Jump to content

EU Vote in Favour of Article 13

chiller15
2 hours ago, Sakkura said:

You mean that's why people from the EU had to explain the basics to him.

 

The directive is written more vaguely than regular laws because it's a directive, not a regular law.

He and people from the EU probably understand technology better than the EU lawmakers do.

More like vague on purpose, because this is about money and leaving it so vague leaves it open for countries in the EU to abuse the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, ActuallyMediocreOC said:

image.jpeg.c225c9bd447cf5a317cc5e363db0e85c.jpeg*'Mericanism Intensifies ;-;*

This wins the internet today.  I am stealing this 100%

Workstation Laptop: Dell Precision 7540, Xeon E-2276M, 32gb DDR4, Quadro T2000 GPU, 4k display

Wifes Rig: ASRock B550m Riptide, Ryzen 5 5600X, Sapphire Nitro+ RX 6700 XT, 16gb (2x8) 3600mhz V-Color Skywalker RAM, ARESGAME AGS 850w PSU, 1tb WD Black SN750, 500gb Crucial m.2, DIYPC MA01-G case

My Rig: ASRock B450m Pro4, Ryzen 5 3600, ARESGAME River 5 CPU cooler, EVGA RTX 2060 KO, 16gb (2x8) 3600mhz TeamGroup T-Force RAM, ARESGAME AGV750w PSU, 1tb WD Black SN750 NVMe Win 10 boot drive, 3tb Hitachi 7200 RPM HDD, Fractal Design Focus G Mini custom painted.  

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 5 3600,ASRock B450M Pro4 (3dmark.com)

Daughter 1 Rig: ASrock B450 Pro4, Ryzen 7 1700 @ 4.2ghz all core 1.4vCore, AMD R9 Fury X w/ Swiftech KOMODO waterblock, Custom Loop 2x240mm + 1x120mm radiators in push/pull 16gb (2x8) Patriot Viper CL14 2666mhz RAM, Corsair HX850 PSU, 250gb Samsun 960 EVO NVMe Win 10 boot drive, 500gb Samsung 840 EVO SSD, 512GB TeamGroup MP30 M.2 SATA III SSD, SuperTalent 512gb SATA III SSD, CoolerMaster HAF XM Case. 

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/37004594?

Daughter 2 Rig: ASUS B350-PRIME ATX, Ryzen 7 1700, Sapphire Nitro+ R9 Fury Tri-X, 16gb (2x8) 3200mhz V-Color Skywalker, ANTEC Earthwatts 750w PSU, MasterLiquid Lite 120 AIO cooler in Push/Pull config as rear exhaust, 250gb Samsung 850 Evo SSD, Patriot Burst 240gb SSD, Cougar MX330-X Case

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, chiller15 said:

Source: The Verge

 

This doesn't look promising, even if the most controversial aspect has been removed (the 'upload filter'). Who knows what the future of content creation is going to be like after this has been implemented and the dust settles.

the verge eh i do not trust em anymore

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lurick said:

-snip-

As said there are many interpolations and how it turns out depends on many things. Mostly it's about what companies will do. For example currently YT has this blanket licence agreement (ToS) with every user that states YT owns every single second of content you upload and can do what they want with it without asking you; If they want to keep that mentality they are screwed because they need to actually start to pay every single YT user who has uploaded something for the ads that are shown with their content; Other side they can stop doing that and make it so that they just provide a service where people can upload videos (as long as they don't break laws) and they don't want to have anything to do with licences and adsense is completely different service that would need the licences (YT wants to have the licence because without it they cannot make money out of your content by showing ads with it) (in a way this would also mean YT must pay for every creator whos video gets to the rewind, which might get quite expensive, especially if not all top videos of the year are within adsense). This is where the small artists actually win because now they kind of have EU on their side to say that they also have full rights to receive payment for their content and not only the big companies (basicly because services cannot favor anyone for their size but they must give every user the same contract; either the big content creators and companies get the same fuckery as small ones get now or the small ones get same priviledges as the big ones have now).

 

Cloud companies are against this because they would need to start to use man hours to care for copyrights (quite many of those 240 companies are server halls and cloud companies). This part is kind of funny because if we change one word a lot of opinions and current protocols change; replace "copyright" with "CP". If one of their user uses their rented server to upload CP and gets gaught, it would probably take 5 mins at max for them to terminate that server and their customership and give all of the data to officials. Currently if someone uses their server to upload copyrighted stuff: "Ah geez, it's so hard and complicated to do a shit about that. You can go and have a look at the data but it's going to take sometime to get their server offline".

 

Open source side is always against anything that even resembles something that would stop someone from doing everything. But IMO quite many people in open source world seem to be like marxists who ignore that people are humans with humanity, including greediness and mischievousness.

 

2 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

And who gets to decide that. Your making an awfully big assumption that they'll consider for example content ID adequate or that they won't expect everyone to match Google from the outset.

In short:

  • Every EU country sets up a system where service providers and copyright holders negotiate (with experts and 3rd parties probably included) what kind of copyright management/monitoring system would be possible to implement while being good enough for copyright holders.
    • Now we have a ton of different kind of CR systems and governments report them and their outcomes to the EU parliament
  • EU parliament then compares constantly these CR systems and goes through what works and what doesn't with experts and whatelse and publishes what is going to be the "standard" (this will most likely be something like collection of systems in different ranges to cover companies in different situations)
    • Now we have guidelines from which new CR systems will be made and the cycle repeats

And it's actually written in the article that in every step they must take into account the revenue and generally the size of the service provider and the companies behind it and the size of the service. So yeah, they are not going to expect something like LMG or Floatplane to have as sophisticated CR management system as YouTubes ContentID is, but they can probably expect something like Mega to have a lot more than nothing (what they have now). And as I have said in many threads about this, YTs ContentID will probably be the golden standard for megacorporations, if you have revenues in billions (even tens or hundreds of billions), you very clearly have money to spend into a quite sophisticated CR system that can at least try to filter the most clear copyright infringements and you have money to get people handle the takedown notices as they should be handled (you also clearly have money for toiletpaper so no need to use those takedown notices as one). Probably only handling the takedown notices correctly will take services a long way in this because if you handle them copyright holders probably don't sue you and probably no one will ever know that you don't have any kind of automatic filter in place or at least no one cares as long as you takedown those copyright infringements when the CR holder asks you or even better: take the time and ask for the uploader does they have rights to upload what they uploaded and make it so that the uploader and the CR holder can discuss what to do.

 

I don't say the article 13 is perfect or good, but it isn't as bad as quite many want it to be. It might turn out very badly, but that remains to be seen. And it's kind of logical, just like I would like to see false claims to be punished almost as much as what they tried to claim, I really cannot take the stance that it would be OK for service providers just sit idly while their service is used to commit crimes, if you allow that it's almost as good as yourself doing it, especialy if you still agree to co-operate with other laws and stop other crimes. (you can't prove that I pirate, so I don't pirate, capisce?)

 

Edit: And as it's stated that the automatic filtering part is removed things get a lot simplifier because it doesn't specify that service should have preupload filtering or anything like it. Basicly for probably most companies and services it's enough to handle the takedown notices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it's good that they got rid of that one part that would cause a lot of issues.

 

As for the rest, honestly I'm too lazy to read up all the changes it brings, so I'll just wait and see if the internet implode on itself in the EU or not in the coming months.

CPU: AMD Ryzen 3700x / GPU: Asus Radeon RX 6750XT OC 12GB / RAM: Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8GB DDR4-3200
MOBO: MSI B450m Gaming Plus / NVME: Corsair MP510 240GB / Case: TT Core v21 / PSU: Seasonic 750W / OS: Win 10 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong button? 10 MEPs who voted to reject debate on Article 13 say they didn't mean to

 

Quote

A total of 13 MEPs have issued corrections to their voting on Tuesday, when the European Parliament narrowly rejected debating amendments that might have watered down or even completely erased Articles 11 and 13 from the updated EU copyright rules.

 

Instead, the lawmakers voted to bypass additional debate on the highly contentious provisions by 317 votes against 312, and proceeded to pass the entire legislation by 348 votes to 274.

 

According to European Parliament voting guidelines, MPs can register corrections to their votes, but without changing the actual result, which is done and dusted once the voting is finished.

 

Marietje Schaake, MEP from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Party, drew attention to the fateful mistake on Twitter as soon as corrections were published by the European Parliament.

 

A total of 13 MEPs said that they did not intend to vote the way they did. Of these, 10 said they wanted to vote for amendments, but instead voted against them; while two MEPs had it the other way around. One MEP claimed that he wanted to abstain from the vote altogether.

 

Schaake noted that the new count would have allowed the debate to be reopened which, potentially, could have paved the way for Articles 11 and 13 to be revised or repealed.

You own the software that you purchase - Understanding software licenses and EULAs

 

"We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the american public believes is false" - William Casey, CIA Director 1981-1987

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

A total of 13 MEPs said that they did not intend to vote the way they did. Of these, 10 said they wanted to vote for amendments, but instead voted against them; while two MEPs had it the other way around. One MEP claimed that he wanted to abstain from the vote altogether.

so the "we wanted to take the money, but also want to make sure we dont get voted out next election because we ""accidentally"" voted wrong......please believe us you gullible idiots valued voters"

🌲🌲🌲

 

 

 

◒ ◒ 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

A total of 13 MEPs said that they did not intend to vote the way they did. Of these, 10 said they wanted to vote for amendments, but instead voted against them; while two MEPs had it the other way around. One MEP claimed that he wanted to abstain from the vote altogether.

"I just don't understand how this happened" one MEP said in a statement, "I really wanted to vote for amendments, but somehow my hand slipped and I voted to pass the bill. We will get to the bottom of this incident as soon as we pass the bill". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, VegetableStu said:

"The russians! it's the russians! (also the chinese phone company guys)"

"Absolutely great work Article 13, another GREAT day for Europica. Truly Unbelievable. Just can't trust those CRIMINALS running the internet, no substance - no meat. Sad". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we still have like two years of regular internet, perhaps in the meantime we'll see how websites will implement this directive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

f

8086k

aorus pro z390

noctua nh-d15s chromax w black cover

evga 3070 ultra

samsung 128gb, adata swordfish 1tb, wd blue 1tb

seasonic 620w dogballs psu

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

After hearing our old politician farts, I strongly believe 99% of people in EU pairlament who voted for this idiocy don't have the slightest clue how internet works. They know how to use basic Google and check news sites. And they think they are competent enough to decide about the fate of the internet in Europe. I've been on it daily for 20 years and aa lot of it is still mistery to me lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

11 hours ago, Thaldor said:

Cloud companies are against this because they would need to start to use man hours to care for copyrights (quite many of those 240 companies are server halls and cloud companies). This part is kind of funny because if we change one word a lot of opinions and current protocols change; replace "copyright" with "CP". If one of their user uses their rented server to upload CP and gets gaught, it would probably take 5 mins at max for them to terminate that server and their customership and give all of the data to officials. Currently if someone uses their server to upload copyrighted stuff: "Ah geez, it's so hard and complicated to do a shit about that. You can go and have a look at the data but it's going to take sometime to get their server offline".

 

Open source side is always against anything that even resembles something that would stop someone from doing everything. But IMO quite many people in open source world seem to be like marxists who ignore that people are humans with humanity, including greediness and mischievousness.

 

And as I have said in many threads about this, YTs ContentID will probably be the golden standard for megacorporations, if you have revenues in billions (even tens or hundreds of billions), you very clearly have money to spend into a quite sophisticated CR system that can at least try to filter the most clear copyright infringements and you have money to get people handle the takedown notices as they should be handled (you also clearly have money for toiletpaper so no need to use those takedown notices as one). Probably only handling the takedown notices correctly will take services a long way in this because if you handle them copyright holders probably don't sue you and probably no one will ever know that you don't have any kind of automatic filter in place or at least no one cares as long as you takedown those copyright infringements when the CR holder asks you or even better: take the time and ask for the uploader does they have rights to upload what they uploaded and make it so that the uploader and the CR holder can discuss what to do.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/what-is-article-13-article-11-european-directive-on-copyright-explained-meme-ban

 

This page gives a more simplified explanation on what exactly both articles behold. Memes aren't going to be banned as it is considered a parody, but can still be potentially flagged by accident (Eg. like YouTube's current algorithm). Regardless, it's almost next to impossible for YouTube or any other large platform that has large amounts of content being displayed to others to filter out those who have committed copyright infringement. 

 

It's a shame that the majority aren't experts when it comes to the IT technology in general. I will say though for the politicians who've voted in favor for the article, is that they might have good intentions about it, but that doesn't mean much when it can't be properly implemented. 

 

Desktops

 

- The specifications of my almighty machine:

MB: MSI Z370-A Pro || CPU: Intel Core i3 8350K 4.00 GHz || RAM: 20GB DDR4  || GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX1070 || Storage: 1TB HDD & 250GB HDD  & 128GB x2 SSD || OS: Windows 10 Pro & Ubuntu 21.04

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Thaldor said:

As said there are many interpolations and how it turns out depends on many things. Mostly it's about what companies will do. For example currently YT has this blanket licence agreement (ToS) with every user that states YT owns every single second of content you upload and can do what they want with it without asking you; If they want to keep that mentality they are screwed because they need to actually start to pay every single YT user who has uploaded something for the ads that are shown with their content; Other side they can stop doing that and make it so that they just provide a service where people can upload videos (as long as they don't break laws) and they don't want to have anything to do with licences and adsense is completely different service that would need the licences (YT wants to have the licence because without it they cannot make money out of your content by showing ads with it) (in a way this would also mean YT must pay for every creator whos video gets to the rewind, which might get quite expensive, especially if not all top videos of the year are within adsense). This is where the small artists actually win because now they kind of have EU on their side to say that they also have full rights to receive payment for their content and not only the big companies (basicly because services cannot favor anyone for their size but they must give every user the same contract; either the big content creators and companies get the same fuckery as small ones get now or the small ones get same priviledges as the big ones have now).

 

Cloud companies are against this because they would need to start to use man hours to care for copyrights (quite many of those 240 companies are server halls and cloud companies). This part is kind of funny because if we change one word a lot of opinions and current protocols change; replace "copyright" with "CP". If one of their user uses their rented server to upload CP and gets gaught, it would probably take 5 mins at max for them to terminate that server and their customership and give all of the data to officials. Currently if someone uses their server to upload copyrighted stuff: "Ah geez, it's so hard and complicated to do a shit about that. You can go and have a look at the data but it's going to take sometime to get their server offline".

 

Open source side is always against anything that even resembles something that would stop someone from doing everything. But IMO quite many people in open source world seem to be like marxists who ignore that people are humans with humanity, including greediness and mischievousness.

 

In short:

  • Every EU country sets up a system where service providers and copyright holders negotiate (with experts and 3rd parties probably included) what kind of copyright management/monitoring system would be possible to implement while being good enough for copyright holders.
    • Now we have a ton of different kind of CR systems and governments report them and their outcomes to the EU parliament
  • EU parliament then compares constantly these CR systems and goes through what works and what doesn't with experts and whatelse and publishes what is going to be the "standard" (this will most likely be something like collection of systems in different ranges to cover companies in different situations)
    • Now we have guidelines from which new CR systems will be made and the cycle repeats

And it's actually written in the article that in every step they must take into account the revenue and generally the size of the service provider and the companies behind it and the size of the service. So yeah, they are not going to expect something like LMG or Floatplane to have as sophisticated CR management system as YouTubes ContentID is, but they can probably expect something like Mega to have a lot more than nothing (what they have now). And as I have said in many threads about this, YTs ContentID will probably be the golden standard for megacorporations, if you have revenues in billions (even tens or hundreds of billions), you very clearly have money to spend into a quite sophisticated CR system that can at least try to filter the most clear copyright infringements and you have money to get people handle the takedown notices as they should be handled (you also clearly have money for toiletpaper so no need to use those takedown notices as one). Probably only handling the takedown notices correctly will take services a long way in this because if you handle them copyright holders probably don't sue you and probably no one will ever know that you don't have any kind of automatic filter in place or at least no one cares as long as you takedown those copyright infringements when the CR holder asks you or even better: take the time and ask for the uploader does they have rights to upload what they uploaded and make it so that the uploader and the CR holder can discuss what to do.

 

I don't say the article 13 is perfect or good, but it isn't as bad as quite many want it to be. It might turn out very badly, but that remains to be seen. And it's kind of logical, just like I would like to see false claims to be punished almost as much as what they tried to claim, I really cannot take the stance that it would be OK for service providers just sit idly while their service is used to commit crimes, if you allow that it's almost as good as yourself doing it, especialy if you still agree to co-operate with other laws and stop other crimes. (you can't prove that I pirate, so I don't pirate, capisce?)

 

Edit: And as it's stated that the automatic filtering part is removed things get a lot simplifier because it doesn't specify that service should have preupload filtering or anything like it. Basicly for probably most companies and services it's enough to handle the takedown notices.

i like how you explained this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait for a no deal brexit

 

/s

My Rig - Intel I7-5820k@ 4ghz| Rampage V Extreme| 4x4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4|RTX 2060 SUPER| Corsair 650D| Corsair HX750| 2TB Samsung 850 EVO| H100i| 3x SF-120's| 1x 240 cooler master Red LED Front intake

 

Everything I say defaults to include /s

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

If UK leave the EU, it that mean this law not going to affect UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Age of 9394 said:

If UK leave the EU, it that mean this law not going to affect UK?

It probably depends when they actually leave, all current EU laws are supposed to remain in UK law after they leave.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

 

 

It's a shame that the majority aren't experts when it comes to the IT technology in general. I will say though for the politicians who've voted in favor for the article, is that they might have good intentions about it, but that doesn't mean much when it can't be properly implemented. 

 

The internet is a very large uncontrolled entity.  It is defended by idiots who don't understand social responsibility and starting to come under laws written by politicians who sometimes don't understand technology.  

 

At the end of the day the Internet has to be managed in a way suitable for all humanity to be able to function.  We don't live in the wild west anymore for very good reasons.

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

Internet has to be managed

Not really, especially not by ppl who cannot move on with times and want to preserve their failed business model at all costs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jagdtigger said:

Not really, especially not by ppl who cannot move on with times and want to preserve their failed business model at all costs....

case in point of this:

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

The internet is a very large uncontrolled entity.  It is defended by idiots who don't understand social responsibility and starting to come under laws written by politicians who sometimes don't understand technology.  

 

Because they left out this:

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

At the end of the day the Internet has to be managed in a way suitable for all humanity to be able to function.  We don't live in the wild west anymore for very good reasons.

in there desire to not have to think about this:

 

3 hours ago, mr moose said:

The internet is a very large uncontrolled entity. 

 

Grammar and spelling is not indicative of intelligence/knowledge.  Not having the same opinion does not always mean lack of understanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Age of 9394 said:

If UK leave the EU, it that mean this law not going to affect UK?

honestly, no one knows at this point. As with everything Brexit-related, there are no deals or agreements in place. For all we know, on the dawn of the day Brexit goes into effect, all non-British people living in England and all Brits living on the mainland will be deported and all ties the UK has with the outside world will vanish overnight.

 

It'll probably be a bit more nuanced than that, but with no deal in place, literally anything is possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2019 at 3:09 PM, Velcade said:

Does free speech exist in Europe? 

Why wouldn't it?

On 3/26/2019 at 11:37 PM, Trik'Stari said:

It's almost as if the EU is a by-definition violation of national sovereignty, and every nation within it should be following the UK's lead.

 

Although do it more smoothly. Don't bungle it just because you're a party at odds with your own voters, trying to tank the exit from the EU because you'd like to stay and are likely getting paid to do so.

You know the EU parliament is an elected body, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Master Delta Chief said:

 

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/what-is-article-13-article-11-european-directive-on-copyright-explained-meme-ban

 

This page gives a more simplified explanation on what exactly both articles behold. Memes aren't going to be banned as it is considered a parody, but can still be potentially flagged by accident (Eg. like YouTube's current algorithm). Regardless, it's almost next to impossible for YouTube or any other large platform that has large amounts of content being displayed to others to filter out those who have committed copyright infringement. 

 

It's a shame that the majority aren't experts when it comes to the IT technology in general. I will say though for the politicians who've voted in favor for the article, is that they might have good intentions about it, but that doesn't mean much when it can't be properly implemented. 

 

Again article that says: "The Directive on Copyright would make online platforms and aggregator sites liable for copyright infringements..." which isn't wrong, but it's still claim worth of me going "In what language EU parliament doesn't release their papers that you can read? Or are you just so fucking stupid that they would need to explain it with pictures?". There is VERY big difference between "making services liable for CR infringements" and "making services, who don't do shit about it, liable for CR infingements". This is all just basicly DMCA with consequences for not co-operating which is kind of good thing.

 

Yeah, misflaggings will happen, but haven't they been thing for around 10 years now or even more? No one isn't expecting anyone or everyone to be perfect, every single internet service where people can upload their shit is going to get a lot of copyrighted stuff from people who don't own the materials copyrights, what now matters is how the services deal with it. They don't need to have automated system to filter out copyrighted material, but they must at least handle the takedown notices and seem to do all they can to mitigate the problem, the questions that people are so much complaining and rioting against rise after a company doesn't do a shit and is taken to EU court of justice because they don't do shit about CR takedown notices, probbaly only there it will be pondered wether or not the company has done everything it's power to mitigate the problem or are they completely allowing breaking the laws in their service because "reasons". As I said the article 13 is aimed against Mega and other net services which basicly live off from CR infringements on their platform and which more or less even market themselves as good places for that kind of activity because they don't give a shit and they won't do a shit about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it funny that people in the rest of the world are worrying about this while people in the UK are like...

 

Article 13: 

Image result for alan partridge gif

 

Brexit:

Image result for hit head on wall gif

زندگی از چراغ

Intel Core i7 7800X 6C/12T (4.5GHz), Corsair H150i Pro RGB (360mm), Asus Prime X299-A, Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB (4X4GB & 2X8GB 3000MHz DDR4), MSI GeForce GTX 1070 Gaming X 8G (2.113GHz core & 9.104GHz memory), 1 Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB NVMe M.2, 1 Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD, 1 Samsung 850 Evo 500GB SSD, 1 WD Red 1TB mechanical drive, Corsair RM750X 80+ Gold fully modular PSU, Corsair Obsidian 750D full tower case, Corsair Glaive RGB mouse, Corsair K70 RGB MK.2 (Cherry MX Red) keyboard, Asus VN247HA (1920x1080 60Hz 16:9), Audio Technica ATH-M20x headphones & Windows 10 Home 64 bit. 

 

 

The time Linus replied to me on one of my threads: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×