Rakanoth

What if you only install a single 3070? What happens then? This "no post" type of problems are very annoying. I had one GPU that would randomly prevent PC from "posting". Can you test it on another mobo?

You can never be sure the source is trustworthy. Pirating is good.

I suggest you first test it on a virtual machine and examine its behaviour.

I was too lazy. I just found this: Source: Wikipedia article about Apple M1, Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_M1

The older Mac Minis used Intel CPUs that were based on x86 architecture. The latest Mac Mini has M1 chip and doesn't have a CPU with x86 architecture. How is the software and operating system compatible with the new chip? I just don't get how this architecture works.

We are working on a multilingual dictionary app that takes definitions from various dictionaries online and presents them to the user. I won't get into the specific details about what this app does it differently than others. The innovative part of the dictionary is its user interface. We believe it is going to be extremely useful to a lot of people. The languages include English to English (as in oxford or cambridge dictionary) as well as English to German, German to English. The problem is that our app will either scrape the definitions from online dictionaries' website (via regex or DOM/xpath/xquery) or receive the definitions from an API and store the definitions. So, the definitions of the terms/word won't be ours. We can "maybe" call them "stolen". What kind of copyright issues if: 1.) we make the project open source and publish it? 2.) we sell it as an app?

A march song glorifying the resistance of Felluce against the occupying US forces: "May God greet the people of Fallujah, all of them brave"

Online competitive games burden your body. Your shoulders, neck, arms etc. might still a bit stiff. They might ache. Does this happen to you? How do you deal with it? Do you get massage therapy from professionals? Do you daily exercise?

no u

Where is the fun in that?

"Michael Jackson's 2009 death now listed as due to Covid-19": https://gordiecanuk.blogspot.com/2020/05/michael-jacksons-2009-death-now-listed.html I actually had to double take to make sure this was humor. It’s getting so ridiculous I wouldn’t doubt it if it were true lol This was just too funny. Thriller? Heh, more like: Grandma Killer. Unlike 99.6% of people with covid, Michael Jackson failed to Beat It. The covid models were Bad. In lockdown, we’re all stuck here with The Man in The Mirror. Say, say, say what you want, but I refuse to live in fear. One thing I've noticed is that the media have been reporting the deaths of somewhat obscure people more than usual. It's like "So and so died" but either the cause is not disclosed or is reported as "natural causes". The net effect is more obituaries= more panic.

Set a proper title next time.

"More than 40 diagnosed with COVID-19 after Frankfurt church service": https://news.trust.org/item/20200523134545-hjpes/ Isn’t the point of slowly reopening that we are ok with some increased infections? The goal is to not overwhelm hospitals, so the fact these folks were identified means everything is working properly. And it’s evidence that slowly opening is working ok. The problem in February is these people weren’t identified and kept infecting others. People are just disagreeing on what slowly reopening looks like. In this case people are worried that 40 people were infected in one place. That’s a pretty high rate for one spot. You might consider it a hot spot. The problem with hotspots is that they affect the places that are not hot spots as well and could likely cause another lockdown. "Dr. Anthony Fauci says staying closed for too long could cause irreparable damage": https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/05/22/dr-anthony-fauci-says-staying-closed-for-too-long-could-cause-irreparable-damage.html Could cause irreparable damage? It already has. All the lost hours of learning and playing that kids will never get back. All of the families torn apart by deaths of despair. All of the businesses we’ll never be able to visit again. All of the lives lost because access to basic, necessary preventative care was cut off. What the hell is going on? It seems the tide has really started to turn with the lockdown. And of course the people who worship at Fauci’s feet will now call him a fraud and a hack. Doomers demand total trust in the scientists and experts... that is, of course, until they say something positive or optimistic. The most irreparable being nobody’s going to believe a word the government says the next time there actually IS an emergency.

Comparing lockdown skeptics to anti-vaxxers and climate change deniers demonstrates a disturbing amount of scientific illiteracy. I am a staunch defender of the scientific consensus on a whole host of issues. I strongly believe, for example, that most vaccines are highly effective in light of relatively minimal side-effects; that climate change is real, is a significant threat to the environment, and is largely caused or exacerbated by human activity; that GMOs are largely safe and are responsible for saving countless lives; and that Darwinian evolution correctly explains the diversity of life on this planet. I have, in turn, embedded myself in social circles of people with similar views. I have always considered those people to be generally scientifically literate, at least until the pandemic hit. Lately, many, if not most of those in my circle have explicitly compared any skepticism of the lockdown to the anti-vaccination movement, the climate denial movement, and even the flat earth movement. I’m shocked at just how unfair and uninformed these, my most enlightened of friends, really are. Thousands and thousands of studies and direct observations conducted over many decades and even centuries have continually supported theories regarding vaccination, climate change, and the shape of the damned planet. We have nothing like that when it comes to the lockdown. Science is only barely beginning to wrap its fingers around the current pandemic and the response to it. We have little more than untested hypotheses when it comes to the efficacy of the lockdown strategy, and we have less than that when speculating on the possible harms that will result from the lockdown. There are no studies, no controlled experiments, no attempts to falsify findings, and absolutely no scientific consensus when it comes to the lockdowns. I am bewildered and deeply disturbed that so many people I have always trusted cannot see the difference between the issues. I’m forced to believe that most my science loving friends have no clue what science actually is or how it actually works. They have always, it appears, simply hidden behind the veneer of science to avoid actually becoming educated on the issues.

"The Lockdown Skeptic They Couldn’t Silence - Targeted for censorship in March, Aaron Ginn is becoming an influential voice in cities, states and Washington.": https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-lockdown-skeptic-they-couldnt-silence-11589566245 Data is data. Our focus here isn’t treatments but numbers. You don’t need a special degree to understand what the data says and doesn’t say. Numbers are universal. Everybody was claiming "durr ur not an epidemiologist" when I said it's delusional to expect not to eventually catch a disease with a relatively high R0 and ridiculous to worry so much about a disease with such a low IFR. Anybody who can do arithmetic could see the obvious folly in both those ideas. But how can you believe me if I don’t have a PhD in addition? Umm, like you hear what I am saying, but my comment is not peer reviewed. I posted Ginn's original Medium article on Facebook (I almost never use FB, but I thought some of my friends who generally respect my judgment would be interested). I even prefaced the post with "it is a bit controversial and I don't really agree with all the conclusions", but I praised the open-minded style and analysis that considers the big picture. Well, there was a chorus of outrage from my highly-educated work colleagues, and then the article disappeared from Medium. I'd been thinking for the past few days that this was another example of censorship that we shouldn't forget. And my question is: Why is the idea of "no guaranteed immunity" so heavily pushed in any coronavirus discourse? Everywhere you go on the internet that mentions anything about antibodies or any sort of immunity you'll find doomers in the comments claiming "antibodies don't guarantee any immunity, reinfections are proven, there is no evidence that anyone can become immune" thus creating this fear that if the virus doesn't get you the first time round, it will get you eventually and that's why we need lockdown til vaccine. This has me skeptical because surely we would be seeing a lot more evidence of reinfection, people recovering and then dying but this doesn't seem to be the case. I've been thinking about why this "no guarantee of immunity" idea is being pushed so widely by people when scientists like Neil Ferguson said “I acted in the belief that I was immune, having tested positive for coronavirus, and completely isolated myself for almost two weeks after developing symptoms." after he broke the lockdown he pioneered. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/may/05/uk-coronavirus-adviser-prof-neil-ferguson-resigns-after-breaking-lockdown-rules Neil Ferguson was on the committee of scientists advising the UK government. If a government scientist working with other leading epidemiologists to advise the government with access to all the latest data and information claims he has immunity because he had the virus then surely there must be some scientific and governmental belief in immunity that the public isn't allowed to know for certain yet. I mean if you're willing to destroy your economy and society on the word of big expert Neil Ferguson, why does the idea of immunity that he clearly believes in be any less valid. I'm assuming that the idea about not being transparent with the public about any sort of immunity is because they fear the concept of guaranteed immunity would encourage people to seek out the virus, potentially risking themselves or vulnerable groups. You can see this with how quickly immunity passports were dismissed by the WHO and the experts for the possibility that people may seek out the virus thus prompting all the claims that there is no evidence of guaranteed immunity. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/25/who-warns-against-coronavirus-immunity-passports This leads me to believe that all the fear mongering about immunity you may see on other subreddits or the media is a social control designed to stop people seeking out infection. I wouldn't even call this a conspiracy theory as its pretty clear government slogans and advice aims to socially control behaviour to limit the spread of the virus. You can argue that this is not inherently bad if the aim is to not have any infections but seeing as a vaccine could be years away and coronavirus is probably here to stay I think the fearmongering over lack of immunity is dangerous as it exaggerates the risk to those unlikely to suffer a severe case of covid by suggesting "if you don't die from it this time, it will get you eventually" which contributes to the mass hysteria you see in healthy and relatively safe individuals. Basically, what I'm trying to say, all these social control policies that use fear to try and limit the spread of the virus are short sighted, and has instilled such a level of fear in the population I'm worried that coronaphobia and health related anxiety are gonna impact behaviour for years to come. I think it is all based in ignorance, since the media went and ran with a WHO tweet that said there is no proof the antibodies grant long-term immunity. Sure, but then if there is no sort of immunity why are we bothering with a vaccine? People are simply ignorant. Our lizard brains just see fear-mongering everywhere, taking it all in. It’s really just a great card to play to scare people. Not only will this lockdown be here a year from now, it’ll be here forever! #TheNewNormal There was a doctor on Good Morning Britain this morning, touting the idea that there is no guaranteed immunity just because you have antibodies. In the following sentence, he said "you know, when we get a virus, we get antibodies that grant us immunity from several years to a lifetime. But there's no guarantee of that with this virus." So, in one breath he tells us to be afraid of the lack of evidence of immunity, then highlights that with almost every other disease we come in contact with, if it doesn't kill us, we become immune to it. But this new virus might act completely differently than to how every other virus is observed to behave. Utter madness! The best one was yesterday, though. Skynews was running a headline saying "20% of brits at risk from coronavirus". The expert they had on was saying about the elderly, those with comorbidities, etc are at risk of suffering with this disease. His words? "8 million, or about 20%" of people have these comorbidities. Go away! The UK has a population of around 65 million people. 8 million is near enough 12%. So, about 1 in 8, not one in five. That's a sixty percent difference. I hate this fear campaign so much.

Bro I think you need some fresh air. These lockdowns aren't working out well for you. Anyone can notice the smoothness difference between a low refresh rate monitor and a high refresh rate one.

There is nothing wrong with my argument because everyone can notice the difference between 60Hz and 120Hz, 144Hz and 240Hz. Don't be funny.