TopHatProductions115

That's not the issue, Nvidia removed GPU passthrough restriction on consumer/Geforce GPUs and the RTX 6000 is a professional product and those have always supported it.
 
Without being able to plug a monitor directly in to the GPU it cannot bed used for anything other than application acceleration when passed through. Without passing it through then you need to use VMware Horizon or equivalent from other hypervisor vendors and also purchase Nvidia virtual GPU licenses.
 
VMware Horizon is really great though, we have a few thousand concurrent session setup at work and it even gets used for video editing with software like Adobe Premier and Aftereffects.

"PC is just adult Lego"
🤔

I dunno about your system but nothing with the air or hardware around my cpu and gpu is running anywhere near that temp.

overheats and blows up. lego everywhere, it was like a war... could not take a step further, before I took a lego to the foot.

You didnt ask correctly, right @Spotty?

*me, reading your name as polished  chicken*
 
*Me at the FAH Badge store* "I need you to engrave this badge"
 
*Clerk*: "Okay and who would you like for me to engrave this to?"
 
Me:

I think they mean, if the computer's domain-joined in general. Domain type doesn't matter in this case. In addition to that, non-Activated installs of Windows can be joined to a domain iirc. I remember pulling it off recently. Not suggesting the practice, but it was to test a VM for functionality before pushing a license to it. 
 
Either way, I think that this is the type of thing that a procurement/legal team should be working to prevent. Software licensing research and interpretation should be a regular task for a legally-operated organisation.

I think they mean, if the computer's domain-joined in general. Domain type doesn't matter in this case. In addition to that, non-Activated installs of Windows can be joined to a domain iirc. I remember pulling it off recently. Not suggesting the practice, but it was to test a VM for functionality before pushing a license to it. 
 
Either way, I think that this is the type of thing that a procurement/legal team should be working to prevent. Software licensing research and interpretation should be a regular task for a legally-operated organisation.

True, good point. It might be better to not address the use of ad blockers or this whole OCCT controversy. I think it may be better to let people have their opinion on using ad blockers, I have no issues with using them. As for this whole OCCT controversy I think both are wrong, and even if a developer were to take legal action I'm not really sure but it probably wouldn't amount to much, a company might get a small fine and have to pay for the software.

Can we all take a moment to stop and acknowledge the fact that the dev responded to linus' response in the original reddit thread, and in that response he seemed appreciative of the fact that linus addressed the situation in the way he did, and that he never intended for this to blow up like this? He also said he was open to the possibility of working with LMG in the future, so the way I see it this whole situation has been resolved.
 
https://old.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/srhalz/linus_tech_tips_pirating_occt_answer_from_the_dev/hwtqmhj/

Anyone who thinks he did it intentionally isn't thinking straight. It's highly unlikely he's even in the know about things like this, he just sees the program on there and thinks someone else has dealt with it. He's not going to go to Accounting each time he sees something new.
 
As for the post/rant the dev made? A little misplaced, I think. As soon as you say "I would have given it to them for free" it kind of invalidates the entire reason you posted. Sure, I get that you wanted the reach out, but you can't cry about lost funds after you've said you wouldn't have charged them because you understand the exposure is worth far more than the cost of the license.

* 5 posts
 
 
do it and provide proof.

The people still calling out Linus's adblock=piracy take have either not listened to what he said or are deliberately missing the point for an agenda. I hate to be defending a rich man and his company, but this line of attack is borderline delusional. Linus was not passing a moral condemnation on people that block ads. His was a philosophical point. A semantic point. He was talking about the definitions of words. His point was almost entirely restricted to the realm of linguistics. All he said was by definition, consuming content you agreed to watch ads to access without watching those ads is SEMANTICALLY analogous to using paid software without paying. This was a philosophical, not a moral point. He was not passing moral judgment on anyone. 
 
That said, parts of Linus's response were gratingly passive-aggressive in a way only a Canadian can be (I say this as a Canadian). Either come out and attack someone explicitly or keep your mouth shut. This fake subtle shit is pathetic. Particularly his quip about the dev writing a "novel" on Reddit is underhanded and shameless as all hell. If you think the dev was in the wrong, say it in as many words. Acting like a Machiavellian fox is absolutely bottom-of-the-barrel pathetic.
 
Also, Linus, I am not a lawyer but I find your insistence that you weren't using the product commercially because you weren't using it for its "intended purpose" a flimsy excuse at best. If I rip a YouTuber's thumbnail off because I like the image and use it in my video as a floating graphic, it does not mean I am in the right simply because I did not use it as a thumbnail.
 
However, I am still a fan of Linus and his work, and his channel is one of my favorite on YouTube. I just point out when people I like engage in what I see as bullshit. 
 
Finally, I believe that, in this particular instance, the dev is in the wrong. It seems like he was doing this for clout. It is discourteous and uncalled for to address something like this in public before making an effort to correct it in private when it is clear there is likely no malicious intent behind LMG's actions. Particularly suspect are two of the dev's actions:
 
1. His 180 from thanking Linus on Twitter to attacking him on Reddit. 
2. Ending his response to Linus's comment on Reddit by saying, "I hope we can work together in the future."
 
I do not claim to know the man's mind, but this smells fishy to me. It feels underhanded and like he's doing it for clout, particularly when you consider that he has no problem with YouTubers using his product for free and that he was willing to hand out a license to Linus for free too. Excuse me, but what's the issue? There's nothing wrong with wanting to get paid for your work, but if you want that but also in the same breath imply you're okay with not getting paid for your work, what standard are people supposed to judge their actions regarding your product against?  
 
Lastly, @Annika, you are embarrassing yourself. At first you had some semblance of a point, although I disagreed with you, and, honestly, was alarmed at the amount of passion and vitriol you came at LMG with, you have lost the plot entirely now. Spazzing out and frothing at the mouth about your credentials is never a good look. Nobody cares what degrees or position you have. Argue with your points; don't demand people's qualifications and credentials on an anonymous forum. Your occupation is not a citation. 
 
[Forgive typos, can't be bothered to proofread.]

there used to be it used to require a USB Dongle back in the 4.x days 
 
again people need to go back and review the history of the program before making a snap judgment because the dev has been all over the spectrum in regards to licensing 
 
yea LTT(the company) fucked up and honestly, matters like this are probably well below Linus's eye level  at this stage in LTT's life
he should hire a lawyer and have an internal audit done 
 
I think Linus's only real mistake was not recognizing how much he pissed off the community with that hot take and not immediately backing down 
 
I really don't interact with this community much beyond the occasional comment on stream because this community is a raging dumpster fire most days 

Literally WTF? I can't imagine a more ignorant response to such a straightforward response by Linus. How is it damage done? The dev said that he saw +15% traffic just from the mention of OCCT on LTT. That kind of marketing is worth many, many licenses. Imagine the cost the dev would have had to pay to be sponsored, and he got that for free. Regardless, Linus purchased a license anyways, as soon as it was brought to his attention. I'm not sure how that doesn't "solve" it unless you're talking about a few months of missed interest on the $30 that might have been sitting in the devs bank account. Not even sure if that would amount to a full Canadian penny, though. And, you hope LMG gets sued? Really? For what? Even if they didn't purchase a license, which they did, the cost of court filings would be far more than the dev would ever hope to get back. Suing someone for not paying $30 soon enough. If that isn't the most brain-dead thing I've ever heard. Sheesh.

Not going to lie I pulled a you(or one of your employees) by selectively looking for what I wanted. For you/employee it was a download link giving little to no care to what else was on the site, for me it was to see if you righted a wrong giving little to no care what you have stated otherwise.
 
HOWEVER this is not what you did, now is it? As you never made contact nor did they contact you, therefore your actions are not the "norm".
 
As long as this isn't BS (only time will tell) then there isn't really anything else to discus now is there?

Thank you for this totally reasonable and thoughtful contribution to the conversation. 
 
I will be very sure to use this comment as the defacto standard for a highly reasonable comment. 

No, I don't think money is really the issue, as a company the size of LMG could probably handle legal action and settle it unless they get sued by a company the size of Microsoft.
And yeah I think this is a bad look after the ad block users are pirates hot take, which Linus spent most of a WAN show defending himself on somehow watching free content with no requirement that anyone must pay to watch content on Youtube means you're pirating videos if you block out awful ads that makes youtube annoying to use.  The other issue I have is claiming the channel is educational and getting off with pirating software, thats an interesting take considering I see mentions that LTT gets things wrong. I think LMG should have a legal analyst for things like this to prevent any problems with software licenses.

@LinusTech
My 2 Canadian cents on this is that you probably need some kind of licensing admin to make sure all the software you're showing on screen is in fact used appropriately and paid for properly. I think what has the community so riled up is that you said a thing that was a hot take and then found yourself in exactly that situation, the internet thrives on drama especially when fueled by irony. This is like a teenager getting reprimanded for a speeding ticket only watch their parent speed themselves. I know I know, you didn't reprimand anyone but equivocating adblock to piracy and piracy is bad sure feels like being reprimanded. You kind of can't tell people something they're doing is bad without people feeling like they're being put down for it, I'm sure you know this. Put some checks and balances in place to make sure it doesn't happen again and it'll just become a funny footnote I'm sure.
 
As for the dev of OCCT it's possible that they have some kind of social impediment that makes it very difficult for them to deal with people in certain situations and this was brewing for a long time until it just word vomited out all at once in a kind of ugly manner. I think a lot of us can commiserate or have dealt with this or people who have this kind of issue when it comes to potentially stressful interactions with other people.
 
And finally, it's nice to see you here addressing this personally but I feel you're just adding more fuel to the fire in a way.

Depends how you define piracy. If you mean strictly according to the legal definition of software piracy, then technically you're not wrong.
 
But it's clearly benefitting from something and not paying the (obviously, and well understood) price for it. It's in a clever 'hee hee hee it's not technically wrong' way, but isn't that how a pirate (or privateer) might behave? 😉 

This sounds awfully close to "I'll pay you in exposure!".  Don't be that guy.

 

I don't believe it should have ever been an "issue that required something like this reaction, reddit, multiple videos about it and all that".
 
All of this happened (the way I see it) because most people don't have the capability or the mindset to see their own mistakes on a conscious level, but they know a subconscious level that they themselves make mistakes, and it's easier to point "the other guy" then it is to look inward.
 
We all have pirated stuff in the past, present and/or future. Either by mistake or not. Most times people just can't afford to pay for "stuff" because most people live below minimum wage so yeah... feeding the kids takes precedence.
 
I would suggest locking this thread and maybe talking with the dev in question directly over the phone, discord, any voice/video chat and working things out.
 
Then you could also colab with him. If the new version of his software requires platforms to test it out on, you could all colab on it and make a video that is educational and would help everyone involved while at the same time <hopefully> shut up the trolls.

The amount of hilariously bad takes on this already has me excited for the next WAN show.