Thank you kind lemming

They can be. Because of course there are poorly made commercial units that are only quiet because they have low CADR. But you’ll never be able to get a DIY box as quiet as a well made unit, unless you basically engineer your own air purifier device, use blower motors, etc., but that’s not a Corsi-Rosenthal Box.

It’s not just about aesthetics. That DIY box will be loud as hell.

Have you bought a TV in the last 5 years?

Long gone are the days when I used be excited to read update notes for new features… Now I just hope they don’t god damn force an update on me.

So basically an OS. The only difference is that the OS developer doesn’t control or make all the apps (features). Which I think is good for competition, but bad for tight integration.

But this is exactly what we like to avoid from Google and Apple. Perhaps, it can work in China because of strong Govt oversight (read: control), but not in U.S…

OP is from the future, when GPUs are a subscription service that processes your graphics online.

TL;DR over from Puget reddit accounts is that their overall failure rates for all chips is very low because they run it at tightly controlled base specs.

So any automatic boosting/OC doesn’t come in play here, which might be why Intel chips are failing more in the broader user space.

What?

I looked it up but don’t understand it.

Actually, I think it’s not about defect numbers. This is about delaying until Intel releases the microcode update. They want to be compared after the (potentially) performance tanking update from Intel. Which is hilarious because Intel gave a date after AMD’s initial launch date.

I think it’s also fair as a lot of reviewers aren’t going to bother retesting after Intel releases updates and comparing with AMD after the 9000 series hype has died down, if they had just recently did so for the AMD launch.

Nah something fishy

You can’t explain it!

I understand the cynicism. But if you’ve been following this topic, Intel really fucked with some huge customers (businesses) here. And AMD was already stealing their lunch with their previous gen processors.

Why does “nothing but” and “all but” mean the same thing?

Did you just put “repairable” and “Apple” in the same sentence?

Veritasium. Over time I realized his content is mostly about flashy half baked “sciencey” content like Discovery Channel. It’s meant to get an audience and nothing more. It lacks quality control, and fact checking. I only realized how many errors his videos have when he covered a topic I know more about. Also, the whole electricity thing and self driving car debacle only reinforced my views on his content.

I like it inside, where you loop it through the tube.

Obviously a stunt.

Thanks for the link. The article is a whole lot of nothingburger. The entire premise of the article is that Kaspersky works as intended (just as any other security software) to flag files with certain phrases. Therefore, it can be used to find classified markings. Therefore, Kaspersky is bad… What?

So we should just ban all security software?

Why is it so hard to find a single piece of evidence that Kaspersky fucked up, or that their software has something in particular that is more risky compared to other security software. Anyone with more knowledge can explain plz?

Sounds like there is some other motive for doing this. Or they found something they aren’t willing to tell us. But why?

In 2024 life is hard and you can’t do anything about it in most cases. Religion gives you an excuse for why it must be so, so that you can keep grinding away.