C0stanza

There's a lot to really like about cloud gaming services. I'm not familiar with GeForce Now specifically but I've heard good things.
 
That being said, there are more than a few things about it that aren't ideal. Often you can't download your save data (not positive if this is the case with GeForce Now), which is especially annoying given the fact that these services can be discontinued at any time (see Luna and Stadia). I'd be pretty sad if I wanted to go back to an old game after a few years only to find my save file had died with the streaming service. You're also reliant on a constant internet connection to game which can be really annoying for some use cases (gaming away from home in particular). Another potential issue is latency which can be brutal in some genres (fighting games for sure) or something you barely notice after a minute or so in others.
 
Now, even given all these issues I still think cloud gaming services can provide killer value for the right user. In a world where a 60 series graphics card alone is $400+ I can definitely see the value in just paying $10 a month and dealing with a gaming experience that isn't 100% perfect.

It is and it is still completely unacceptable. All I am saying is that at least WotC has clarified that existing products won't be caught up in legal garbage. Anyone publishing old content can at the VERY least continue publishing old content and stay in business while they figure out their next move rather than having to make the decision to drop out of the industry entirely due to fear of having to deal with a lawsuit.

I suspect a lot of creators are going to back out of making D20 content or work it to be compatible but not reference the SRD and knowing they won't get sued on old content will give them more time to comfortably figure stuff out.

WotC just put out another statement along with a draft of the new OGL (now 1.2)

The first thing of note Creative Commons is not just one license but a collection of licenses ranging anywhere from extremely permissive to extremely restrictive. I am told by a friend this is one of the good licenses but if anyone has insight let me know. 
 
Also the entire SRD isn’t going to be Creative Commons but only certain pages will be. I have no idea if this is a win based on the page numbers alone. 
 
This is what I expected. There was no way they were not going to let 1.0a. On the one hand this is the least offensive reason to do it. On the other this is a “Think of the children” argument and these arguments should inherently not be trusted. Regardless of whether or not  they actually care about the children the almost certainly have other motives. 
 
I will need to read into this in more detail  at a later time. But wanted to update everyone here on this. 
 
Sources:
statement
https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1432-starting-the-ogl-playtest
 
OGL 1.2
https://www.dndbeyond.com/attachments/39j2li89/OGL1.2_DraftForDiscussionPurpose.pdf

What makes you think their current attempt is over? 2 of the most important issues people had with 1.1 were that it would revoke 1.0a which their response doesn’t not address (at most it says existing products are unaffected) and the other thing was that they could change the terms on you with 30 day’s notice (which wasn’t even remotely talked about at all). 
 
1.0a is DEFINITELY being revoked. Whether they actually CAN is up to a court of law but they will say it until they aren’t allowed to say it and they will hide behind “we haven’t touched existing content” to make it sound like they are being reasonable. 

Agreed. The RX 6500 XT and GTX 1650 are just ridiculously crap cards and pretty much all that's available sub $200 new. Before the crypto boom you could get RX 570 new for $120 and those were genuinely awesome 1080p cards for the time and still better than the 6500 XT and 1650. Nowadays you're paying $280 for the RTX 3050 that's basically a 1660 Super that was $230 back in 2019 plus 2GB of VRAM and DLSS support, what a joke. AMD's RX 6600 ain't bad for a 1080p card, but those are $250 now. $250 used to be solidly midrange, you could get GTX 1060 6GB or RX 580 8GB, and no way the RX 6600 will age anywhere near as well as those two legendary midrange cards did.

Get a WFH job.

Thanks everyone, clearly lots of different opinions about the subject. I'll keep the rig clean and tight and keep an eye on temps, otherwise I think I'll leave it alone. It's not an off the shelf rig and high-end paste was used. If it starts getting hot or I ever remove the liquid cooling head, I'll repaste it
 
Appreciate the feedback!

Fact is that Apple has some catching up to do this year. The Pixel 7, 7 Pro and 6a are the phones of the year. On top of that there is a rumored Pixel mini coming and to discontinue the SE entirely will only improve Google's market position.

No thats on me lol, I was trying to figure out why this could happen but at the moment I’m as confused as you are. Hopefully someone comes in with a good answer

Accidentally hit post, ignore this its all trash and SATA SSDs can use PCIE lanes like you said

There is a chance power line could work, but once I tried using 100 Mbps MikroTik power lines but with my wiring I only was able to push 20 Mbps though it. Chances are you will have similar, sub par results. But that does lead to the question of are you sure you need Gig speeds in both rooms? I have a Wifi 6 router that delivers 400+ Mbps to my laptop and 6E may perform even better. You may or may not get better speeds or signal quality with a power line set up vs WiFi. If wifi isn't an option, you can get a small drywall saw, an Ethernet cable, 2 Ethernet wall plates, and the jacks for equal to or less than any power line or mocha adapters.
I tried running 100 Mbps power line in my apartment and got 20 Mbps, results may vary.

Its the start of an arms race between AI plagiarism(kinda? I mean it’s probably plagiarizing someone) and AI plagiarism detection.

I wonder how accurately we can determine GPTZero performance since, to my understanding, chatGPT is a bit of a moving target output-wise.

Summary
 Princeton student Edward Tian has developed GPTZero, an app that can detect if an essay was written by AI or a human. GPTZero analyzes text based on its "perplexity and burstiness" - how complicated it is and how randomly it is written - to determine if it was written by an AI like ChatGPT. The app's popularity caused its website to crash due to high traffic, but it is still available to use on Tian's Streamlit page. 
 
Quotes
 
My thoughts:
 
 It's interesting to see efforts being made to combat AI plagiarism, especially as AI writing tools like ChatGPT become more popular. It will be interesting to see how GPTZero's accuracy holds up in real-world testing, and whether it becomes a widely-used tool in education and other sectors. 
 
Sources
 Student Built App to Detect If ChatGPT Wrote Essays to Fight Plagiarism (businessinsider.com)
Did ChatGPT Write That? College Kid Creates AI Essay Detector (gizmodo.com)

Its the start of an arms race between AI plagiarism(kinda? I mean it’s probably plagiarizing someone) and AI plagiarism detection.

I wonder how accurately we can determine GPTZero performance since, to my understanding, chatGPT is a bit of a moving target output-wise.

For $40 more, you can get a 3600 and call it a day. Going from 4C/8T to 6C/12T will be a lot better, and also, the 3600 is a great CPU you can buy right now (that's available).
 
Supply issues may last into 2H of 2021 at the rate we are going.

Thanks!
 
I realize now I wasn't clear about this but I wanted to count the $75 I put towards the 560 in the final price. Looking at this I get the impression I may have to go used and old on the CPU to hit that mark

PCPartPicker Part List Type Item Price CPU AMD Ryzen 5 3600 3.6 GHz 6-Core Processor $199.99 @ Best Buy CPU Cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 RGB Black Edition 57.3 CFM CPU Cooler $39.00 @ Amazon Motherboard MSI B550-A PRO ATX AM4 Motherboard $139.99 @ B&H Memory Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory $78.98 @ Amazon Storage Samsung 970 Evo 500 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive $64.98 @ Amazon Storage Western Digital Caviar Blue 1 TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive $44.99 @ Adorama Video Card MSI Radeon RX 560 - 1024 2 GB AERO ITX OC Video Card Purchased For $0.00 Case Phanteks Eclipse P300 ATX Mid Tower Case $49.99 @ Newegg Power Supply EVGA BQ 500 W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply $62.84 @ Amazon   Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts     Total (before mail-in rebates) $690.76   Mail-in rebates -$10.00   Total $680.76   Generated by PCPartPicker 2021-01-21 01:05 EST-0500     a little over your budget but i chosed the ryzen 5 3600 over ryzen 3 3100 as there was only a 20$ difference between them

That is normal. It's the same as looking at something under cold white artificial light vs warm white artificial light, vs. yellow artificial light...
You adjust to the color warmth of the surface you are looking at, and your  brain works out the colors from there. It's the same if you use just one monitor under one image setting for a while, then change to a different setting - the new setting will also look yellowish or blueish at first, until you get used to it (provided it's not too extreme )
 
It is to be expected between different panels, different calibrations of the same panel, and different settings for the same panel and calibration. All monitor have it in them to display a certain array of versions of the same image, tuneable to your liking (some more, some less).
It is a freaking gorgeous monitor, that's for certain  
 
It matters at the margin, to the extent that it limits the pixel format and image properties you can set. Since both are 1440p, and probably have HDMI 2.0 like the card, it should be possible to have all that set equally, although the drivers may be defaulting to different settings when connecting via HDMI vs DP. You can check that in the display section of Radeon Settngs. Still, I'm sure something this noticeable is mainly due to different image settings in each monitor.

it will be worth going though the monitors settings and fiddling around with those to see if maybe its on a warmer setting than your other display.

If the two differences are too distracting one option is to try and adjust them both so that they are the same with each other so that it is less noticeable 

jQuery works as well as it ever did today but a whole lot of its use cases have been replaced either by native JS functionality or newer, more specialized libraries. Back when I first began web development around 2014/15 jQuery contained a whole lot of functionality that was pretty critical to a new website or webapp. It was used for making asynchronous calls to external APIs, it had better selectors than normal JS getElementById/Class, it had a weird early form of promises, it was even able to handle basic animations if I remember right.
 
Basically it patched in almost all of the functionality we needed but didn't get from vanilla JS in one library (especially since it was often safer to use jQuery than vanilla JS due to differences between browsers making it likely vanilla JS code behaved differently between browser). It was pretty much an auto-include (along with underscore if you were fancy).
 
Nowadays it still works but there are a couple reasons it isn't the swiss army knife everyone uses for everything.
 
1) To speed up their apps by relying on smaller dependencies than jQuery. There are lots of popular, more specialized, smaller libraries that perform the same functions jQuery used to (some would say they do it better but thats more subjective). Since jQuery did everything it needed to include lots and lots of code to implement all its functions, this made the library quite large. For reference, Vue (a popular library used for templating and organizing code today) is 33.3KB compared to jQuery's 214.09 KB. Something like Vue is simply a lot smaller and quicker to download than a dependency like jQuery, especially when you consider that since jQuery does a million things you're probably spending time downloading code you aren't actually using.
 
2) It leads to code that isn't quite as organized as code written using a modern framework. This is a bit subjective but back in the day when jQuery was used for everything it was really on the programmer to organize their code logically. Its not that ALL jQuery dependent js relies on hundreds of lines of pyramid code but a whole lot was. This made it pretty difficult to read js files written at the time, especially as complicated webapp logic became more common and the community at large was not yet proficient at organizing it. These days, popular frameworks (whether you love them or hate them) force structure on your code. For example, if you know what a React Component is you can look at each React Component in a project and not have to wonder what the purpose of all that code is. By contrast, jQuery merely provided you the means to update the UI and make AJAX calls and counted on the programmer to make the actual purpose of the code clear.
 
3) Its older, isn't as "cool", and doesn't give new programmers many good reasons to learn it in a world where there are other options.
 
tldr; jQuery is big, less organized, and generally less desirable than modern alternatives.
 
All that said it isn't BAD to know jQuery. It still performs its function, parts of it can still be useful, and I'm sure a lot of "older" JS is filled with it so for some devs its very important to understand it to this day. I just wouldn't rely too heavily on it with all the other options we have today.

I disagree, if you already have the 57 just pick up an inline preamp for it, the 57 will be much better than any cheap condenser for recording guitar amps and with the preamp will be much easier to drive. Condenser mics will also definitely pick up the AC noise (especially pseudo-LDCs like the 2020.) The cheapest option I know of is the Klark Teknik CT1 and it's just as good as the Cloudlifter and Fethead. 
 
If you're looking for other options or more info the recommendations list in my signature may be useful to you.

It uses the phantom power on your interface to amplify the mic signal so yeah, should do the trick.

I'd Probably say the AT2020 xlr, if the ac is picked up you can always adjust the microphones pick up range through either settings for what application your using or otherwise

jQuery works as well as it ever did today but a whole lot of its use cases have been replaced either by native JS functionality or newer, more specialized libraries. Back when I first began web development around 2014/15 jQuery contained a whole lot of functionality that was pretty critical to a new website or webapp. It was used for making asynchronous calls to external APIs, it had better selectors than normal JS getElementById/Class, it had a weird early form of promises, it was even able to handle basic animations if I remember right.
 
Basically it patched in almost all of the functionality we needed but didn't get from vanilla JS in one library (especially since it was often safer to use jQuery than vanilla JS due to differences between browsers making it likely vanilla JS code behaved differently between browser). It was pretty much an auto-include (along with underscore if you were fancy).
 
Nowadays it still works but there are a couple reasons it isn't the swiss army knife everyone uses for everything.
 
1) To speed up their apps by relying on smaller dependencies than jQuery. There are lots of popular, more specialized, smaller libraries that perform the same functions jQuery used to (some would say they do it better but thats more subjective). Since jQuery did everything it needed to include lots and lots of code to implement all its functions, this made the library quite large. For reference, Vue (a popular library used for templating and organizing code today) is 33.3KB compared to jQuery's 214.09 KB. Something like Vue is simply a lot smaller and quicker to download than a dependency like jQuery, especially when you consider that since jQuery does a million things you're probably spending time downloading code you aren't actually using.
 
2) It leads to code that isn't quite as organized as code written using a modern framework. This is a bit subjective but back in the day when jQuery was used for everything it was really on the programmer to organize their code logically. Its not that ALL jQuery dependent js relies on hundreds of lines of pyramid code but a whole lot was. This made it pretty difficult to read js files written at the time, especially as complicated webapp logic became more common and the community at large was not yet proficient at organizing it. These days, popular frameworks (whether you love them or hate them) force structure on your code. For example, if you know what a React Component is you can look at each React Component in a project and not have to wonder what the purpose of all that code is. By contrast, jQuery merely provided you the means to update the UI and make AJAX calls and counted on the programmer to make the actual purpose of the code clear.
 
3) Its older, isn't as "cool", and doesn't give new programmers many good reasons to learn it in a world where there are other options.
 
tldr; jQuery is big, less organized, and generally less desirable than modern alternatives.
 
All that said it isn't BAD to know jQuery. It still performs its function, parts of it can still be useful, and I'm sure a lot of "older" JS is filled with it so for some devs its very important to understand it to this day. I just wouldn't rely too heavily on it with all the other options we have today.

As mentioned, you're totally fine cranking it.
 
My only suggestion is that on your PC, make sure audio output is maxed there so that the 2i2 gets the best signal. Do all volume adjustments on the 2i2.