Belgarathian

???....?????

I honestly don't think you understand the logistics and expenses of having 'a couple hundred servers on backup'. Besides, a better strategy would be to spend on mitigation of DDOS attacks rather than having a replicated backup. Quick question (for research) - Do you vote for Donald Trump Do you support the NRA in arming more of the public to prevent mass shootings and terrorist attacks in the USA?

Okay, let me put it this way: Would you steal, destroy, and vandalize your neighbors property if they didn't have a fence? If your answer is yes, then you're part of the problem. We shouldn't have to protect against these things, but because of the world we live in we have to have precautions in place to deal with these situations. EA was the victim of a DDOS attack during the launch of BF1 beta where traffic was already high. This didn't take the game servers offline, it just loaded up the login servers (which also didn't go offline) causing massive latency and connection issues for some people. Even the best network is susceptible to DDOS attacks, and we shouldn't be blaming EA because they got DDOS'd and their services were compromised for a period of time, we should be blaming the aggressor, Poodle Virgins.

My fault... I said that blaming EA for a malicious attack was like blaming rape victim for wearing clothes. Sure EA could have done more to protect themselves, but they shouldn't have to. A malicious attack is still a malicious attack and we shouldn't be blaming the victim.

Valid... We will never be able to test each SoC apples for apples as the software and drivers are completely different, so there are a lot of variables that impact the performance off chip. To be honest, I think that processors in phone with current software are at the point where I'm not sure they need to be super fast. My iPhone 6 is super quick for everything.

Looks good... Will be interesting to see how the A10 stacks up against it.

I may be very wrong here, but the cable isn't the issue - it's the hardware on each end? The cable is, in layman's terms, a conduit for light to pass through. Sure, the cables that we use today are more flexible, durable, have better internal reflection, and better shielded, but there is no reason that with new hardware that an older cable can deliver higher bandwidth (within reason). Obviously, you have degradation of the cable with age which may alter the attenuation and dispersion properties. The fact that the fibre network hasn't been updated in all these years tells me that it isn't being utilised to its full extent, or is uneconomical to update, but I wouldn't put my money on this. For reference the cost to lay fiber using Chorus as the contractor is approx. $1000 NZD per meter (Chorus makes money on this, probably between 20-30% NP). The USA is ~4,500km wide and if we octuple that to account for all the twists and turns, then the cost to lay fiber from one end to the other would be $36,000,000,000 NZD. <sarcasm> That's horribly expensive, I take back all my arguments. </sarcasm>

The Southern Alps run for 500km from top to bottom of the South Island, with a peak height of 3,700m. No, they're not hills at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Alps I give up. Seriously. If you think that construction costs for your network are the biggest issue then you're beyond help (given that the majority of the network is already in place, we're only talking about unifying and extending).

Shit, who knew you already had fiber to the vast majority of places? All you're doing from this point is laying fiber to the door for areas with high population density, fiber to node and then copper to the door for not so dense populations, and wireless relays for everything else with the origin point being an exchange with a fiber backbone. Similar to the 4G network. I'm not proposing to create a new network, rather a unified network. The hardest part is getting the network acquisitions (or for all the ISPs with significant investment in infrastructure to sign over control to a JV, or SOE), compliance, and consents.

Yup... You also have ~318 million people vs. 4.5m. New Zealand has the majority of our population in cities with rural living accounting for about 10%. When I say rural, I mean townships with less than 1000 people and a 'city' has more than 50,000 people. You already have the majority of the infrastructure in place for this to work, you literally just need to open up your existing infrastructure to wholesale without restriction and on uniform pricing by area, and then further investment in fiber and copper is managed by a SOE or JV between ISPs. Wireless is capable of handling most of the rural expansion and delivering 50mbps.

No very true, we have no problems with mountains at all. </sarcasm> Fiber is only laid in cities. Small towns have fiber to the exchange and ADSL or VDSL to the home. Fiber is being laid to all hospitals and education institutes. Everything outside what's covered above is being provided a wireless network over 4G and other wireless technologies capable of delivering up to 1gbps per antenna. http://ufb.org.nz/ https://www.chorus.co.nz/ http://enable.net.nz/ There isn't an issue to implement this in America from a logistical or cost perspective, the issue is Government.

Not true. Your population density would make this a much more viable offering, if anything because of New Zealand's low population density the cost of infrastructure per household is massive. If you're talking about the policy, then it doesn't matter either as our Governments are very different in how they operate but there is no reason to suggest that it wouldn't work in America other than you'd somehow have to change the model of Government to get it passed and give the FCC some power. Good luck.

Well to be honest, your Government & business culture does make me laugh. A lot.

Or New Zealand... Where we have heaps of government intervention and 93% of NZ has access to 1000/500 fiber by 2020 and one network (1 fibre, 1 copper for each area, with exceptions, that are shared Government oversight). Most of the issues you have are not from Government intervention, but from commercial entities lobbying for Government intervention. There is a massive difference.

Honestly can't tell if this is a troll, or a 13 year old boasting about something that isn't going to happen. You'll have better single thread performance on the i7-6700K, which makes it the best for gaming. 16GB of RAM will be plenty A single 1080 will be more than enough for any game you can think of for any think at 16:9 & 1440p. If you're planning on a lot of video editing, modeling, rendering etc then more RAM and more logical and physical cores will be very useful, so the X99 setup would be preferable but you might trade 1-5 FPS in games.

A phone battery catching fire is pretty bad, but I'm waiting for one of these bad boys to go up in flames:

Lithium Ion batteries are incredibly volatile. It's basically a fuel tank next to a fire with a wall in the middle. Wall is punctured, BOOM Wall gets hot, BOOM We've just learned how to handle batteries better, and improved the material the wall is made of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery

I don't think you can blame EA given that this was a malicious attack. Kinda like saying the rape victim was at fault for walking down the street...

Shit, man. Hes one-upped EA.

The problem with the USA is that there isn't competition, or enough of it anyway. No one shares networks, and the FCC is trying to create change but they just get sued and then everyone in congress and from a local body tries to cut off their feet. To really start things rolling we shouldn't have to have companies like Google roll out their own fibre network, why not open the whole lot up by creating a law that forces all ISPs to wholesale connections to any ISP at a fixed rate (set by the FCC or government). That way you no longer need 5 networks in the same city, one shared network reducing the cost of infrastructure and increasing competition. ___________ There are way too many people to quote here - Google has said that it's not returning the ROI that they wanted, that doesn't mean that it's not profitable, it just means that it's hurting their capital utilisation as the money spent on infrastructure development would have a higher return if spent on other projects.

I have that one year. It's.... okay.

Other than OC, not a lot. Reduce graphics settings in games. - Start with draw distance, Anistropic or Trilinear filtering, water reflections, shadow quality, and then start reducing your texture detail, etc. Make sure you have advanced settings such as volumetric lighting turned off.

Vega only has to edge out the 1080 by 5% for me to consider it a win. I hope that's true. AMD and RTG has done really well with some key products in my opinion. Back on track!

Yeah, buddy.... the GTX 690 is 2x 680 on one board.

Likely to be a faulty SATA cable. Try plugging it into another SATA port first, if the problem persists replace the SATA cable. This was happening to my 2TB WD Green literally 2 weeks ago, replaced SATA cable and it was good to go.