UltraMega

Ahh I see. When I looked just now, newegg is completely sold out of the 2000 series and RX5000 series cards so 3rd party sellers are the only option.

Its not piracy anymore than when you write an essay for an english class and quote part of an article. I understand your point but legally, quoting data from an article is perfectly fine so long as the source is included, at least in America where Google lives. Now if news sites wanted to copyright their articles, then google would have a problem but if they did that it wouldn't be news anymore. COVID data is probably one of the better examples of google doing something like this since that data is so important right now but, at least in my experience, google doesn't show much more than the headlines.

Tell that to MSFS2020 and Cyberpunk. Actually the game I would like to get higher performance in the most is Ghost Recon Wildlands. An extremely underrated game but also one with lots of performance issues.

Given how crazy the market is, I've actually started thinking about buying a second 1080Ti used. Even though they say SLI support is dying, it seems like it still works pretty well for the bigger more demanding titles.

I noticed this recent price hike. I haven't seen any news about it yet though so no article to share other than the direct source which is newegg. Was hoping the older cards would drop in price but it looks like supply/demand has gotten so bad that prices are going up on all semi modern GPUs. I'm starting to wonder if I'm going to have to keep using my 1080Ti for another 2 years. Source: Radeon RX 5000 Series,GeForce RTX 20 Series Desktop Graphics Cards | Newegg.com

I don't see any logic in that argument at all. Google provides a service in the form of web searches. If people use that search feature to find content, I don't see why google doesn't deserve a finder's fee. Logically it would have to be true that news sites would make more money if google didn't exist and that doesn't seem like it would be the case even a little bit u less I'm missing something. This push seems destined to fail because it makes no sense.

Yea but youtube actually hosts the videos. Google isn't hosting the news sites.

I don't really understand their argument for why google should pay news sites. Facebook I can understand because it will show a good amount of the content without the user needing to open the link so it sort steals content in that sense, but I don't think that is true for google in the same respect. Also why google and not bing? I think google is a terrible company that abuses it's market power in highly inappropriate ways and has for a long time. I think they deserve really harsh punishments that are long overdue, but with all that said I still can't think of a reason why they own news sites anything. I literally only use google for maps, I don't see how it's vital to the news at all. It sounds like their news companies are struggling and they're just looking for someone to blame. Saying google owes them anything is like saying there should be a fee for giving someone directions that's paid by the person being helpful. Just because google has made a successfully business out of pointing people to the right places and they make ad money from that, doesnt mean they owe any of that to media companies and I can't think of any reasonable logic that would support that idea.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1366540/Dyson_Sphere_Program/ Similar to factorio except the game doesn't end when you build a rocket to get to space.

Format the source @OP

Given the small performance difference between the 3080 and 3090, hard to see where a 3080Ti would fit in and justify it's existence. That said it's going to be really word when the 3060 launches with more ram than anything except the 3090. Seems like a 3080 with more ram would fill the gap between the 3080 and 3090 more reasonable than a 3080Ti would.

That "theory" isn't reality.

North pole Edit: the color looks washed out because I am laying in HDR and the screen shots are not in HDR I guess.

Thanks, I might do just that. Still wish I could figure out what was causing it. Maybe someday!

IDK how you can say that when the OP itself is stupid. Everyone can agree that social media is cause for concern but any argument that they shouldn't be able to control their own content is so fundamentally flawed. People who push this kind of stuff need to be called out. When we have terrorists literally trying to storm the capitol in hopes of overthrowing the government, the time to be polite has ended. The only reason this even comes up now is because republicans have a bunch of support from hate groups. That's the bottom line, the un-sugar-coated truth. If hate groups didn't have a political favorite, republicans would never bring this up.

Free speech works both ways. If you have the right to say whatever you want, people and business who create social environments have a right to their own free speech which means they can remove whatever they want from their platforms. It's just that simple. If someone went to a bar and started yelling about white supremacy and overthrowing the government, they would get kicked out for sure and no one would question it but for some reason there are a bunch of morons out there who think that the same isn't true for other businesses like facebook. It's such a stupid argument I can't help but roll my eyes. OP, you and those who think like you need to stop being dumb and selfish and realize you don't have the right to control what other businesses say on their own platform just because they're social media businesses, just like no one can control what you say. This is just a stupid argument that hinges on believing your voice should count more than others, and confusing free speech with believing that means there are no repercussions. It's not far from arguing that you should be able to yell bomb on a plane (when there is no bomb) without getting in trouble for it, or accuse someone of a crime they didn't commit. And the whole section 230 argument from the right is a great example of how stupid they're argument is. If section 230 were repealed, platforms like facebook and twitter would be liable for all the dumb and incorrect things people like Trump say online and he would get banned immeadiately since businesses would have no choice but to purge liabilities from their platforms. They don't even understand what they're arguing about.

yea, right I am at least aware of the red lines meaning too fast but this happens with the 747 when I am no where near that speed. It can happen at 160NM or 250NM. It's gotta be some kind of warning but I right now I have no idea what. It seems to happen a lot less when I am flying more carefully though, thats for sure.

I would assume that except it happens sometimes when in not even going fast.

The air bus is super weird compared to the 747... But they're definitely both really weird as someone new to the flight sims... Why does the 747 start making a clicking noise in the cockpit sometimes? Why won't it let me throttle down on a decent? Sometimes it's like these planes want me to crash them.

I had a similar issue where the game cache was messed up and I had to manually delete a certain file and it fixed it. Don't remember what file but you could probably look it up or just delete the entire cache folder. Reinstalling does not fix, must manually delete.

I finally figured out how to disable the auto-trim on the airbus. That thing is so weird to fly. Also I've been trying to land it with the engines off and so far, no luck. It seems ok until the last few seconds when it's clear my decent is too fast and game over.

Slightly off topic but why hasn't Nvidia dropped the prices on the 2000 series GPUs? It makes no sense that 2000 GPUs are slower and more expensive than the 3000 still today. If they dropped 2000 series prices, people might actually but them since they're the only thing available that can do RT right now.

A fair point. Still, 15 years since AMD was ahead in the pool of passmark users ?

Source: https://www.techspot.com/news/88148-amd-desktop-cpu-share-passes-intel-first-time.html Didn't quote anything from the article since really there was no need.

I think this is because the 3000 series was supposed the have more ram to begin with. I'm sure Nvidia always planned to hit their ram target with the 3000 series even if that means a second revision. That said, as other have pointed out elsewhere, it will make it awkward if they release a 3080 super and a 3080 to with the gap between the 3080 standard and the 3090 being so small.