AFAIK they are all producing AIBs ('add in boards').

Just that for the longest time nvidia and ati/amd have referred to 3rd party makers as 'add in board partners', or 'AIB partners', shortened to 'AIB's.

-scheherazade

Burrito of Peace wrote on Nov 14, 2020, 13:39:
1: Go AMD! About time you roared back to life on all fronts.

2: HighPoint? Hard, HARD pass.

I've had weird issues with highpoint, such as having two controllers in the same system causing only one to have the driver load successfully - unless I run different firmware on each, then each has a successful driver load.

That said, their stuff is usually 'good enough' for workstation use.

-scheherazade

Synthetic vulkan api benchmark.

-scheherazade

I would love to see people shun all political parties, and have independents take over all positions in the upper tiers of government. Shit can all these propagandists, influence peddlers, and regulatory capture sellers.

-scheherazade

jamiedj99 wrote on Oct 30, 2020, 19:39:
i betcha facebook wants to know whats being said in those 100billion messages a day to data mine it for ad revune purposes. how long till the change the encryption and do it illegally and just pay the fines later.

Who says they haven't already?

The app has to pay for itself somehow, and fb is an info seller.

-scheherazade

Cutter wrote on Oct 30, 2020, 17:34:
Spot on, Simon. I don't even understand why video cards need to be involved in cryptocurrency. The process should be CPU intensive. People involved should be using supercomputers or quantum machines.

A GPU is basically an old school supercomputer. Crap tons of simple yesteryear (figuratively speaking, in terms of general purpose capability) cpus packed into a single chip.

And since crypto math is low intensity branching wise, and each attempted hash is independent of any other attempt, it's a perfect fit. It scales well and avoids the weaknesses of using rudimentary cores.

-scheherazade

Dacron wrote on Oct 12, 2020, 11:17:

Razumen wrote on Oct 12, 2020, 05:40:

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 12, 2020, 03:38:

Razumen wrote on Oct 11, 2020, 20:18:

crazedgironemo wrote on Oct 11, 2020, 19:26:
Remember the 'cutting edge' camera feature that will translate your facial motions into the game? Yeah, I didn't think so.

\
That's actually in the game. And it works.

It is in game but it is a broken mess. It is only shown locally and not transmitted across the network, which defeats the point in an MMO.

It's not really a broken mess if it works but the data's just not being sent across the server. It's also a bloody alpha, so things are bound to break anyways.

That said, I don't think it's something the game need right from 1.0. They should've planned it as a post-release addition.

"It's not really broken if it doesn't work right."

SC fans in a nutshell.

Steele Johnson wrote on Oct 12, 2020, 11:12:
The last resort is when you start playing the "when it's done" card. Didn't George Broussard (Duke Nukem Forever) play that card after slipping 4 or 5 times?

100%, They pioneered the term... didn't work out so well for them. I still want to try that original build shown at e3.

I thought Blizzard popularized "when it's done".

-scheherazade

MrBone wrote on Oct 1, 2020, 07:24:

Scheherazade wrote on Sep 30, 2020, 19:46:
I worked on a project where I crunched for well over half a year. The last 2 months were 16 hour days, which was especially annoying since the company didn't allow you to log more then 12 hours per day [ because of some legal limit to daily hours IIRC ].

What did I get in the end? A reprimand for looking bad on security review for working odd hours... by the same person assigning me the daily tasks... who would leave at 5 and give me a full days work to do by next morning (we all started at 9 daily).

Lesson learned : don't do overtime.
If they demand it, demand compensation.

Another thing I noticed was that when management leaves at 5, they don't see people working anymore, and they act like as if everyone is done working at the same time.
By not doing overtime simply by request (which is quickly out of mind) they are forced to be aware of it by authorizing the compensation.

I don't mean onesey twosey rare and incidental overtime, I mean the 'this is how things are' overtime.

-scheherazade

When you woke up from this nightmare, did you have a hankering for some cookies??

The reference goes over my head, sorry.

-scheherazade

I worked on a project where I crunched for well over half a year. The last 2 months were 16 hour days, which was especially annoying since the company didn't allow you to log more then 12 hours per day [ because of some legal limit to daily hours IIRC ].

What did I get in the end? A reprimand for looking bad on security review for working odd hours... by the same person assigning me the daily tasks... who would leave at 5 and give me a full days work to do by next morning (we all started at 9 daily).

Lesson learned : don't do overtime.
If they demand it, demand compensation.

Another thing I noticed was that when management leaves at 5, they don't see people working anymore, and they act like as if everyone is done working at the same time.
By not doing overtime simply by request (which is quickly out of mind) they are forced to be aware of it by authorizing the compensation.

I don't mean onesey twosey rare and incidental overtime, I mean the 'this is how things are' overtime.

-scheherazade

Confused... didn't this launch already? I mean there are 3090 cards on ebay being scalped right now. People with pics of successful orders of nvidia's 3090 FE.

-scheherazade

+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.