On 08/23/2018 10:38 AM, Michael Tremer wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 10:26 -0400, Tom Rymes wrote:
>> On 08/23/2018 9:34 AM, Michael Tremer wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 19:36 +0200, Peter Müller wrote:

[snip]

>> I see the desire to err on the side of caution, plus the desire to put
>> pressure on Intel to modify the license, but I'd argue it's overkill.
> 
> It is just ridiculous from my angle. Their primary sales argument is to
> be on top of the list of each benchmark out there. They probably forgot
> about that.
> 
> But this is more about a slight change to hide that they messed up
> *massively* here and a very bad attempt to cover it up. Now they got a
> proper Streisand going. Well done Intel.

[snip]

I'm all for holding off on this as a principle thing, as it's clear that 
Intel's lawyers are trying to pull a fast one. From a practical 
standpoint, though, it's probably less of a problem.

Tom