+10% and cheaper than scalped 3080's, sign me up.

Not joking. I'm fine with it. So long as I can get it soon, and have the full 2 years of 'fastest around' out of it, I will be content.

If it takes 6 months to buy a 3090, I would rather get a 3080 and then shoot for a day1 4090.

Although it would probably be more sensible to get a 2nd 2080ti and sli. The 2080ti prices made it the first time since sli has existed that I didn't sli.

-scheherazade

jdreyer wrote on Sep 18, 2020, 22:42:

Scheherazade wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 18:44:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 15:45:

Scheherazade wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 11:55:

Jonjonz wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 06:32:
I think Apple has taken things too far with it's store and how locked down it's products are, and that one reason why I don't buy them, but other people are quite willing to buy a pig in a poke.

Imagine buying a car with a EULA that says it can only be fixed at the original dealers, which you cannot buy accessories for, replacement parts for, or even get a new paint job without having to give the original dealer a cut. Imagine buying a house, where any changes modifications, additions, etc. can only come via the builders company. No thanks.

The day smart phones and computers became a necessity (many government services now require or can only be accessed via a smart phone or computer via the internet) and not a luxury is that day Apple stepped on to thin ice with it's closed garden business model for them.

Welcome to Tesla.

Pretty much the reason I'm not driving one.

(Although I think I'm starting to get over it, since everyone else releasing electrics keeps disappointing with slow cars I have zero interest in.)

-scheherazade

Tesla isn't 60% of the US Market. Apple is. That's the main difference. Tesla does some shady stuff too, but the market will correct some of that behavior since there are essentially unlimited alternatives to getting a Tesla. There aren't many alternatives to Apple phone, and even fewer to the Apple App Store. So there's no correction unless the government steps in.

I suppose you can buy a Porsche taycan.

Or DIY electric conversion.

-scheherazade

I meant cars in general. If you can't get an electric, there are still plenty of other choices for automobile transportation. Not so with phones and apps. Two app stores control 99% of the market: Apple and Google. If you own an Apple device, there's only one.

To be fair, you can just sideload, or download apk's and install them locally. I don't mind going to the developer site and fetching the apk instead of getting it from the play store. The stores never meant much to me. But I realize I'm not the typical user.

-scheherazade

jdreyer wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 15:45:

Scheherazade wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 11:55:

Jonjonz wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 06:32:
I think Apple has taken things too far with it's store and how locked down it's products are, and that one reason why I don't buy them, but other people are quite willing to buy a pig in a poke.

Imagine buying a car with a EULA that says it can only be fixed at the original dealers, which you cannot buy accessories for, replacement parts for, or even get a new paint job without having to give the original dealer a cut. Imagine buying a house, where any changes modifications, additions, etc. can only come via the builders company. No thanks.

The day smart phones and computers became a necessity (many government services now require or can only be accessed via a smart phone or computer via the internet) and not a luxury is that day Apple stepped on to thin ice with it's closed garden business model for them.

Welcome to Tesla.

Pretty much the reason I'm not driving one.

(Although I think I'm starting to get over it, since everyone else releasing electrics keeps disappointing with slow cars I have zero interest in.)

-scheherazade

Tesla isn't 60% of the US Market. Apple is. That's the main difference. Tesla does some shady stuff too, but the market will correct some of that behavior since there are essentially unlimited alternatives to getting a Tesla. There aren't many alternatives to Apple phone, and even fewer to the Apple App Store. So there's no correction unless the government steps in.

I suppose you can buy a Porsche taycan.

Or DIY electric conversion.

-scheherazade

Plenty of cards on ebay, so I guess someone got them.

I just hope the 3090 has stock. Am eager to upgrade my 2080ti (which I got day 1 iirc).

The irony is that all I play lately is zandronium/zdaemon (original doom ports), and war thunder...

I do owe a kid a 3000 series for his birthday (I promised). I hope to get him a 3070, but with this sort of availability he will get whatever 3070 or 3080 with which I can actually make it through checkout.

-scheherazade

Renegades Hang wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 12:46:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 01:38:
It's textbook anti-trust. It's why the studio system was dismantled in the 1950s. Just because the Trump JD doesn't prosecute doesn't mean it's not illegal.

Did Apple just start owning the OS and hardware under Trump? Or have they been like that for decades? Gee, you're not biased against Trump are you?

Vertical integration isn't a monopoly since other companies can also vertically integrate and compete on the exact same footing. The Paramount ruling was atypical.

Ronald Reagan explained why in his autobiography, "An American Life" (p. 116-118). He wrote:

"In those days Hollywood was run a lot like an old-fashioned candy store: You cooked it in the back and sold it in the front.

....But that all changed after the war. An anti-trust suit was brought by a private chain of theaters and as a result the Justice Department issued a series of decrees declaring that the studios could either make pictures or operate theaters - they couldn't do both.

This turned Hollywood inside out overnight. The studios chose to continue producing movies. But no longer could they afford stables of actors and other workers under contract because from now on, they had to make movies purely on the speculation theaters would want to show them.

....Nevertheless, I believe the government's decision to break up the studio system was wrong. It destroyed the stability of the industry under the justification that the studios monopolized the picture business. But they didn't have a monopoly; there was intense competition that worked well for everybody. You had seven companies who were always competing with each other to turn out a better movie than the guy down the street, and if people didn't like a picture, they'd show it by voting with their feet.

Owning the theaters provided a guarantee to the studios that if they guessed wrong on a movie and made it, at least they'd get some of their money back by playing it at their own theaters. This allowed them to take risks on people and stories."

The lack of risk taking is why we have so many reboots of the same damn movie. How many Spiderman reboots are we on now? I've lost track. Thankfully the ruling is being turned back...

Why movie theaters are in trouble after DOJ nixes 70-year-old case

On Friday, a federal judge agreed to the Department of Justice's petition to vacate the Paramount Consent Decrees, a landmark 1948 ruling that forbade vertical integration in the film sector and ended the Hollywood studio system.

...."Multiplexes, broadcast and cable television, DVDs, and the Internet did not exist" when Paramount was decided, Torres wrote.

Were the robber barons not broken up due to excessive vertical integration? IIRC they owned their product pipelines all the way down to mining minerals, making it impossible for any new player to compete.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Sep 17, 2020, 15:27.

Jonjonz wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 06:32:
I think Apple has taken things too far with it's store and how locked down it's products are, and that one reason why I don't buy them, but other people are quite willing to buy a pig in a poke.

Imagine buying a car with a EULA that says it can only be fixed at the original dealers, which you cannot buy accessories for, replacement parts for, or even get a new paint job without having to give the original dealer a cut. Imagine buying a house, where any changes modifications, additions, etc. can only come via the builders company. No thanks.

The day smart phones and computers became a necessity (many government services now require or can only be accessed via a smart phone or computer via the internet) and not a luxury is that day Apple stepped on to thin ice with it's closed garden business model for them.

Welcome to Tesla.

Pretty much the reason I'm not driving one.

(Although I think I'm starting to get over it, since everyone else releasing electrics keeps disappointing with slow cars I have zero interest in.)

-scheherazade

Verno wrote on Sep 16, 2020, 19:39:

Simon Says wrote on Sep 16, 2020, 17:50:
Gamers Nexus wasn't impressed.
Hardware Unboxed wasn't impressed.
Linus wasn't impressed.

Only Jayz"Nvidia"2Cents and Digital"Cherrypicking"Foundry were.

I feel like you're seeing what you want to see. You said Linus wasn't impressed for example but that wasn't his conclusion at all. I watched all of the reviews in question, as well as read several linked here and the general opinion was that it was at least a 25% average increase on the 2080ti and everyone seemed suitably impressed with the FE card, minor quibbles aside.

Agreed. They didn't seem unimpressed - more like 'business as expected' because nvidia left no room for surprise by stating 'up to 2x 2080 performance'.

In the last 1.5 decades or so it's been typical for a gpu generation to do about +25% ... we get one that does +~70%. Sometimes +100%, sometimes when cpu bound +0%. All that sounds good to me.

-scheherazade

jdreyer wrote on Sep 15, 2020, 17:01:

VaranDragon wrote on Sep 15, 2020, 05:49:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 15, 2020, 02:52:

William Rubin wrote on Sep 14, 2020, 23:45:

Scheherazade wrote on Sep 14, 2020, 21:35:
I don't get how company a can tell company b to stop selling software that company a does not own and does not have rights to.

Because a corporatist elite sees no value in a government that does things like feeding or educating the poor, or ensuring that they have medical insurance.
A corporatist government has just one function: to maximize corporate profit - with the threat of force whenever necessary.

So you think it's fine that cheat software makers thrive and devalue a 100 million dollar product? I'm not pro-corporatist in the least, but kind of artificially devalues a company's hard work and unnecessarily destabilizes the multiplayer market. It's akin to sewing the roads with nails, thus causing drivers to get flat tires. "You're infringing on my right to scatter nails wherever I feel!" Yeah, not so much.

Actually your analogy is not really that great because sewing the road with nails is a criminal offense, one that can lead to death and injury, cheat software doesn't cause death, doesn't cause injury and in most cases actually increases the sales of said game (if it is really popular) as waves of cheaters get banned and need to re-buy the software.

The only ones who really get screwed in these cases are the non-cheating end-users, and even the cheaters themselves. Non-cheaters are getting screwed since they have to "compete" in a cheating environment, and cheaters are getting screwed since they need to keep re-buying the original software and even the new iteration of their cheat software if they want to keep cheating.

So while I don't condone cheating, indeed I am extremely adverse to it, I don't feel bad for the companies who make the games I feel bad for the end users. These companies usually do fuck-all to protect their software from cheaters in the first place and deserve the righteous indignation of people who are affected by this.

Certainly it's the end users that suffer the most, I'll agree. But the companies are also affected. I have no love of EA or Activision, but I respect their right to compete in a free market, and cheaters devalue their product resulting in reduced sales. Scattering nails in the road won't cause accidents, modern tires have no problem staying intact and inflated with nails in them. But you have to take your car to the shop to have them removed and your tire patched, which is costly. Also, just like scattering nails, making and using cheat software is also illegal under the DCMA. I'll admit the analogy isn't perfect, but the motivation is the same: people argue for their right to engage in sociopathic and illegal behavior.

In general, no company has to protect any other company's bottom line. I can open a restaurant across the street from another, undercut them, and put them out of business.

For some reason, there is exceptionalism when it comes to cheat makers.

DMCA does not prevent cheats. It prevents certain things that ostensibly violate copyright, such as breaking encryption.
DMCA doesn't prevent you from using another entity to represent you - be it your lawyer buying you a car in your name, or a cheat app pwning noobs for you in your name.

-scheherazade

I don't get how company a can tell company b to stop selling software that company a does not own and does not have rights to.

-scheherazade

Assault is not combat, it's the movement before combat. This suit is way faster than taking a RHIB over and scaling the sides of a ship. And you can approach from multiple sides.

They just have to add a shoulder T to hold the engines, and some articulation servos. Make a computer steer instead of the pilot, and free up his hands. But that takes money, and a proof of concept is great for getting people to sign a development contract.

The system as it is, is privately developed (by one of the pilots, actually, as a personal project turned commercial venture). I expect the navy paid for the trials they wanted.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Sep 14, 2020, 11:41.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Sep 1, 2020, 04:48:
"Exploiting a bug is not cheating"
I dont remember how many times I heard that in multiplayer games, especially from the bunnyhop crowd. But I would be rich if I always got a penny for it.
Coaches of esport teams being that stupid.. Now thats something new.

Bunny hopping has been a deliberate feature in FPS games since quake 1 (1996). There is dedicated movement code for it. It was added to make movement another skill to develop.

The sheer popularity and endurance of CounterStrike basically erased the normalcy of bunnyhopping from the collective FPS gaming psyche. CounterStrike (which patched bunnyhopping out around beta 3 ish IIRC) was all many people played for years, and so many games tried to copy it, that it just became the new normal.

That said, I tend to side with the 'if the engine allows it, then it's fair' crowd. The engine defines the rules. What it allows, is allowed. If you don't want players doing it, patch it out.

Since doom, for a decade+, it was considered a skill to find and master anything that the engine allows for an advantage. From silent BFG firing and wall run speed boosting, to making pixel-precise jumps to ledges (that 99.99% of players can't make) where you can fire from an advantage.

Overwatch was infuriating to play widowmaker on. There are countless off-limit areas where you can't grapple to. I've died countless times planning an attack and escape, only to find out that my escape path has an invisible wall. Absolutely COUNTLESS. Then the opposite happens - someone else escapes from me using a route that I just assumed would be blocked because 100 other similar routes had invisible walls. FFS. The inconsistency is far worse than just allowing a general purpose grapple to anywhere. (Or at least make invisible walls translucent, so we know places are magically off limits).

-scheherazade

HoSpanky wrote on Jul 13, 2020, 16:48:

Scheherazade wrote on Jul 13, 2020, 01:33:
No idea why it's there, but I almost bought an Index this weekend.

Only thing that stopped me this weekend was that I couldn't choose between the Index (meh rez at144hz) and the PiMax 8kx (4k per eye at 75hz).

Since neither has both high resolution and high refresh, I didn't get anything. I know that either one will make me feel like I'm giving something up.

I currently have a 4k 120hz full chroma IPS display, 48 inch. Not VR immersive, but I don't need to compromise on clarity of fluidity of motion.

I mainly play flight sims, and I average 120+ fps at 4k on a single GPU.
With a second GPU, I could pull 120hz per eye.
As soon as someone makes a VR unit with both 4k and 120+hz, I'm buying.

-scheherazade

You can’t do dual GPU with VR unless the game is made for it. It makes SENSE, because you should be able to do one card per eye, and there’s already support for this in both Unreal 4 and Unity, but no one uses it. I don’t know of a single game that supports VRSLI.
Also VR is a different beast when it comes to refresh rate. Headsets will cut to half framerate the INSTANT they drop under the set framerate. It’s why you can force the index down to 120 or 90fps. It’s better to have a solid 90 than have 120 cut down to 60 when the game pushes too hard.

Does the virtual frame insertion stuff take care of the frame rate halving? I thought that was what it's for.

Last I used VR was DK1, which didn't have anything fancy to it.

-scheherazade

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Jul 12, 2020, 17:22:

HoSpanky wrote on Jul 12, 2020, 15:15:
Index back on top! Nice to see Satisfactory on the list, it's a great game, even though it's currently unfinished.

Does anyone think that's actually there organically?

No idea why it's there, but I almost bought an Index this weekend.

Only thing that stopped me this weekend was that I couldn't choose between the Index (meh rez at144hz) and the PiMax 8kx (4k per eye at 75hz).

Since neither has both high resolution and high refresh, I didn't get anything. I know that either one will make me feel like I'm giving something up.

I currently have a 4k 120hz full chroma IPS display, 48 inch. Not VR immersive, but I don't need to compromise on clarity of fluidity of motion.

I mainly play flight sims, and I average 120+ fps at 4k on a single GPU.
With a second GPU, I could pull 120hz per eye.
As soon as someone makes a VR unit with both 4k and 120+hz, I'm buying.

-scheherazade

jdreyer wrote on Jul 4, 2020, 21:02:

noman wrote on Jul 4, 2020, 20:15:
She had friends who witnessed the attack and helped her in piecing up what happened. Then there's the nonsensical tweet exchange. Not sure why WaltC is getting so offended by these reports.

I feel sad when reading these things come to light. I was always a big fan of Chris Avellone, but yes few years away from industry will probably do good for him. Hope he turns his life around.

Some of these people either have an irrational fear of being wrongly accused (1%-2% of sexual harassment claims), or they don't like the idea of having to give up the ability to hit on women that aren't interested in them in a workplace setting. Walt obviously didn't read the entire article, or willfully ignored that part in order to make a strawman argument. Also, that article left out a couple of important facts:
1) Chris was plying her with free drinks on his company dime, so cost as a limiting factor was not present.
2) He was plying her with Midori sours, a drink of strong flavors that masks the alcohol so you're unaware of how strong the drink is or how much alcohol you're consuming.
Regardless of the exact circumstances of this particular incident, Chris' behavior is a pattern.

What's missing about a lot of these "worries" about wrongful accusations is that reducing harassment across the industry also reduces the number of false claims. If there is almost no harassment happening, the ones that do happen get greater scrutiny, make it more perilous to make a fake claim.

This scenario reads like the typical crap you can witness any given night at a busy hotel bar near last call.

As described by her, the events occurred in the conspicuous presence of her friends, was initially permitted, and he obeyed her rejection. I don't see the criminality. The main difference between what happened, and what would be considered ok, is whether or not she regretted or liked the encounter.


Regarding 1&2 :

1)
Plenty of companies provide 'go out on our dime' benefits.
I have a buddy that even went to bora bora on the company dime (all above board). He's away on travel 3 weeks out of every month, and his boss makes it worth his time. His boss is like 'here's a card, have fun'.

2)
The primary give away of a strong drink, is the alcohol vapor that chokes you when you breathe. Flavor isn't going to mask anything 'strong'.

Plenty of people hit up bars to hook up on the regular. There's a massive population of folks in the 21-39 ish age bracket where that's their entire idea of diversion. It's not an unusual behavior pattern.


"You miss every shot you don't take". Ultimately, as living creatures, trying to mate is a normal natural imperative - which involves negotiating with some other party.
The real issue (for him) is that he needs to be better at divining the other party's interest in him - failed attempts risk an upset. Fail enough times, you are guaranteed for an upset.

The work aspect is going to beat you over the head when you fail. When you succeed, nobody minds. Work is where a large portion of people meet their long term partner (assuming they didn't in school, or by associations), so while it's often officially unpermitted (CYA), it's practically permitted almost universally. In any case, he took the risk, and how he'll get beaten over the head with it.

-scheherazade

This comment was edited on Jul 5, 2020, 04:05.

Pigeon wrote on Jul 3, 2020, 22:55:
I built a Ryzen system back in December and for various reasons needed to remove the cooler a few times. It was a precarious process that required way more care than the Intel PCs I had previously had. A retention system that lets you remove a CPU, whiles it's still engaged,with just the adhesion of the thermal paste is a pretty poor design. A recipe for bent pins and thermal paste in places you'd rather it wasn't.

The trick is to twist before lifting, it breaks free the thermal compound.

-scheherazade

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Jun 29, 2020, 12:39:
Man, I wish Blizzard had made a D2 remastered version, just to see people bitch about it looking wrong or the unchanged gameplay being terrible, as their nostalgia glasses shatter.

That animation sums up online late stage D2/LoD perfectly. Sly reference to loot grabbing programs as well. Should have had an obvious bot player too though.

*EDIT* Typo.

I would be happy with a low effort patch for d1 and d2 that makes them work properly on modern os' and allows client game hosting.

-scheherazade

RedEye9 wrote on Jun 30, 2020, 11:12:
The Clorox-ing of social media is long overdue.
Glad to see fakebook, twotter and the tube finally taking out the trash.

I don't know anything about the content from Duke or Spencer.

I saw stuff by Molyneux a year ago or so. He was promoting cultural isolationism. Stuff like 'every country has its own culture and shouldn't adapt it to suit immigrants, but rather immigrants should adapt to the culture they are joining.' Didn't see anything white supremacist tho'. Certainly heard him called that, just never heard it from him. Hopefully he wasn't thrown out with the bathwater.

-scheherazade

Rising sun is a stretch. It's just a common Japanese flag symbolizing Japan, centuries old.

Only offensive if you find Japan itself offensive - which some [Korean/Chinese/etc] people do.

-scheherazade

eRe4s3r wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 15:39:

RedEye9 wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 15:30:

eRe4s3r wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 15:24:

RedEye9 wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 15:12:

eRe4s3r wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 15:05:
Let me get this straight.. SS runes were not banned before this?

What would make you think that?

Oh, just that the US wrote it into law to ban it in Germans laws... you know, way back when...

But not the Iron Cross, Swastika, Wolfsangel, Arrow Cross or Black Sun?

Of course they are banned as well Just find it funny things the US military complex decided to be a thang to ban back in 1946 is not applying to US corporations in the year 2020... until today... talk about a double standard.

Would be a waste of time. Any government ban would fail 1st amendment challenge.

Most countries don't have a constitutionally implied freedom of speech, so you can ban whatever FOTM thing is offensive.

-scheherazade

Sepharo wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 06:39:

Scheherazade wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 06:13:

Sepharo wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 04:47:

Scheherazade wrote on Jun 27, 2020, 04:03:
side note :
I notice you mentioned their leaderlesness. That makes me believe that you misunderstood my mention of anonymous - I'm not mentioning anonymous to talk about leadership.
I mention anonymous to point out how the media misunderstood the use of the word anonymous. Hackers said 'we are anonymous' to mean 'we are unnamed unaffiliated individuals' - but the media understood it as 'oh, so anonymous is your organizations name'.

-scheherazade

People who claimed they were in "Anonymous" were acting in part with the "Anonymous" movement.
Just like people who are organizing and participating in "Boogaloo" groups and are identifying that way are part of the "Boogaloo" movement.

I know you think it's just preppers and people with "bugout" bags, and maybe that's all you've been exposed to... but the people dressing in Hawaiian shirts and planning violence, and organizing in "Boogaloo" groups are part of the "Boogaloo" movement, not simply preppers or whatever.
It's a real thing.
You're trying some "no true scotsman" esque argument... but there are people in the groups who want a 2nd Civil War, and that's what the name comes from.

(Anonymous is all of us. You, me, etc, not a movement. The anonymius hackers were a complete misunderstanding in mainstream media.)

Boogaloo predates any of these groups.

The no true Scottsman fallacy first requires that the person be a Scottsman.

In this case, uninitiated outsiders see a Frenchman and call them a Scotland. And when corrected they say 'yeah, well, we call them Scottland'.

Uninitiated outsiders are hearing boogaloo for the first time, and misappropriating the term as a label for groups that talk about the boogaloo.

-scheherazade

You're honestly the one doing the retconning here.
You have it backwards, Boogaloo has always been in reference to the "sequel"... Nobody would have called zombie apocalypses, meteors or whatever "boogaloo" before and it's not from "bugout".
Your exposure to the term has come long after it has been used on the chans for Civil War 2: Electric Boogaloo specifically.
I don't disbelieve you that it means different things to different people... same thing happened with "gamer gate".

That's possible. I don't strictly adhere to whatever a term was in the first post it was ever coined in, but rather where it settled once it became adopted. Hypocritical I admit.

Nobody even remembers the conflict of interst issue that gamer gate was in the beginning (game reviewer dating game author).

The chans are people competing over who can out shitpost the other. You even have black kids posting anti black racist crap, Jewish kids posting nazi memes, zero fucks given. Just winning the thread with the most fucked post. I can't take anything from there seriously. It's impossible to separate what is honest from what is shitposting.

-scheherazade