Did people think that this would be the case? The gap between the 4080 and the 4090 is huge. Basically all non xx90 cards are heavily lobotomized.

The 5080 will be half the card the 5090 is and the 5090 is 30% faster than the 4090. I expect the 5080 to land in the middle between 4080 and the 4090, maybe 25% faster than the 4080.

1. The msrp is good, maybe too good, we just need to wait and see the actual prices and availability.

2. I dont care about frame generation but it might be a decent last resort for when the gpus are old. Having a small latency, some visual fuckery and a “playable” game is preferable over not being able to play the game.

3. The biggest advantage of dlss 4.0 is their new ray reconstruction(transformer model) that will improve image quality but this feature is coming out on older gpus too.

4. We need to wait for benchmarks. Any card can be good or bad, it just depends on its price and performance. If the 5070 is 20% faster than a 4070super but also costs 20% more, then it isnt really that relevant, is it? I expect we will see something like that.

I dont know anything about faucets other than using them. But not all faucets are the same. The mechanism, the design tolerances, the materials, the granularity, smoothness and its longevity can vary by a lot.

Grohe used to be amazing, i am not so sure how things are nowadays. I’ve heard enshitification has hit them. If you own a house, a faucet is something that you will use for decades, even centuries(your descendants). Something that you will interact with many times a day. It is worth spending a bit more money to get something good.

Swish is very popular in Sweden and has no fees(for individuals)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swish_(payment)

Noone uses cash in Sweden, except for maybe drug dealers and super old people(and the occasional tourist). Most businesses dont even accept cash anymore.

It isnt just the convenience of not having to carry cash, it is also much safer. Much lower risk of getting robbed, for both individuals and businesses.

Either is fine but i strongly recommend going for amd, especially an x3d one, like 7800x3d(if you care about gaming).

Whisky no, doesnt expire but its cork might have dried, fall apart, alcohol escaped, etc.

You dont need to sell your stocks to access that wealth. You can use that as collateral to take loans or exchange stocks.

Did capitalism destroy this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea

The Aral Sea is considered an example of ecosystem collapse.[42] The ecosystems of the Aral Sea and the river deltas feeding into it have been nearly destroyed, largely because of the salinity being dramatically higher than ocean water.[5] The receding sea has left huge plains covered with salt and toxic chemicals from weapons testing, industrial projects, and runoff of pesticides and fertilizer. Because of the shrinking water source and worsening water and soil quality, pesticides were increasingly used from the 1960s to raise cotton yield, which further polluted the water with toxins (e.g. HCH, TCCD, DDT).[43] Industrial pollution also resulted in PCB and heavy-metal contamination

This was the result of this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plan_for_the_Transformation_of_Nature

Exploiting nature and fucking things up is not limited to capitalism.

An ai can help a lot of non tech savvy people. Imagine every time they want to do something, they could just ask the ai on how to do it, instead of asking you or having to go through a billion SEO garbage google results.

Because not many europeans primarily identify as “european first”. This is slowly changing but for the most part, people identify by whatever european nation they inhabit. But i bet most chinese identify as “chinese first” instead of whatever region/city they are from.

In fact, China likes to brag about how “advanced” they are, that they solved this “issue” centuries ago, while the EU is currently trying to “copy them”.

TLDR : If you ask a chinese tourist “where are you from?”, they will answer “China”. If you ask a european the same, noone will say “Europe/EU”.

Because they dont have first hand statements, they are just using different israeli sources that independently verified it. Hence the quotes and the “allegedly”.

Contacted by the Guardian, a spokesperson for Israel’s prime minister’s office said: “The questions forwarded to us are replete with many false and unfounded allegations meant to hurt the state of Israel.” Cohen did not respond to a request for comment. Bensouda declined to comment.

My entire postscript was just an attempt to make veganism more appealing. That extra little push might enable more people to become vegan. Which is why you see a lot more emphasis to the health benefits of veganism or the positive environmental impact of veganism.

These are things that might enable people to become vegan(or reduce their animal product consumption), because they dont make people feel attacked when you discuss these aspects of veganism. Ultimately, the animal doesnt care if it doesnt get killed(or created), because a human stopped eating animal products for the gains or because the human became a “woke” animal rights advocate. The end result is the same.

And while becoming “woke” is a more sustainable long term position, it can also be harder to sell to current mainstream because of social norms. And a lot of people might become vegan for the gains and then transition to be an animal rights advocate, because it is easier.

Most people think themselves as good people. Most people love, or claim to love, animals.

The existence of veganism and its implication is that there is an unnecessary animal holocaust happening, because of societal norms and for the entertainment of people’s palates. So how do you reconcile these things? By claiming that veganism is something extreme, something unattractive, something that is impossible to do.

People who talk about how “militant vegans have turned them away from veganism” are mostly lying to themselves. If an asshole told you not to litter, would you litter because of that? If an asshole told you to be atheist would you go “well now, i will be even more religious”? But when people make arguments like this, leftists realize how ridiculous those arguments are. Except when it comes to veganism.

Obviously you catch more bees with honey than with vinegar but i want to believe that people in this site can see past that and think for themselves.

Legumes(beans/lentils), vegetables, fruits, potatoes, pasta and rice is what most of the world already eats. Nowadays there are vegan alternatives for stuff and most restaurants often have a vegan option. It isnt hard to be vegan but any lifestyle change can be hard, especially if real life is putting a lot of pressure on you.

Any change is hard, being vegan is easy. Millions of people are vegan and have been vegan for many years. I have been vegan for 12 years now. There has never been an easier time to be vegan than now. Being vegan is the easiest and with the biggest impact thing you can do.

True Courage Is About Knowing Not When To Take A Life But When To Spare One

PS Salt potato chips and oreos are vegan. You dont need to eat healthy. And if you are a straight dude, vegan dudes are more attractive to women, even to non vegan women. It’s literally free +charisma in real life.

If the cars run over people while going 30kmh because they use cameras and a bug crashed into the camera and that caused the car to go crazy, that is not acceptable, even if the cars crash “less than humans”.

Self driving needs to be highly regulated by law and demand to have some bare minimum sensors, including radars, lidars, etc. Camera only self driving is beyond stupid. Cameras cant see in snow or dark or whatever. Anyone who has a phone knows how fucky the camera can get under specific light exposures, etc.

Noone but tesla is doing camera only “self driving” and they are only doing it in order to cut down the cost. Their older cars had more sensors than their newer cars. But Musk is living in his Bioshock uber capitalistic dream. Who cares if a few people die in the process of developing visual based self driving.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm2x6CVIXiE

Abu-Sittah has been accused by some groups in the UK of promoting terrorism and spreading antisemitism.

Abu-Sittah spoke at a ceremony for the one-year anniversary of the death of Maher Al-Yamani, the co-founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine in 2020.[22][23] A video showing Abu-Sittah appear to cry while delivering a eulogy at the event that includes the language “This is our only comfort: that even when Maher leaves, the Israelis will be afraid of Maher” is published on The Jewish Chronicle’s website.[18]

In March 2024, the British NGO, UK Lawyers for Israel (A UK-based, pro-Israel legal lobbying group) sent an open letter to Glasgow University which included a review of Abu-Sittah’s public social media comments. The letter accused Abu-Sittah of reposting “an image commemorating a leader of the al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, Nasser Abu Hamid, the day after he died, holding a machine gun, dripping with blood.”[24] He also wrote an article grieving for Abu Hamid, who had been convicted of multiple murders.[22]

The Times reported that Abu Sittah had compared Israeli leadership to “the psychosis of the Germans in the 30s and the 40s." The UK Lawyers for Israel letter also accused Abu-Sittah of re-posting “an antisemitic image featuring Hitler on one side and Israeli prime minister Netanyahu on the other side, both images smeared with blood, comparing Israel to the Nazis. The image was headed “Free Palestine (Palestinian Flag), Israel is a Nazi State”. The image compared the average pace of child killing of Hitler, at 127 children per day, to that of Netanyahu, which it put at 178 per day.”[24] Both of these instances have been interpreted by UK Lawyers for Israel as Antisemitism according to Example 10 of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of Antisemitism which proscribes "Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.

Since receiving UK Lawyers for Israel’s letter, Glasgow University has launched an investigation into Abu-Sittah.

From wikipedia.

ISIS exists because Saddam was toppled, replaced by, a mostly shia government and the old iraqi military was disbanded. That created a power vacuum and left a lot of military trained guys unemployed, who felt betrayed. They basically said “fuck this world order, we will make our own, with blackjack jihad and hookers sharia law”.

Over time, they became more and more religious radicals, split off Al Qaeda and now they are fighting everyone everywhere. ISIS-K(the one in Afghanistan) seems to be the main one organizing terrorist attacks now. They are fighting the Taliban, Iran and Pakistan too. Most of ISIS’ victims are muslims, sometimes shia but often sunni(but not the right sunni).

They are a very attractive proposition for poor and desperate people around the world, who feel they got screwed. They are basically resentment manifest.

Now you might say “thats because of western imperialism” and you wouldnt be wrong. But do you know what was the most common ethnicity for foreign ISIS fighters? Russian. And no, it wasnt random russians fighting against american imperialism, it was muslim russians who simply could not fight in Russia’s Dagestan and Chechnya. Russia bombed the shit out of ISIS too, partially because of this reason.

While understanding what lead us to our current situation is important, ultimately we must face the present. Whether a military solution is the best way, is debatable. But it is easier to convince your parliament to spend x amounts of money on your own military, rather than use that funds on developing other countries.

One is not relevant to the other. The billions that Europe is spending is orders of magnitude less than they did for most of european history.

Do you think that Europe should not fight against ISIS? Are you referring to the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions? French interventions in Africa? Not all wars are the same. Take a stance instead of using vague expressions.

The fact that wars have mostly stopped in Europe is something worth celebrating and maintaining. And Russia is threatening the status quo in the european continent.

I mentioned the yugoslav wars in the post before that. The argument still stands, Europe has been mostly peaceful for the first time ever. Do you intend to actually answer any of the points of my post?

There havent been wars in Europe, unlike literally any other period in history, for almost 80 years. Dont you think that is an impressive achievement? An achievement that the invasion of Ukraine has endangered? How would you feel if you were a baltic state like Latvia? A country that has been very prosperous since the end of the Cold War?

What does your rhetoric offer to a latvian? What tangible measures should someone in Latvia take, in order to protect their way of living from someone like Russia? Should they just ignore it and focus on class warfare? What class warfare currently exists within Russia? Or can exist within an authoritarian state like Russia? Do you think Russia is communist? Or wants to become communist?

I am trying to understand, what is your argument. What do you suggest the people of a country do when some other country invades them. Even if you think that countries are obsolete artificial constructs that need to be demolished, you surely understand there is a difference when a leader from another country takes over your country. Do you think Putin is a communist?