peredv

I am experiencing this same issue. On an iPhone 12 Pro Max using the youtube app with youtube premium, if that helps any.

No mention of 3rd gen here that I can see. Which is why I included the link.

I didn't consider someone would just read my title and not the entire post before I started it, sorry that I phrased my title in such a confusing way.

So you a: knew it was a thing, and b: assumed it wasn't there and still thought it might be supported? Sound like you're just finding an excuse to be snarky if you ask me.

See: And tyvm boggy77, I didn't think to check the "support"-page when "tech-specs" looked so definite.

Agreed, but I don't really like spending 300€ on a "probably" so I'm hoping someone has a "definitely". Thanks for the reply though!

I've found mixed information online, pangoly (link) lists Ryzen 7 3700X as supported, but ASUS themselves do not mention 3rd gen. ryzen support, only 1st and 2nd gen. This "same socket, different chipset and cpu support"-stuff have got me very confused

My hero

It gets a lot easier when you can rest the phone against pretty much *every* surface, using the new dBrand grip™ watch how their robots use the grip™ to rest an iphone on a moving formula 1 car here.

I´ll be man enough to admit my newly acquired share in that, sorry. To get back on topic.. Mulling it back and forth I´m still not sure about giving any part of a government the job of tagging content as fake-news, thus effectively censoring it. The wannabe american in me screams just at the thought, but when you look at it in a certain light it does seem like the obvious starting point. Have rules to make sure no corruption is taking place such as transparency in what is tagged, how is the budget used etc. make sure no single person has power ... have clear guidelines on what constitutes "fake-news"; babybutt-bleach-enemas would be a good example of some. Unfounded, unresearched claims made by mr. rando-journalist about the top 10 ways eating GMOs will kill you would be another.. Maybe a science-backed critique of overuse of a certain new poorly tested pesticide is not fake-news.. Then again, there´s a lot of crap being published in journals these days, so "science-backed" should probably be tightened a little as well before we allow everyones facebook feed to be filled up with "Drain cleaner found use as antiseptic, study says. Should you use it to clean your genitalia? The answer may shock you!" because with all this work, news will have more authenticity. Bad example though, I´ll admit.

Ok, fair enough. You have said nothing about fake-news throughout the discussion and was merely arguing that humans have been modifying plants for a long time and there´s nothing wrong with that. I agree; I think Scientific American says it best:

Actually that article states that the first GM crops that came to market did so in the 90´s, confirming what amazonsucks have been saying. Here´s the quote, now go find one that states the opposite: That said, you are right in that he should be reading the source material provided to him. Interesting read by the way, I´ll finish it later. DOUBLE EDIT; in light of mr moose´s answer nothing here really counts, but it´s an interesting article quote so I´ll leave it here.

This whole mr. moose vs. Amazonsucks side-thread sure has been an interesting read. I mean it all started with A: "I think we have enough data to say genetically engineered food is objectively safe and anything else is fake news" - *who's to say what is enough?* - B: "I don't, we only have 24 years of data" - *as if that's a small amount* And then, doing his best to show anyone willing to read through the posts that bias and pride comes before all; mr. Moose has gone on a 2 page long semantics tirade about how "no, I actually was technically right about my wording" instead of admitting we've "only" been eating Genetically engineered food since 94' and continuing the discussion of whether it should be considered fake news tying into the article above. Either take the position that 24 years is enough research and that that's an example of OBJECTIVE FACT that you tout in your arguing for this ruling, or change your opinion on whether GMO foods* (read: genetically engineered edibles produced by gene splicing or other techniques not previously available until the 20th century) should be considered fake-news. Personally I have now read enough petty ad-hominems and condescension directed at Amazonsucks to say that *I have*(read: probably shouldn't base any state-decisions on this one) been convinced that a person, committee or otherwise controlling instance of the state should never be in control of judging what is and is not fake-news. It's simply not possible to do so without bias. Oh by the way, here's the FDAs stance on it: *https://www.fda.gov/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/GEPlants/ucm461805.htm I know I'm cutting it short and they pretty much go on to say that you should always use Genetic engineering to refer to what we are talking about here, but it's also an admittance that GMO is sometimes used in its place. Anyway, those are my two cents. I agreed with you for a lot of your posts mr. moose, but too much of these: "Sorry that is too hard for you to understand." - insulting opponents intelligence. "half of what you post is just irrational banter" - another one, this time using insult to dismiss post instead of breaking down opponents argument. "Argue and dismiss whatever you want, the facts speak for themselves" - Appealing to universal facts without presenting said facts in the same post. "Good thing science doesn't care what you think." - Appealing to glorious science. They break down your own arguments by making you seem like some "mightier-than-thou" jerk. Try to restrict yourself next time and you might win over more readers to your side. Argumentation, after all, is really for the 3. party sake, not the two sides arguing.

We have very different uses for our phones, I'll tell you that much I don't want to modify, install emulators, utorrent or other shady stuff on my phone and I don't use disk space beyond 50 spotify-tracks synced and some pictures, frankly 64Gig is more than I'll ever use. I think(? might be wrong here) that you're doing it wrong? I'm not entirely sure of what you want to do though. I was saying that upgrading from old iphone to new iphone was very easy. Do you mean like downloading stuff on your phone and transferring to a PC? Because if you do then yeah sure, that can be a pain. Not that I see why you would want to.. I agree Samsung did not have the best phones back then, but now. They are beating Apple in some features. If you look at the speeds on 4g. A big difference. But 4g speeds is not something I care about above a certain point, the most I ever download outside of wi-fi is an audiobook or some video like youtube and netflix and the audiobook can start streaming from 5MB anyways. Actually I was worried about this too. My password manager was linked to my fingerprint. But when an app calls for a fingerprint scan the phone takes that to mean faceID automatically and everything works just as normal with face instead of finger. To add to that, I'm also way less cautious about letting Apple have stuff like my face and fingers in their database considering their entire business isn't built on selling personal information.

High prices? Naww, apples prices aren't that high. The kind of prices you're thinking of, the - this product is for businesses - pricing is in the tens of thousands of dollars for a product. And yes, that does imply backing the product. 1200$ for a power pocket computer with a battery that lasts for hours and hours of watching video however, that's cheap when you add up all the hours of research gone into making processors, screen technology and everything else. The norm with apple is honestly something only apple would know for sure, but it's certainly got nothing to do with "customizing interfaces" good god that just sounds like a whole can of worms and is honestly a pretty good example of how apple products absolutely save you time. Hmmm... My bet is it'll probably last as long as consumerism, however long. Which is to say that as long as we have a society which likes to buy stuff we will still purchase new phones at a fairly regular interval.