XenosTech

This has absolutely nothing to do with the point @LAwLzwas making, or even your original point for that matter. You can't equate having spare money before a crisis to not having money after a crisis, and say "Oh, you shouldn't have been so frivolous". A thriving economy requires people to spend money on more than just the bare necessities for survival. Even with an ample savings, it can disappear pretty quickly depending on how many bills you have and how large of a family you have to feed. I know people that had contingency plans for losing their jobs, having reduced income and what not, only to realize that those plans have fallen through. A few of my previous techs received amazing job offers, left to go train only to have those offers rescinded, and our company can no longer offer them their old positions. Do you consider that a lack of foresight? Should they have declined the offer of higher pay and better benefits because they don't know if a virus might break out and cause that offer to be rescinded? You can only prepare so much for situations like these before you are forced to roll the dice.
 
It's also impossible to use this logic as a rationalization on a grand scale. Here in the US, different parts of the country will be impacted differently. Our more rural states like West Virginia are already at an economic disadvantage with the political battles of coal mining (one of the few available jobs in that state) and many families already live well below the poverty line in the more rural parts of that state. When their non-essential jobs furlough them and they have nowhere else to work, they'll only be able to survive on unemployment for so long. These people are not frivolous spenders either. The vast majority of my family in West Virginia don't even have internet, their vehicles are extremely outdated and they all live in old trailers on land owned by people that would gladly sell the land to nearby coal companies. 
 
The other side of the coin is places like California, where the cost of living is extremely high regardless of your economic class. A $1200 supplemental income check in California will not go as far as it would in rural West Virginia, and paying to keep your home would be far more difficult due to the higher prices. Once you factor in population density and people competing to remain employed in order to provide for their families, it becomes extremely clear that no matter how much you saved or how frugal you were prior to a crisis, it's simply not sustainable to remain unemployed for a few months when your standard cost of living is higher.
 
I wish it were as simple as "buy only what you need, you'll be fine", but it's just not.

If you earn 3 grand a month and just waste it, the day you are told not to come into work you have nothing. There are people in low paid jobs with huge savings, and people in high paid jobs that have nothing in the bank at the end of the month.

It's not that simple.
 
We are currently heading towards a recession. That means that people will lose their jobs.
Take me for example. I most likely won't lose my job anytime soon so I am not worried, but let's say I was. I usually don't spend a whole lot of money. I save most of my money, and in recent times I have started saving money in investment funds. I have quite a lot of money saved up.
 
But let's say I risk losing my job. All my set expenses don't care that I have lost my job. I still need to pay interest on my loans, pay for insurance, pay for transport, pay for my housing and so on every month. The money I have saved will only last for so long. The investment funds where I have money saved has also lost a lot of value, so even my "money reserve" has all of a sudden lost a lot of its value. So what do I do? I cut back on all expenses so that my money will last longer. The 1000 dollars for computer parts that I may have been saving up over the last 12 months? That will now go towards keeping my apartment one more month.
If I lose my job, I will lose money every month rather than make money. That means I can not save any money, and the money I have saved now becomes my emergency fund even though it might have been saved up for something else.
 
Economics isn't as simple as just "if you bought X before and now has a lack of money then you couldn't actually afford X before". People who bought 1000 dollar phones before might not have been on the edge financially at the time of the purchase. But now that they have lost their jobs, and their savings have lost value they might be.
 

This is something that always annoys me personally, when people call SATA SSDs slow. Good SATA SSDs are in our situations near identical in performance to NVMe so if you need large ish amount of storage there is no reason to not use an NVMe for boot and extra SATA SSDs, as long as you don't run I/O benchmarks you're not going to see a difference so why worry about it.

There is a very good reason a lot of these systems are not upgraded or replace and it has  very little to do with budgets or bureaucracy.   Imagine what happens if your bank suddenly crashes? no payments, purchases, wages, records lost (maybe permanently), what about if the revenue system fails?   When old systems work, are keeping up and replacing them means not only spending insanely huge amounts of money but introducing a huge risk then the logical answer is to not upgrade.  
 
How many times have you had  service issue (game, phone, gym system) and the reason given was a recent upgrade failure?  Happens all the time. I have seen it 3 times this year already. 

Ex-COBOL programmer here.
 
You have *no idea* how verbose COBOL is, or for that matter, how well it scales, until you've sat down and done it for some time.
Swapping out an established mainframe, that's been running for 30+ years, is not trivial.
And anyone who has ever tried, knows this.
There are a million little "if A and B but not Q or R but sometimes L" subroutines in place in old COBOL systems, that redoing them without wrecking the entire system...
 
...well it's easier to keep the COBOL system in place, and re-hiring all the retired programmers.
 
For the record, I wouldn't touch COBOL again for under 7 figures.
But then again I wouldn't touch Assembly again for all the money in the world. Fact. You can't spend it if you're insane. 

I mean it could have been in the process for the last 20+ years lol. It's the same shit with government here, at least now this new administration is taking steps to digitize parts of government slowly.

You mean save icons

It didn't go anywhere though. A lot of companies still use tape when it transitions to cold storage or meets their thresh hold for content that hasn't been accessed in a long time. You think Youtube and Facebook are backing up to SSDs? Ha no

Not really, either one would of been waiting for the other, better to ride bad news at the same time and see who cops it worse than different times when only you will.
 
But Intel funding research even if it's directly to find flaws in a competitor product like this only helps AMD not hurts. If there is a flaw and it is published then AMD can fix it and that improves the product and it's money AMD did not have to spend to find it. There actually has to be a flaw for one to be found so at some point Intel could spend as much as they like and find nothing while all their past efforts have done nothing other than improve the product and make it more secure.
 
For the people that really do actually care about these security issues they have enough intelligence to assess the products and make those informed decisions, little bit of bad press a few times in the past doesn't really alter the best decision that can be made at the time it's being made.
 
Just remember situations like CTS labs was not security research.

New job position: Gaming Accountant

Not to mention Windows 10 really isn't bad at all these days. Early on, sure it had tons of really dumb shit, but today, it's far beyond reliability of any other Windows. Back in WinXP, Vista and Win7 days I basically had to reinstall OS clean pretty much ever yhalf a year coz there was always some dumb shit breaking for no logical reason. Windows 10, I now have it installed on my PC for months and it just works. No issues, no weird bizarre problems. And I keep it fully updated with every update. Hell, the "forced" updating isn't even annoying and a lot of big updates now just hang there and wait for you to manually confirm them. They also solved stupid forced driver installs which don't seem to annoy me anymore. So, all in all, Win10 really matured and is a solid OS that I actually really like using.

i literally just bought a boat load of usb c to lightning audio adapters damn it DONT DO THIS TO ME NOW

Because when a company does it it's profit driven which often leads to things such as anti-competitive behavior.
When a government does it it's to crack down on said anti-competitive behavior for the greater good of consumers.
 
Who benefits from Apple not using USB-C? Apple, and only Apple.
Who would benefit from Apple moving to USB C? Apple's customers.
 
It's that simple really.

I haven't been following the conversation but I just want to point out that pretty much no company in existence has "proper business/corporate structure" everywhere.
Best practice is rarely implemented fully. It's not the businesses fault either most of the time. The problem is old stuff having carried over, or a lack of time and money.
For example last week I replaced a few switches in a factory that had been running since the late 90's. Why had it taken so long to get these switches replaced? Because the documentation for how they were connected and configured were long gone, and the factory lost around 100,000 dollars for every hour of downtime (metal factory and the metal starts hardening if the machines stop). Even though those switches were very critical to the operation, there was a massive risk associated with touching them, so they had been left untouched for as long as possible.
Up until very recently, the risk and cost associated with replacing it outweighed the risk and cost of just leaving it in place.
 
 
So while we can all throw out "if X and Y then Z isn't a problem" the reality doesn't look like that.
 
 
Edit:
Some ranting about that network job I mentioned earlier. 
The fiber patch panels were not labeled (so old the marking had faded /worn off). It was damn near impossible to figure out the physical layout of the network. It's not like I could find maps of the physical topology either (people who handled it before were all gone), and even if I could find it there were several patch panels at each cross-connection cabinet. Not to mention it would have been 30 years old and maybe incorrect. 
 
So how about documentation or clues in the switch config? Well just finding documentation for for the password was one challenge. Luckily for me console standards haven't changed in 30 years so my new equipment could access it at least, once I had login details. 
But that's when I noticed that some of the interface descriptions were outdated. So that couldn't be trusted. 
But the switches supported not only lldp but also cdp! That's nice right? Well turns out the switches are so memory constrained (hardware wise) that they only support SENDING lldp and cdp. It doesn't have the memory to save any cdp or lldp info it receives. 
It was a total shit show. 

I like how op immediately jumps into conclusion with the word “thermal throttle” in their topic title. Heh

CPUs regularly drop below their base clocks for that reason - you are describing power-saving states, not the base clock. Base clocks are not how low it can go when it has nothing to do, but how high it can go for sustained full load.
 
I think @Mira Yurizaki's point was that you can always release a 28-core monolithic CPU with a tiny heatsink as a "500 MHz base clock, 5.0 GHz max boost" CPU rather than acknowledging the inadequacy of said heatsink - or, to come back to laptops, the difficulty/impossibility of fitting adequate cooling in limited space in order for the increased core count to have a meaningful impact on performance.
Hence, the question was whether these mobile CPUs are tuned to some kind of sweet spot, or just tuned down to make them laptop-viable while keeping core counts and single-core, short-lived boosts for marketing purposes.

That was exactly my point.  People today don't understand why it's a thing because they have no experience where it has come from and why, hence they have drawn some rather arbitrary conclusions as to what it is and when it applies.

I think half the problem here with nomenclature is that a good portion of today's enthusiast (active on forums that is) aren't familiar with technology from 20 years ago when variable clock rate was becoming a thing.   For those of us who had to set everything manually (no software to do it for you) then test then reset and retest and so on, Throttling has a different connotation.    Some people seem to be under the impression that throttling is the result of bad CPU design, or that throttling is bad full stop.    Neither of those are true, what is true is that throttling is the restriction of clock speed only.  Not just from a specific point only but any restriction.  As soon as the CPU gets to hot it throttles down (restricts itself) to reduce heat damage.
 
 

I might have to give this browser a try. I prefer Chrome, but if this can effectively pull off what it's advertising, it's worth a look.

CES 2021: Check out these awesome cases with their RGB, tempered glass, and companion phase change coolers.

As someone who ran a FX 9590 in tandem with two radeon 6990s, this is fine. 

HDY Meme.mp4

controversial opinion
 
I kinda like it

Get out! *points to door*