Marinatall_Ironside

ARM wont replace x86 any time soon. The biggest issue is Microsoft. They have the largest software library known to man, BUT practically it all runs on x86. Microsoft has tried to build a comparability layer in their ARM version of Windows, but it was kinda made of suck and fail the last I read. No where even close to Rossetta 2 used by Apple. 
 
Considering the US Navy had lots of software that was stuck on XP, and had to pay Microsoft to continue supporting it. Microsoft has no easy way to move users to ARM. Cant really tell big corporations your no longer going to support x86. Because if they did that, what's to stop them from going to Linux? I mean if they have to rewrite software they might look at new OS's. I think Microsoft's approach is to release a few ARM devices here and there. With the hopes that devs will support the platform. When enough devs get on board then they can release more "Serious" ARM devices. 
 
On the other side I know they are pushing ARM in the data center. Due to the power efficiencies and potential savings on energy. So if ARM is very successful there, then we might see a bigger push in the desktop market. The one thing you have to keep in mind is that changes in tech like this take decades. I mean look at when IPv6 was released. Windows 2000 had support for it. We are just starting to see ISP's invest in it. Some times changes of this scale just take a lot of time. 

Since the discussion is only focused on the credibility of the source, not the topic, I think we can end this here.
 
Due to Project Veritas having extremely strong political affiliation & bias, a focus on producing content that is political in nature, and a well documented history of deceptive and unethical journalistic practices; I would advise that they should not be used as a source for tech posts on this forum. This doesn't just apply to Project Veritas but any such disreputable or highly politically influenced sources.
As per the Tech News guidelines please use reputable sources, and given the topic of this forum this will typically be news outlets that have a focus on tech topics, or respected mainstream media that also cover technology topics.

You need to be more careful about reposting garbage from questionable sources. So here’s a warning about the source of this video: James O’Keefe is known extremist and convict who edits videos to completely misrepresent people. In the US where almost anyone can buy a gun, the FBI has deemed it necessary to put him on a watchlist so that he can’t purchase a firearm.
 
 
 
 
Sources:
www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-okeefe-suit-gun-watchlist-20200806-tgwjaew7kbc4vaeyt5cccwwfyy-story.html
 
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/08/james-o-keefe-settlement-acorn

Is how he obtains information ethical? No. But he gets the truth out.
 
I'm really surprised he's not in prison. He really pissed off the entire establishment. You're not allowed to do that in America anymore. It's simply not allowed!

The problem isn't Project Veritas, it's your cancel culture mindset. Project  Veritas is a gift to humanity as of the few legitimate sources of investigative journalism. Sorry you find that offensive. The truth often is!

As for CRISPR, yeah, everyone seems to be on a bandwagon to slow down or reverse aging; specifically Big Tech. A dollar to a donut they're looking to increase telomeres.

As much as I do think something needs to be done about the amount of power that Facebook and Google have, Project Veritas "investigations" should never be trusted. They manipulate footage to support their objectives.
 
These are long videos, but SUPER informative and well-researched. Watch them at 1.25x or 1.5x and it will be almost impossible for you to trust James O'Keefe on anything ever again.
 
 

Can we just put a moratorium on using Project Veritas as a source? When it's not outright lying or attempting entrapment, it's frequently taking footage out of context or otherwise manipulating it. Even if this is perfectly accurate (it's not, see below)... I'd rather not give any more air to an organization that's dishonest as a matter of course.
 
As it stands, "something called CRISPR" is not exactly shocking or revelatory. That's CRISPR-Cas9 (there are other methods, this is the most common), a well-known, enzyme-based gene editing technique. It has its limitations, and there's already a lot of ethical scrutiny over its use. It has the potential to cure diseases (particularly genetically inherited ones) and end famine. So, as usual, Veritas isn't providing the real story.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O'Keefe
that's the dude who runs Project Veritas.

Veritas is who made the undercover video, so there isn't an alternate source for that video. The person talking in the video isn't Veritas, and they speak their own chosen words. The words they spoke are what is the news here, and not who uploaded the words that they spoke.

@Wail3Y & @ZuppaSalata
Your threads were merged. Because the way merging works, the first posted leaves. However, @ZuppaSalata has correct format, with personal thoughts. @Wail3Y, please follow the formatting guidelines in future with your posts. This is not speed competition.

The monetary value of ethereum is completely arbitrary anyway, all that's changing is the method by which transactions are verified. And yes, owning ethereum in turn will allow you to "mine" more at a speed dictated by how much you already own and completely detached from your hardware.

Ant yet, the problem at hand here is more about the environment. Not only you spend more energy, but you increase the GPU shortages.

Ah yes, victim blaming. They should have done X to prevent Y from happening to them. Excellent, great to know.

Summary
[Former?] Technology pioneer John McAfee has been charged with conspiracy to commit fraud and money laundering in deceptive schemes to promote cryptocurrencies, federal prosecutors announced Friday.
 
In a newly unsealed indictment, the Justice Department alleged that McAfee and his business associate Jimmy Watson used McAfee’s Twitter account to tout various cryptocurrencies to hundreds of thousands of followers, all while concealing from potential investors how they stood to gain from a run-up in prices. They allege it was a “pump and dump” scheme.
 
McAfee and Watson first bought large quantities of lesser known cryptocurrencies at low prices, according to the indictment. Then, they promoted those same digital tokens on Twitter, in an attempt to inflate their prices, using false and misleading endorsements — including deceptively telling potential investors that they would disclose whether they owned the cryptocurrencies that they were recommending. But these were false assurances, prosecutors claim — next came the “dump.”
 
There are also charges involving fundraising events called “initial coin offerings.” In alleged violation of securities laws, McAfee and Watson endorsed ICOs while concealing from investors that they were in fact getting paid for promotional tweets.
 
In one tweet dated Dec. 20, 2017, McAfee responds to another user who asks whether he gets paid to promote an ICO. “I do not,” McAfee says. But he was in fact receiving compensation for boosting the ICO through his Twitter account.
 
Quotes
 
 
 
My thoughts
[This is tech enough news, right?]
Call me old fashioned but I’ve always been suspicious of people who prompt stuff without disclosing it. Do you guys think this whole NFT stuff is real? Does it make sense to pay $$$ for “crypto” artwork? Or is it just people promoting it deceptively?  
 
Sources
www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/05/john-mcafee-charged-cryptocurrency/

Performance gains range from mediocre to non-existent, and in the worst cases it's actually slower than Skylake, overall it's still slower vs the 5800X despite consuming significantly more power.
Interestingly it also has higher core-to-core latency and a worse performing L3 cache compared to Skylake.
It's impressively bad, I'm at a loss for words.
Source
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16535/intel-core-i7-11700k-review-blasting-off-with-rocket-lake

Well you sign a contract with a power company and they charge you a certain rate per kWh, so yes, you "simply" buy electricity. You don't pay, your connection will be turned off.
I think they even said that mining and gaming are both not essential. How does that imply entitlement? The argument is both are hobbies, neither are a necessity so neither has more right to a GPU than the other. Also who's to say they're not running off of renewables.
Yep scientists have trouble getting GPUs as well because, guess what, there's a global shortage. See there is the problem with "actually doing something". Is gaming "doing something"? Just as much a waste as mining from an energy usage perspective. Is using GPUs to teach computers to recognize objects and handwriting "doing something"? One probably says yes, because we see a more direct influence in making our lives easier, which we never seem to have a problem with, but do we really need to waste resources and power on AI so we can have our self driving cars? What are the scientists doing that make them "actually do something"? I use GPUs to image the sky as they benefit me a lot in speeding the imaging process. Is that "doing something"? It's not like it's useful knowledge for day to day life to know what comprises a galaxy a billion light years away.
 
It's the same as the discussion where people try to argue we should spend the millions in astronomy on cancer research, or any other combination of "obviously useless" and "obviously useful" research field instead because that is "actually doing something". One side inherently doesn't see any value in what the other side is doing and therefore cannot justify it.
What I was trying to say is that at the early stages solar cells were inefficient and expensive to make. If I were to guess durability in the early days probably wasn't the best either. Did they just throw their hands and say "well this tech sucks, let's stick to burning coal"? No. Research continued, materials changed, implementations changed, which eventually led to more efficient and more affordable versions. Mining is just one implementation of block chain and current cryptos. Plenty of other projects have no mining involved. It's an evolving process. No innovation without experimentation.
 
ETH is indeed literally designed to not be ASIC mineable. Why? Because the shit show that Bitcoin now is is a perfect example of what happens if it is. I'm sure you've read e.g. some miners even buying up laptops to mine, so I think you can put 2 and 2 together and figure out that people will hoard whatever can make them money. If only cellphones could mine it we'd have a global cellphone shortage. If potatoes were to somehow gain value over time, we'd have a potato shortage.
 
Something that many seem to either ignore or are oblivious to: mining in and of itself isn't the point. This isn't just "hey you guessed a number, here's $5" and you go on to the next. You are providing and supporting the network on which the services run. The coins you get from mining are a reward for doing that. This is again just one implementation. Many projects realise it isn't efficient or sustainable and don't use mining and not every project is trying to be a currency to buy bread with.
 
I mean, you can't use a chunk of gold to buy bread in most places either so in that regard it's just as useless until exchanged for fiat. I feel the problem here is simply that people are just unwilling to accept that cryptocoins have value now, because they don't see a point in it. They don't see a point, because it's something completely different from what we have been used to for basically as long as we have dealt in currencies. Also not every coin out there aims to be the next dollar. If you want to do stuff on the Ethereum network, then ETH has value. You don't, so ETH has no value to you. What's the problem in that.
 
Moot point. You know supply issues reach further than just TSMC. Samsung's yield is supposedly also low, so Nvidia it's not like Nvidia has no excuse. Also how entitled are we getting that in these times nota bene a GPU company, i.e. nothing essential, needs an excuse for lower supply than hoped?
I agree. They definitely have, but I do think current worldly circumstances make it a lot more noticeable.
 
Because the crypto haters know only one argument: bitcoin mining uses so much energy 😧
Taking an interest in how much energy gaming uses or how much would be used if all GPUs had gone to gamers, compared to mining is a perfectly logical step. In the context of energy, both are inherently useless and waste energy.

Arguments for mining: whataboutisms, "decentralized currency", pushing blockchain, cheaper used hardware sometimes, I make money from it so it's fine

Arguments against mining: Energy waste, electronics waste, output allows for easier anonymous blackmarket dealings, at any time the output value can go to 0 with little to no recoup, hoards potentially scarce hardware, crypto can't be readily spent compared to most things

The people who keep these threads going are making money off crypto, the point of crypto was never the coin, it was always the blockchain. Greed invaded and now people think it's worth more than gold.

Cryptomining is not good; Cryptomining generates a pseudo investment currency in its current state, that Crypto has no protections, Cryptomining takes power and silicon and turns it into something less real than game currency since at the end of the day it represents nothing except what people think it is and what countries allow it to be.

Arguing about anything but the negatives is a useless argument (especially here) since despite them, people are making money till it makes a large enough power bubble that needs to get squashed (look at the title of this article). If you have hardware already and mine with it, that's fine; if you're purchasing new equipment to mine more, I wish you the best but I also hope crypto still dies quickly as I'm sure many others would like it to. I'm also really tired of seeing people posting cards mining when there are dozens of threads daily about people still unable to get one for their intended purpose, just so people can squeeze a few more dollars out of nothing.

A better context is "well if everyone stopped recycling, we would run out of newsprint, aluminium, and steel within a decade" 
 
Steel mostly goes doesn't get recycled. Those shipping containers coated in toxic chemicals from china? They rarely get used to ship anything back, and turning them into tiny houses is a bad thing since the amount of energy to clean them is as much as making new ones.
 
The point is. there is nothing recoverable from cryptomining.
- Used ASIC miners? Garbage.
- Energy used to mine bitcoin and others? Gone. Nothing recoverable.
- Used GPU's? Likely going to the landfill when better stuff comes out. A small amount might get resold if they're less than 2 years old. But who's going to dismantle a cryptofarm and stop making money for a day just to do that.
 
Quite frankly anyone championing the current generation of cryptocurrencies is either an idiot, or desperately trying to justify their foolish investment. This is not going to last. All that needs to happen to terminate all cryptocoin mining in any particular state or country is for the energy cost to start charging anyone using more than 15KW/day 10x the price from 6am to 6pm unless they have Solar cells that they can switch to. In which case if it drives people to install Solar... good. Otherwise all it's doing is driving up the cost of energy for everyone.
 
Until I can buy a soda from a vending machine with a cryptocoin and not be charged more than the cost of the soda, it shall remain a fad.

Good on them. I wish more governments would do the same. Cryptocurrency is legitimately a problem when it comes to world power consumption and doesn't offer anything of value over normal fiat currency. No need to waste such large amounts of energy and resources on something so pointless. Definitely has a huge negative impact on the environment. 

And that alone invalidates that claim, not even worth clicking.

I remember back in 2016, was where I purchased the first set of components for my X99 system that would become my first build. Then in 2017, was when I made the jump from the EVGA GeForce GTX 960 4GB FTW to the Asus GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB ROG Strix OC, which still stands as one of the best upgrades I ever made. All but the EVGA graphics card were purchased at the San Diego location.
 
I also bought storage drives there as well. The 480GB PNY CS1311 SSD, 3TB WD Red (2016), and 8TB Toshiba HDD (~2019) I run were all purchased there.
 
The last few times I went to a Fry's Electronics store personally, I knew that the writing was on the wall, based on the vast empty shelves and lack of visitors at the two stores I visited the most. My parents shopped there as well for their PC needs, and the last time my mother visited one, she decided to call it quits for shopping there too. Too bad they went under. I can only believe they made some really awful business decisions that led to this bankrupcy, and that's not even considering last year, which only made matters worse. What I also believe was that they tried to diversify too much (stocking non-PC or electronics items -- the likes of which you would normally find at a Target), rather than keeping a narrow focus on consumer electronics. Additionally, they weren't really stocking enough high-end PC hardware from brands that were strongly in demand, especially the watercooling hardware (like who wants to buy Thermaltake watercooling hardware when EKWB, Bitspower, and the like were more in-demand and often made better-quality components?). The most expensive motherboard I ever purchased was the Asus ROG Rampage V Edition 10, and Fry's did not have that motherboard at all. That was an online purchase.
 
Like what Linus said about NCIX, I do think Fry's should have scaled their storefronts back, got rid of their general goods selection (I still think this is the worst decision period) as well as their automotive electronics, stopped the internet pricing campaign (online sales really are hurting walk-in retail stores' revenue), started to stock actually good and in-demand PC hardware and other consumer electronics, among other decisions to bring the focus back onto consumer electronics for the home, and come up with a few things that no other retailer could have come up with so that they (business owners) can sell the brand. The themed storefronts were cool for their time, but they ended up becoming too much of a gimmick IMO, and all of the space could have been used for warehousing for a shipping network for smaller-scale storefronts.

I still don't know why it's so important to you to argue this point. Some sort of vendetta against MC maybe? Much as I'd love the chance to someday hear the story there, I guess I'll just have to miss out because I'm putting you on my ignore list instead. 

Now being confirmed by news media. https://www.kron4.com/news/national/frys-electronics-permanently-closes-nationwide/
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Given that people are already paying over MSRP for many of the GPU's because they eiher want to build a gaming PC or a mining farm, unlikely.