lowers the overall current consumption to leakage levels." Have a nice encryption day. - Ali

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/19/2001 10:45:57 PM
From: Eric K.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Here you can pat each other on the back about how much "leakage" Intel chips have How would you describe Paul's ten posts a day congratulating Viola, Fowler, et al on their "excellent observations?" Paul engages in much more "butt slapping," as he has colorfully termed it, with his posse of past and present Intel employees and sympathizers than do any members of this thread. -Eric

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/20/2001 1:00:39 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

RE:"It's best that Paul got kicked out of your little Maniban-controlled theocracy. Here you will not have to face the facts, not have to deal with reality." Since your fellow Intel shareholders had you kicked off SI I don't blame you for posting here. OTOH, I thought all UCSB Grads of your era were liberals, what happened...<G>

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/20/2001 1:09:47 AM
From: heatsinker2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

screwdriver shop camel jockey Hey, that's an ethnic slur. Not cool, be nice.

To: tcmay who wrote (64061)	11/20/2001 8:01:44 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Tim, We needed paul like a jungle traveller needs leeches, because that is what he was, a bloodsucker. No contribution at all ever of value, just a parasitic existence that made many of us unhappy. At the end over 60% of the posts here were either his crap or our responses to it. As they say, never again.