Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About PopReference

  • Title
  • Birthday 1987-01-01

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Ontario, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

899 profile views
  1. New AMD CPU Cooler from DeepCool

    oof.. What about Fry-Zen?
  2. Yeah I can agree with that. But I even take the comparably weak standpoints and most of this thread has ended up with trying to debate the idea of NDAs, contracts, and agreements as concepts. Truly frustrating.
  3. I wasn't referencing yourself with that comment. It really makes it hard when you keep dropping the context from posts, I was obviously speaking generally because you referenced who the whole thread and the confusion it. This is really annoying because I have to write long sentences that can start to loose all sense as I have to explain things to ridiculous degree. I've already mention the issue of the time frame, how quickly the signing had to take place, and how in the GN video, and other defenses I've seen, it's not mentioned and then made worse by their claims of being a single contract for (maybe) multiple releases over the next years. Just try and consider what I've written and not jump to conclusions I don't take.
  4. Yeah, I've said as much in this thread. It's not matter of what is or isn't, I just have my suspicions for the use of this contract and questioned the problems with and around it. Most of the "debunking" of problems in really only come down to 'just trust us' and gloss over issues will adding more in their statements. But I have little reason to just trust, but even if I choose to, I would still want to have some confirmation to their claims. The reason the standerd of evidence I had set is so high is mainly mock the claims of "this is normal" or even "I sign these all the time" and hopefully make people think about the what really has been discussed, does it make sense, what are the industries best practices, and maybe what's written in the contracts they've sign in their life and gong forward. They main problem with this thread is people 'keep putting words in my mouth' claiming I stand for a position I didn't make and now even claiming I changed my position even though I've stated the same thing over and over again. I didn't start off by taking sides but if people force the issue then what can I do if people attack my positions? I'll say it again more clearly: The contract, itself and the issues surrounding it, I find bad. (Why would I or anyone else sign this document give the circumstances) If then this is normal in the industry then I would be concerned for what's going on. ... Now I'll add: This Nvidia Forum Defends Force is cringe worthy
  5. I just stated an opinion. Why are my responses so hard to take? Maybe take some of that advice for yourself.
  6. 1. I don't care. 2. There are factors outside of just contracts. Contracts themselves don't even matter till they are brought before a judge and ruled on; these agreements are used for leverage, break them and then you'll be giving a reason for the company to ignore you. Even the GN video mentioned how unlikely it is that Nvidia is to actually sue an outlet over breaking this contract it's just saying "don't do these things" in writing with sever consequences if you make them really angry. I did mention the time factor as well as the tech presses reactions.
  7. Why are you so wrong, can you just not take a minute to understand what i'm writing? People were claiming they sign contracts just like these and then post "contracts for dummies" links? Seriously if you want to start gloating about your credentials then by all means post all your information and include any NDAs you may have for me to look at. I guess you have the 'tism then, good for you, I would have never guessed /s (the /s stands for sarcasm) I'm not taking sides. I'm at best responding to people nitpicking my concerns because they're sensitive to they're own bias. Maybe you sign contracts like this all the time and you don't want to perceive yourself as making a mistake? But that's just building an attack on a persons character because maybe I don't have an argument. (the winking means I'm saying that's what you're doing) I guess I have to spell out everything since I'm questioning the attorney(from the GN video)'s explanation since he brought up the idea of it being a long term contract but didn't mention the time concerns. Stop trying to infer motive you lack the mind to do it. in short: Please provide physical/digital evidence to your claims
  8. Yeah, so that's my point. I'm poking holes in the "this is normal" talking point because it probably is similar but we have no reference to base this on just their word, so by not trusting the reportage and demanding actual evidence I got like 5 people to keep repeating the same thing over the last day or 2. I do take offence to the idea of mantra chanting zombie crowd after every Nvidia PR messes up. But I'm trying not pick a sides and that's just a """"coincidence"""" anyway. The worst thing about the contract I find is the timing; from the contract sent out to the required sign date, given on Friday sign by Monday, isn't that the least bit curious? The fact the Attorney in the GN video didn't mention this is also making me wonder if people are glossing over this like it's nothing and then implying that the contract would be used for other product launches? A 5 year long deal for all of Nvidia related releases agreed on in less the 72 hours over the weekend. Really makes you think.
  9. So can I not have my own opinions on events? There's more to this then just what's in the document and I didn't start by taking sides and agreeing with whatever talking points each side says. This isn't a football game it's forum posting. Just want to point out that the use of arguments that involve generalizing something, such as saying "this is normal in the industry" means I can question the industry as a whole. It's not me that's making the argument so wide reaching I'm just responding.
  10. Type strawman in a search engine. lol I don't, but you need to provide evidence that it is since I don't trust industry associates or forum posters. As for lawyers I'm sure they write contracts that are designed to benefit their employers interests all the time, are you really trying to force me to like it? it was to belittle your "evidence", btw I'm done with this autistic conversion. bye.
  11. Your first point is just not an argument and has already been addressed so I don't care and I can argue from a losing standpoint whenever I wish. If you actually wanted to what I think about this specific contract then you can ask nicely. I think you misunderstand my standpoint, specifically: Opinion and relativity. My opinion isn't this strawman you presented were I challenge the exact phrasing used in the contract. Reading through both the sample the NDA and the leaked Nviida NDA many phrasing and language are the same if not lifted completely from the sample; but it's not a carbon copy changes have been made to be particular about the type of press involved and it's been stated that NDAs go through revisions before signing so my point about "what is normal" applies relatively compared to contracts(agreements) signed by the companies in this particular field. If you have a problem with my opinions: Point out what I have said you have an issue with or go post your strawman arguments on reddit or something If you think this NDA is the same as other companies use then post the evidence not just a wiki link.
  12. I don't see what's so hard to understand? I don't have any evidence to conclude that this is the same contract any other company has used before, just repeated phrases without any real context backing them up. What is "normal?" Contracts are a thing, yeah. Doesn't mean you should sign every document waved under your nose. Okay. So don't call me things like *entitled* when I have a different standard then what everybody is trying to push. Obviously I understand this stuff, doesn't mean I have like the 'evil' these paragraphs of autism are only because business contracts can be normal and bad(subjectively). Also understand I realize that I know no one would want to provide an document under NDA to prove their statements that the contract is indeed similar to others, it's a challenge to prove a point: Someone who can't have the freedom to provide evidence shouldn't be challenging some anonymous people on the internet to a semantics argument, that they(me) didn't even start. btw I'm also sure their are contracts that people have signed that have past the contracts time frame so we can still have these ones, I'm flexible.
  13. Yeah I've no clue what this is about anyway, but I don't trust anyone now and contracted silence means I can't even "trust but verify." NO and NO. I'm trying to speak generally and there are many instances of business being fined for bad practices, pick one. The lawyer didn't explain much that I didn't already expect him to say <contracts are written to say whatever is best for their employer usually> I don't trust anyone now and contracted silence means I can't even "trust but verify." This is getting out of hand: I don't trust anyone now and contracted silence means I can't even "trust but verify." Why should I even believe any company has my best interest at heart: medical, manufacturing, or retail?
  14. I can only go full conspiracy theory if I wanted to claim Nvidia was up to no good. Really I'm only thinking what I would sign(just as a general work contract) or what reviewers/tech news outlets would wanted to keep themselves independent. I Still don't have past NDAs to compare this contract to. (Nvidia specifically) applies to @mr moose too
  15. Yeah this is the problem we have no way of knowing what Nvidia was going to release until it's released, 5 years later (in this instance), or someone breaks the NDA(and faces the consequences) so this is all speculation. I can only say this is weird and that all the people "in the know" saying this is "normal" it's no wonder so many major tech companies try to get away with shady practices.(not just you're [insert fav company] specifically) Also I was called out for thinking GPU Architecture would be part of an NDA given to reviewers by LAwLz. Even though I implied that they may not anyway, just a possibility. lol