Brooksie359

Also funny they say can no longer protect against trolls implying that there weren't trolls on twitter before Elon lol. Sure it has gotten worse but I doubt there has even been a time where twitter wasn't a dumpster fire. Also not trying to justify Elon or anything as he is doing a horrible job. I am just stating that twitter has and always will be an incredible toxic place with trolls.

Yeah as soon as I heard the lawyer asking for money in bitcoin I would 100% assume it was a scam. No actual lawyer would do business this way. Also I feel like in the future if you aren't sure just ask them a question that an impersonator wouldn't know. I feel like that would easily double check that who you are speaking to is really the person you know.

Ponzi scheme is not taking money from one place and pretending it comes from another. I mean technically it is but that isn't what makes a ponzi scheme bad. Ponzi schemes rely on new investors money to pay old investors. Tesla is just abusing a tax subsidizes to make profit which is completely legal even though I do not like it. Also the tax credits are there to incentivize the adoption of electric cars to reduce carbon emissions so while I do not like what Tesla is doing with the subsidizes I do think the subsidizes are a good idea as it will push electric vehicles faster which Tesla has definitely done wonders for the perception of electric vehicles. Prior to Tesla most electric cars were memed on for being crazy cars while after Tesla now they are seen as just as good if not better than normal cars. Anyways yes it's pretty crappy that they charge extra for self driving features but again that is a business model thing and I would say that if you don't like it just buy from a different company like Toyota that you referenced.

How is it a ponzi scheme mentality? Most companies have goals and they don't always achieve them in the time frame they thought they would. It's not like Tesla stock hasn't seen returns either for those who bought stock early on. I am not a huge fan of Tesla but I feel like people make them out to be way worse than they actually are. Sure they aren't a perfect company and are largely profitable based on goverment subsidizes but complaining that they claimed they would achieve full self driving at some point seems dumb. If anything I would see a complaint of the naming of autopilot as something to complain about more than being upset that they haven't achieved full self driving yet.

I am confused did Tesla actually intend for people to use their autopilot feature in areas with intersections? I thought it was only supposed to be used on freeways where it will basically change lanes for you and stop and start if in traffic. I didn't see autopilot saying that it could do actually full self driving currently. Obviously there were claims that it would come eventually but that is what basically what anyone would say that is pushing self driving tech.

Unfortunately HDR is often advertised when realistically they don't actually have the necessary components to make HDR work. First and foremost is you need local dimming in the forms of groups for ips displays as otherwise you won't actually be able to have one section of the screen bright while the other is dark as normal ips displays can't do that without multiple backligh groups. Oled can achieve this without needing for local groups so generally any decent oled display should support HDR content well. Anyways unless you see an ips panel that has local dimming with a decent amount of zones I wouldn't consider it as being an HDR display. Oled being excluded as the technology itself allows for high quality HDR.

Yeah that is not an actual HDR monitor so even if you turn HDR on it won't do anything unfortunately.

I mean I guess I would just have to disagree. Let me give you a scenario. You are someone who travels alot and need a laptop that can game and do productivity work on the go. Are you going to choose the much heavier msi titan laptop just get a couple more frames in gaming? Ir would you opt for something like the asus dual 16 that was used in this review that is significantly lighter?

I am not saying they would be putting in an insufficient cooling solution. I am saying that because it uses less power it produces less heat and can be cooled with smaller cooling systems making the laptop smaller. I have had many gaming laptops and you would be surprised how much a few extra pounds can really make or break how easy it is to bring around. If you can get top of the line performance in a smaller package why wouldn't you?

I would have to disagree. Even if the laptop has to be plugged into wall you would still want better energy efficiency for the sake of getting away with lighter cooling solutions and lighter power brick possibly. If the amd part can allow laptop manufacturers to create lighter laptops then It would be huge as that is honestly one of the main drawbacks of these top of the line laptops.

Obviously if you have a frame cap or an engine level frame limitation then not getting 100% wouldn't necessarily mean it's a cpu bottleneck but that is sorta common sense.

What? I am pretty sure this is already an option to not show games tagged with sexual content. At least it has been for me.

Also if your gpu isn't at 100% load you have a bottleneck regardless. That is how I look for bottlenecks as it is way easier to see and more consistent. If you are near 100% load most of the time then it's safe to say that your setup is gpu is being fully utilized.

That is probably because that cpu has a super low thread count. Most cpus have more than 4 threads and so you will likely never see them anywhere near full load during gaming. I would expect a xeon to not have all of the threads loaded up but only some of them.

I have never seen a cpu bottleneck that had the cpu 100% all core load. The major of the time it will be only one thread that is maxed out. You hardly ever see 100% multicore scaling that can actually fully utilize a cpu.

Lol this sounds like you just have a frame cap and or vsync. Also if you have a 60hz monitor not sure what the point of getting a 4080 is unless it's a 4k monitor. Also that cpu is very old at this point so I would expect it to bottleneck the 4080 heavily

As someone who has had random crashing issues before I can say that 99% of the time it's ram issue if it's very random and stress tests for some reason do not always show any issues. Had a ram configuration that was stable doing most things but every once in a while it would freeze and lock up and I would have to force the shutdown. After this happened a couple of times I downclocked my memory and it fixed the issue. Granted when i down clocked I mean relative to the xmp profile not to the motherboards base memory speed. I think I ended setting it to 2666 instead of 3000 which I had it at before. Anyways my best guess would be your ram is not completely stable resulting in random crashes.

Apparently there is the innocn 32M2V which is 32 inches for 1000 that has great color performance and 144hz refreshrate. Apparently it uses a panel similar to the Asus PG32UQX. With 99% Adobe rgb and DCI-P3 it seems like a good choice.

After looking at the Neo g7 review it looks like it's not the greatest when it comes to color performance so probably not the best choice if color accuracy is important.

Also it looks like they have a review of the Samsung Neo g7 that you can look at for actual info on the monitor fron their testing

I would look at hardware unboxed monitor reviews as they actually look at color accuracy and other monitor specs in their testing and would give you way better info than I could. Tbh most of what I know about monitors comes from their reviews anyways.

Tbh the best HDR monitors are either 4k or 1440p ultrawide. There aren't really any great HDR 1440p or 1080p monitors or at least there weren't last time I checked.

I knew quite a few people who had small mining setup in the school apartments because electricity was free and there was no rule against it. I guess that is one way to pay for tuition

If you took what the AI did and modified it I could see getting copyright to it but when it's just you asking the AI to make something I do not see how that is anywhere near the same as someone using after effect.

I guess I just find it weird that one could tell an AI what to do and it does the work and you would get the copyright. I would imagine that the one who created the AI should be the owner of the copyright tbh. But then again when someone trains an AI using open source code then it really is a Grey area. Anyways I am not a super strong proponent of copyright in the first place so I do not see why it matters anyways.