Morgan MLGman

Quite a nice game, should be better optimized in terms of performance. The main story is great, the DLCs are not as great but still good and I personally like the shift towards RPG/Mercenary type game, instead of only Assassin stuff that was in the old AC games. Although this shift caused the "modern" plot to be quite useless in this iteration. I don't personally mind though.

I never said anything about punishing anyone. I merely explained one of the reasons why the US Government may be involved with Google, because someone asked that question.
Really? I honestly haven't met any in my country, neither in private, nor in professional life. Keep in mind that I work as an IT professional and if anyone, it would be me who knew such people. "Most people" is quite a generalization without any data to back it up.

Maybe Bing, or Yahoo are popular and used in the US. I guarantee you that pretty much nobody uses those in Europe because they're terrible for searching stuff here. In my country, Google has pretty much exclusivity. And how many people actually search for simple stuff in three different search engines? That's unrealistic, and frankly quite naive thinking.

I don't think you understood what I said. Let me give you an example - what if there were, say two competing candidates in an election. What if Google, as the largest search engine in the world decided that they preferred one of the candidates over the other, and adjusted their search engine so when people googled the names of the candidate it mostly showed negative coverage of one candidate, and a mostly positive one of the other?
How could you verify that they were actually doing that, and how would you prevent such behavior?

Please note that this is only speculation and a theoretical example. I'm not asserting that Google is actually doing that or has ever considered that.
Any actual sources for that "guarantee"?

We've only been given a date for the announcement, but we don't have a date for when people can buy. I'd argue they could still vary that if they see demand, and build up more stock to match if needed.
 
Bonus points if anyone can work out what the typical time gap is between previous AMD product announcements and when you can actually buy it. Let's see if this follows that pattern, or if it is longer.

I never said anything about punishing anyone. I merely explained one of the reasons why the US Government may be involved with Google, because someone asked that question.
Really? I honestly haven't met any in my country, neither in private, nor in professional life. Keep in mind that I work as an IT professional and if anyone, it would be me who knew such people. "Most people" is quite a generalization without any data to back it up.

Maybe Bing, or Yahoo are popular and used in the US. I guarantee you that pretty much nobody uses those in Europe because they're terrible for searching stuff here. In my country, Google has pretty much exclusivity. And how many people actually search for simple stuff in three different search engines? That's unrealistic, and frankly quite naive thinking.

I don't think you understood what I said. Let me give you an example - what if there were, say two competing candidates in an election. What if Google, as the largest search engine in the world decided that they preferred one of the candidates over the other, and adjusted their search engine so when people googled the names of the candidate it mostly showed negative coverage of one candidate, and a mostly positive one of the other?
How could you verify that they were actually doing that, and how would you prevent such behavior?

Please note that this is only speculation and a theoretical example. I'm not asserting that Google is actually doing that or has ever considered that.
Any actual sources for that "guarantee"?

Probably because Google has far more power and reach than any of us even imagine. Just think about this - if Google decided to "adjust" search results so it fits whatever the company's current goal is, it could influence virtually most of the human population.

This is something that can be dangerous and needs to be looked at in some way in my view. As far as I know, nobody knows how companies like Google actually configure their search engines.

It's not about "punishing success" as you put it.
If I were to build a nuclear reactor in my kitchen and regulators went "hey, this is very dangerous. You can hurt someone. We're confiscating it" they aren't "punishing me for being successful". They see a threat and act accordingly to remove said threat.
 
Also, the lawsuit isn't about "Google is too big so we should harm them". It's about Google using their dominance in the market to harm competitors. We should be VERY thankful that we have laws which prevents companies from harming competitors. It's okay to build your own product and make it successful. It's not okay to start actively doing things to make competing products worse so that you don't have to compete.
 
 
For example the US government didn't have a problem with Intel making better processors than AMD to the point where Intel had the vast majority of market share. That's fine. Nobody felt like punishing Intel for making better products than their competitors.
But when Intel started telling PC manufacturers "hey, we'll give you rebates on our processors if you stop selling other CPU brands" then the court got involved.

I never said anything about punishing anyone. I merely explained one of the reasons why the US Government may be involved with Google, because someone asked that question.
Really? I honestly haven't met any in my country, neither in private, nor in professional life. Keep in mind that I work as an IT professional and if anyone, it would be me who knew such people. "Most people" is quite a generalization without any data to back it up.

Maybe Bing, or Yahoo are popular and used in the US. I guarantee you that pretty much nobody uses those in Europe because they're terrible for searching stuff here. In my country, Google has pretty much exclusivity. And how many people actually search for simple stuff in three different search engines? That's unrealistic, and frankly quite naive thinking.

I never said anything about punishing anyone. I merely explained one of the reasons why the US Government may be involved with Google, because someone asked that question.
Really? I honestly haven't met any in my country, neither in private, nor in professional life. Keep in mind that I work as an IT professional and if anyone, it would be me who knew such people. "Most people" is quite a generalization without any data to back it up.

Maybe Bing, or Yahoo are popular and used in the US. I guarantee you that pretty much nobody uses those in Europe because they're terrible for searching stuff here. In my country, Google has pretty much exclusivity. And how many people actually search for simple stuff in three different search engines? That's unrealistic, and frankly quite naive thinking.

I don't think you understood what I said. Let me give you an example - what if there were, say two competing candidates in an election. What if Google, as the largest search engine in the world decided that they preferred one of the candidates over the other, and adjusted their search engine so when people googled the names of the candidate it mostly showed negative coverage of one candidate, and a mostly positive one of the other?
How could you verify that they were actually doing that, and how would you prevent such behavior?

Please note that this is only speculation and a theoretical example. I'm not asserting that Google is actually doing that or has ever considered that.
Any actual sources for that "guarantee"?

Probably because Google has far more power and reach than any of us even imagine. Just think about this - if Google decided to "adjust" search results so it fits whatever the company's current goal is, it could influence virtually most of the human population.

This is something that can be dangerous and needs to be looked at in some way in my view. As far as I know, nobody knows how companies like Google actually configure their search engines.

You usually don't need to buy the most expensive drives - WD Red series or Seagate Ironwolf will suffice just fine and you'll save money.

I managed to order an ASUS TUF 3080 about 20 minutes after the cards went on sale (tried ordering an FE card first, but we all know how that turned out)
- I even paid an MSRP price for it, exactly the same as the one on Nvidia's website. Shortly after that they were out-of-stock and actually taken down from their website (other models are still there, just a lot more expensive atm).

I contacted the retailer today (one of the largest ones in my country) to find out when can I expect the card, this is what they said:
This is pretty much a word-for-word translation and it looks like a pretty generic response for "we have no idea, sorry"

This should answer your question: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-amd-3900-xt-vs-intel-10900k/


At 1080p and 1440p there can be a couple percent difference, at 4K it's all the same with Intel chips.

I wanted to order the Founders Edition model - couldn't, first it was unavailable and then immediately went Out of stock.

Ordered the ASUS TUF Gaming one instead, for the same MSRP price. According to Hardware Unboxed it's better in every way than the FE, so that's nice.

I wanted to order the Founders Edition model - couldn't, first it was unavailable and then immediately went Out of stock.

Ordered the ASUS TUF Gaming one instead, for the same MSRP price. According to Hardware Unboxed it's better in every way than the FE, so that's nice.

I wanted to order the Founders Edition model - couldn't, first it was unavailable and then immediately went Out of stock.

Ordered the ASUS TUF Gaming one instead, for the same MSRP price. According to Hardware Unboxed it's better in every way than the FE, so that's nice.

I wanted to order the Founders Edition model - couldn't, first it was unavailable and then immediately went Out of stock.

Ordered the ASUS TUF Gaming one instead, for the same MSRP price. According to Hardware Unboxed it's better in every way than the FE, so that's nice.

I wanted to order the Founders Edition model - couldn't, first it was unavailable and then immediately went Out of stock.

Ordered the ASUS TUF Gaming one instead, for the same MSRP price. According to Hardware Unboxed it's better in every way than the FE, so that's nice.

I wanted to order the Founders Edition model - couldn't, first it was unavailable and then immediately went Out of stock.

Ordered the ASUS TUF Gaming one instead, for the same MSRP price. According to Hardware Unboxed it's better in every way than the FE, so that's nice.