dizmo

Because children are being forced to participate in an adult conversation without the knowledge, context or even maturity to handle it. Until you're 18, your activities really should be monitored by your parents. I'm sure many kids at age 13 believe they know everything, but they really do not. If some rando is demanding you send them naked pictures, or they will be be blackmailed for having visited this forbidden thing, there are kids who fall for this. Hell there are adults who still fall for this, because they've not the experience or supervision to know how to identify scams. Sit your kid down, and just armchair babysit them as they use the internet and ask them why they visit the sites, why they play those games, and see what happens.  When I was 13 I discovered usenet and IRC and without the context, back in the 90's to know that both of these were extremely unsafe spaces. I knew there was something wrong when the channels and messages at the top of the lists had a lot of padding characters. Your kid might be less willing to visit the forbidden sewers of the internet if you tell them why the site is bad for them. There are people on *chan sites who are there just to get you killed. Many troll sites are like that. They make no distinction between "ha ha, look at this wannabe, they should kill themselves" and "let's see what happens when the cops break down their door", if those are serious threads or just meme's. The last thing you want is some kid being baited into doing something illegal because they believed they had something to prove to some *chan troll.
 
 
I think a study on gaming really would need to be at least an entire year. Track their habits (eating, smoking, drugs (legal or not), coffee/energy drinks/soda's, sleep cycles, etc.) Figure out which study participants are "gaming" their study and remove them.
 
 
Nope. It's pretty clear that the title was basically "we did a study and found nothing conclusive"
 
The style of game probably has more to do with happiness than the actual "gaming"
 
People generally feel better after playing games that don't piss them off. Like if I want to relax, I'd rather play an adventure game that has no timing puzzles. A FPS or a game with a time limit would do the opposite.

So I think this might be interesting. After making sure I've fully enabled G-Sync/FreeSync Compatible, I tried creating a custom resolution on NVIDIA control panel. When trying to set the refresh rate to 165Hz the test works but then the custom setting doesn't save. Doing the same thing for 164Hz the setting actually saves and I believe works. Weird that a custom 165Hz refresh rate doesn't save but 164Hz does. I guess that'll work until AOC tech support figures something out.

Well, Apple does use 120hz panels in the 13 Pro line.
 
A lot of the features Samsung adds are nice additions to Android, and you can disable most you don't want to use.
 
Samsung now gives 4 years of OS updates on Galaxy devices. The Pixel line gets 5 years of security updates, which Samsung pushes out to most devices as well, and only 3 years of OS updates. Oneplus is almost the same as Google, with 3 years of OS and 4 years of security.
Worth noting that the Pixel line with Tensor chips has apparently not aged well, MKBHD has seen significant slow downs over time to the point he wouldn't recommend the device.

iPhone's are out, they have 60hz displays.
I'd get the S20 FE over the S21.
Don't know anything about Xiamoi.
 
I'd personally go for the Nothing phone out of that list. Solid device, though the camera is probably just adequate.

Most ads on Amazon list the dimensions of the mounting base as well as clearances. 
 
If you have clearance issues just use it without the clamp, by drilling a small hole in the desk. 

It's an interesting dilemma. Initially I had the same viewpoint as you, but I think a better analogy would be this:
You send a PC you just bought in for repairs, they replaced your 16GB module with a 32GB one previously, because they don't have any 16GB ones in stock. (I assume this is why the original purchaser had a larger-than-spec battery). Later on they email you, which starts a download and limits your 32GB of RAM back down to 16GB.
 
In their eyes, you're not worse off, because you didn't pay for the 32GB to begin with. You bought the system with the stated 32GB, and thus feel shorted.
 
I feel this is just shows you really need to know what you're buying. Wouldn't the VIN say 60d? Or the paperwork when transferring the vehicle? Anyone can stick badges on the back of their car. I could turn my dads 500k/km F250 into a Ferrari F40. There's no faultless party here. Though I feel Tesla should have just given it to the customer since they lose nothing in the deal. It's very poor customer service.
 
I don't agree with the title of the article, nor with the OPs write up, though.
 
Tesla would likely try to have it fall under implied consent, where the second owner would "know what he's getting into when buying a Tesla." Which, to Tesla, might make perfect sense, but to a laymen wouldn't be obvious at all.
 
It'll be interesting watching them try to use laws not really designed to deal with a changing landscape in this case.
If we were to go for a ride somewhere, and you forget your phone in my car, your phone is now mine?

It's an interesting dilemma. Initially I had the same viewpoint as you, but I think a better analogy would be this:
You send a PC you just bought in for repairs, they replaced your 16GB module with a 32GB one previously, because they don't have any 16GB ones in stock. (I assume this is why the original purchaser had a larger-than-spec battery). Later on they email you, which starts a download and limits your 32GB of RAM back down to 16GB.
 
In their eyes, you're not worse off, because you didn't pay for the 32GB to begin with. You bought the system with the stated 32GB, and thus feel shorted.
 
I feel this is just shows you really need to know what you're buying. Wouldn't the VIN say 60d? Or the paperwork when transferring the vehicle? Anyone can stick badges on the back of their car. I could turn my dads 500k/km F250 into a Ferrari F40. There's no faultless party here. Though I feel Tesla should have just given it to the customer since they lose nothing in the deal. It's very poor customer service.
 
I don't agree with the title of the article, nor with the OPs write up, though.
 
Tesla would likely try to have it fall under implied consent, where the second owner would "know what he's getting into when buying a Tesla." Which, to Tesla, might make perfect sense, but to a laymen wouldn't be obvious at all.
 
It'll be interesting watching them try to use laws not really designed to deal with a changing landscape in this case.
If we were to go for a ride somewhere, and you forget your phone in my car, your phone is now mine?

It's an interesting dilemma. Initially I had the same viewpoint as you, but I think a better analogy would be this:
You send a PC you just bought in for repairs, they replaced your 16GB module with a 32GB one previously, because they don't have any 16GB ones in stock. (I assume this is why the original purchaser had a larger-than-spec battery). Later on they email you, which starts a download and limits your 32GB of RAM back down to 16GB.
 
In their eyes, you're not worse off, because you didn't pay for the 32GB to begin with. You bought the system with the stated 32GB, and thus feel shorted.
 
I feel this is just shows you really need to know what you're buying. Wouldn't the VIN say 60d? Or the paperwork when transferring the vehicle? Anyone can stick badges on the back of their car. I could turn my dads 500k/km F250 into a Ferrari F40. There's no faultless party here. Though I feel Tesla should have just given it to the customer since they lose nothing in the deal. It's very poor customer service.
 
I don't agree with the title of the article, nor with the OPs write up, though.
 
Tesla would likely try to have it fall under implied consent, where the second owner would "know what he's getting into when buying a Tesla." Which, to Tesla, might make perfect sense, but to a laymen wouldn't be obvious at all.
 
It'll be interesting watching them try to use laws not really designed to deal with a changing landscape in this case.
If we were to go for a ride somewhere, and you forget your phone in my car, your phone is now mine?

It's an interesting dilemma. Initially I had the same viewpoint as you, but I think a better analogy would be this:
You send a PC you just bought in for repairs, they replaced your 16GB module with a 32GB one previously, because they don't have any 16GB ones in stock. (I assume this is why the original purchaser had a larger-than-spec battery). Later on they email you, which starts a download and limits your 32GB of RAM back down to 16GB.
 
In their eyes, you're not worse off, because you didn't pay for the 32GB to begin with. You bought the system with the stated 32GB, and thus feel shorted.
 
I feel this is just shows you really need to know what you're buying. Wouldn't the VIN say 60d? Or the paperwork when transferring the vehicle? Anyone can stick badges on the back of their car. I could turn my dads 500k/km F250 into a Ferrari F40. There's no faultless party here. Though I feel Tesla should have just given it to the customer since they lose nothing in the deal. It's very poor customer service.
 
I don't agree with the title of the article, nor with the OPs write up, though.
 
Tesla would likely try to have it fall under implied consent, where the second owner would "know what he's getting into when buying a Tesla." Which, to Tesla, might make perfect sense, but to a laymen wouldn't be obvious at all.
 
It'll be interesting watching them try to use laws not really designed to deal with a changing landscape in this case.
If we were to go for a ride somewhere, and you forget your phone in my car, your phone is now mine?

6 weeks really isn't much of a study. There are so many flaws to this, I don't think it really carries any weight at all. 

This is Teslas fault and not previous owners how? 
If you buy a V6 Mustang but the PO told you it was a V8 is that on Ford or is this just Teslas fault because BiG cOmPaNy BaD?

Yea no dude. The "nO iNnOvAtIoN" argument is weak and overused. Apple has had 11 years to innovate on a new connector but they haven't. Why? Because the money cash cow that is licensing out the lightning port is just too much for Apple to pass up. Apple itself is making the market worse and stifling innovation because of pure greed. There's a reason why all the wall plugs in your house are of one design.
 
And all connectors are weak. Drop id on the floor while plugged in and just about all of them will break.

Not that I care what cable I use more that every cable in my house, friends and relatives is type C. Just an annoyance to buy whole new cables and adapters for everywhere I go. The new proposed EU type C directive at least sort of makes sense.

I don't like IOS. Sorry, that's a dealbreaker. No type C. I need my ability to install apk's, just too many restrictions for me.

Just wipe the whole thing. You're not going to get any more money for the PC because of some installed titles.

Just wipe the whole thing. You're not going to get any more money for the PC because of some installed titles.

Just wipe the whole thing. You're not going to get any more money for the PC because of some installed titles.

Just wipe the whole thing. You're not going to get any more money for the PC because of some installed titles.

Just get the Samsung. No point in getting something that expensive if it's just to fit in.
On top of that, if they won't text you because of the phone you have, they're shitty people and you can find better people to be around IMO.
Welcome to the forum.

Then yes
 
(no problem, they're the right cables)

Are they labelled CPU?

Very, very very unlikely to cause interference with audio cables. If it did, they'd have to be horribly cheap cables.

What? That is such an open ended question. You need to be far more precise. For example, what is a traditional matx case? There isn't really something that fits that description. As @RONOTHAN## said, just look up the dimensions, and go from there.
 
You can also try this site, but I don't know if they have the cases you want to look at. You'd probably have to put in the custom size.
https://comparesffpc.com/

A hole as a socket design? Interesting. I wonder how they'll work with that.
Just wait and see, or email Noctua and ask. Since you'll be waiting to get the CPU, it wouldn't really be any extra wait to get the cooler at the same time.
Honestly I'd just wait. Noctua will probably send out the coolers with proper mounting hardware closer to release.
 
You're thinking about this way too far in advance.
 
Welcome to the forum.

You could just contact Noctua as well, since they would know and we can only speculate.  Why don't you post here with what they say, so everyone can know definitively?