Soonercoop

It's a shame that the RIAA should be allowed to continue to shaft parties who aren't even actually responsible for the perpetuation of piracy to no end. If they really wanted to stop piracy, they would funnel all of that money they spend on an army of lawyers each year into lobbying to change the system. Instead they try to bury unknowing families of child offenders and now wage war on companies who couldn't possibly manage being responsible for policing the actions of all of their users. All the while the masses continue to commit piracy because nothing can stand in their way and they will never be held liable. Now we innocent users will get to pay for it all as it trickles into our bills and fees. Edit: $100,000 per case??!!! Are you sh*tting me?

The R6 had mostly the same features and build of this and they reviewed it highly so I wouldn't expect a big difference in their review. iirc, these cases have a big enough gap the vertical gpu performance is tolerable.

We can keep getting upset about the way games are monetized and whatnot, but here's the thing- You are not forcibly compelled to open the damn things! EA is a slippery company, but why do we have to invite lawmakers to force it out? Yes, we're temporarily eliminating it now, but at what cost? Inviting lawmakers into regulating our games can only end one way, and it's gonna eventually be the EU outlawing titles that are available elsewhere. The bottom line is that if the items are not of actual real monetary value (They're not in 90% of cases), it's not real gambling. Is it teaching kids poor decision making? yeah. Should it result in an adult content rating? yes. Is it real gambling though? No, of course not. Boy, game regulation is one case where I'm glad that U.S. politicians are worth their salt.

That's true, but it's semantics. You know good and well what he meant.

You don't literally have to, but practically, you do.

Well by that I mean at 144hz, I should have clarified that. But yeah even some triple AAA games struggle around 60 fps on high but those are standouts, on average a 980ti is still great for most people. First world problem I guess but I'd like to be able to break the ~80-110 fps I hit in many games. I'm also losing about 10% in some games because I'm using virtualization.

Hyped for the new architecture and hoping the 2080 will run well under virtualization using qemu. My 980ti just doesn't cut it for 1440p gaming, but I'm afraid Nvidia will start locking down their cards for these kinds of configurations given that was the case with the 10 series. AMD just can't compete in the high end and it's really a bummer because Nvidia is just shafting the linux and vfio communities in their lack of compliance with drivers etc. We'll just have to see whether RTX picks up but I am betting that adoption in popular games will be incredibly slow given the rate of DX12 adoption.

Limiting the keys wouldn't be effective without a trade ban as well. I'm fairly certain you are reading too far into this and what actually happened is their legal team decided what was necessary and the changes were made accordingly to abide by The Netherlands' laws. If the people don't like the rules they should leverage their public opinion against their government, Valve is just playing by the rules.

My primary concern with this is that it is not likely to be implemented in a way that is really beneficial to consumers. We are inviting the federal government to regulate something that should be left to the states imo. What we really need is incentives for isps to upgrade their infrastructure. People complain about 10 Mbps being an unrealisticallly low broadband standard and yet in large swathes of the country (including where I'm from, a city of 140,000) 10 Mbps down is the maximum speed even businesses can buy at all. My company is paying $1,500/month for a 15/5 Mbps line and that's literally the best we can get because there are no other providers available. That's not even a business package level btw, those are more like $3500/month. People can keep talking about "net neutrality" as a blanket for regulation like it's the life or death of internet usage, but the fact is that the infrastructure and lack of competition is the problem that really needs to be addressed.

While you are not wrong, you have to remember that the 99% who use smartphones, tablets, and other mobile devices are people who can't handle any of the above. The only benefit of some form of windows in mobile devices is the proprietary windows only software they can't currently use on android or ios and that's what those people want, so if it happens and runs well lots of people will be interested in it. Coming from an avid linux user.

On topic, I don't think this will make an enormous difference in intel's tactics. They are going to continue to do everything they can to hold onto their market share and it's worked until the last year or so. As they lose more and more we'll start to see differences, but for the time being they'll just find a new ceo and keep at the same old "innovating" or whatever it is they do at intel hq nowadays.

ChromeOS itself isn't just great or anything, but the money you save buying a chromebook for purposes of browsing, media consumption, schoolwork, or light software development for instance make it a compelling buy in the context of cheaper chromebooks. It looks awful when you think about it on the pixelbook but it's extremely useful for low budget laptops and that's why so many people buy them. They are also soon releasing native linux app support and that combined with android app support makes it substancially more useful than android x86 for basically every use case.

What's with all the pessimism? 343 already drove the series into the ground so there's nothing to lose. If there's at least a slim chance I might be able to play a decent halo game on pc I say let's wait and see how it turns out.

I agree, we should have had a release from Apple detailing the issue and how their fix was to be used to solve it before implementing it. When I said "twisted" I was referring to the phrasing of the argument that "PHYSICS" is to blame for this issue. Two can play this game - So what you're telling me is that the software team had to do this because the hardware engineers at Apple failed to consider PHYSICS when designing their devices? It's a ridiculous and flawed argument. The people at Apple are not stupid and they know exactly what they are doing when they design a device. I'm pretty sure their engineers have a good grasp of PHYSICS. On Apple's part where I take issue is that if the user can't replace the battery, the device is effectively end of life at the point it degrades that badly. The real solution in the first place would have been to fix the batteries for a reasonable cost for both parties, and they did follow up on it pretty swiftly after the news broke so good on them.

That is entirely subjective and a twisted way of putting it. There was clearly a different intent at play in throttling the old phones. The fact that it's opt out doesn't change the effect it has on clueless users. Lol.