• 0 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 21st, 2023

help-circle




  • Not sure what kind of shit take that is if you bought a $70 game recently (Baldur’s Gate 3, even I’m waiting for a sale and money is not tight for me), you have cats and probably a Nintendo Switch with Zelda, that’s just what I read on the first page of your profile. So you obviously have money to spend on entertainment, like most adults.

    $20 is clearly too much just to get rid of ads (though it also gets you YouTube Music, like Spotify), but I was talking about content creators who can easily afford this. And most people spend hours on YouTube, probably more time than they use Netflix if we’re being honest.

    I don’t like Google either, but at some point they need to make money. That’s the simple truth. If everyone used adblockers we’d see a lot more content locked down behind a paywall. It is what it is. Then you either pay or you find some other source of content.

    And let’s be real, people pay for entertainment. If I go outside and throw a stone it would probably hit someone with a Netflix/HBO/Disney+/Spotify/Prime or whatever subscription. It’s difficult to find a person who doesn’t have Netflix for example. If Google forces this through YouTube will just be another subscription service (or you get ads). Or they start limiting uploads to save on cost, which would actually kill their platform (as probably 99% of uploaded videos are barely or never watched, around one hour of video per second is getting uploaded right now).



  • Dude, it’s at most 20 bucks a month to get rid of all ads (with YouTube music on top). Any creator who has some following can pay that from pocket change. The big content creators (1M+ subscribers) pull in millions with a mix of ad money and sponsorships. And it would be a business expense on top for them…

    Creators are the last person to actually care about YouTube forced ads, it’s their job, they can afford it easily.

    The only ones really impacted are power users, people who use adblock right now to watch. Which would also include me. But what do you want to do? There is no other platform, if they block adblockers I either have to watch ads or finally pay them money. I’m not going to leave for another platform because there is none. Twitch is there, sure, but it’s only for livestreams and awful for VODs.


  • You do realize the average person watches YouTube on their TV or their phone, with ads? You are not the target audience for Google.

    So I fully expect YouTube to kill adblocking at some point and they might lose what? 10% of users? Of which 5% either come back to watch ads or pay the subscription because all the content is on there?

    I’m 100% pro adblocker, the internet is a mess without, but it’s stupid to think YouTube wouldn’t cut you off the moment you don’t provide any benefit to their service (For example despite adblocking you might give Superchat money to streamers, or join Streamer memberships).


  • I personally like to keep it on. Most of my messaging is with family and friends and it’s good to know if someone read or hasn’t read my message.

    Especially if things are time critical. Picking someone up? Asking if they need anything from the supermarket? If I see that they read the message I know that they are going to reply in a moment. If they didn’t even read the message I won’t have to wait around / can guess that they are currently in the car or wherever.

    Sometimes you also have a spotty connection, so the received + read receipt can tell you if they actually got your message.

    In general if someone sends me a message and I read it… I’m going to fucking reply to it (if I’m not super busy, and even then I might send a quick message back). I seriously don’t get people who just leave things on read and then forget about it.




  • But the NAS is in your house… which basically means if it gets flooded/burns down all your data is gone too.

    I already have my data on my PC, a second backup inside the same house isn’t worth that much. But instead of relying on a cloud service I just rent a virtual server (for various things) and use Seafile to keep my data in sync.

    PC breaks? House burns down? My data is on my own server in a datacenter. My server gets cancelled? My data is on my PCs.

    So even with your NAS you are 100% reliant on a cloud backup still, so why did you get the NAS when you already have a copy of your data on your devices?






  • Vlyn@lemmy.worldtoPC Master Race@lemmy.worldRate my Component Selection
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Where do you find that this CPU “only has 6 3D cores”?

    It’s common knowledge. 7800X3D = 8 3D cores, 7900X3D = 6 3D cores and 6 normal cores (= 12), 7950X3D = 8 3D cores and 8 normal cores (= 16).

    So if you mostly game and don’t need the CPU for productivity tasks you should 100% grab the 7800X3D. If you need a lot of cores then grab the 7950X3D. The 7900X3D is garbage in the middle.


  • Vlyn@lemmy.worldtoPC Master Race@lemmy.worldRate my Component Selection
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Someone already pointed out that a 4090 is a massive upgrade over a 4080, no clue what benchmarks you looked at.

    So another suggestion: Why pick a 7900X3D? It’s the worst of both worlds. It only has 6 3D cores for gaming, which might not be enough in the near future (Look up performance benchmarks between a 5600X vs a 5800X for example, there are already games that benefit from more than 6 cores).

    If gaming is a focus: Pick a 7800X3D so you get a full 8 3D cores to work with. If productivity is a focus (with gaming on top) splurge for a 7950X3D. You’re already spending an insane amount of money, you might as well get a decent CPU.

    Besides that: You are wasting a ton of money on the SSDs. Grab a fast one like that for your Windows drive and for gaming, but for storage there’s much cheaper options (that still deliver 3-6 GB/s, if you even need that). 128 GB of RAM is excessive too, except you have a very clear use-case for it.


  • Multi-threading is difficult, you can’t just slap it on everything and call it a day.

    There are languages where it’s easier (Go, Rust, …) but parallelism is an advanced feature. Do it wrong and you get race conditions or dead locks. There is a reason you learn about this later in programming, but you do learn about it (and get to use it).

    When we’re being honest most programmers work on CRUD applications, which are highly sequential, usually waiting on IO and not CPU cycles and so on. Saving 2ms on some operations doesn’t matter if you wait 50ms on the database (and sometimes using more threads is actually slower due to orchestration). If you’re working with highly efficient algorithms or with GPUs then parallelism has a much higher priority. But it always depends on what you’re working with.

    Depending on your tech stack you might not even have the option to properly use parallelism, for example with JavaScript (if you don’t jump through hoops).


  • At this point you’re just arguing to argue. Of course this is about the math.

    This is Amdahl’s law, it’s always about the math:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/AmdahlsLaw.svg/1024px-AmdahlsLaw.svg.png

    No one is telling students to use or not use parallelism, it depends on the workload. If your workload is highly sequential, multi-threading won’t help you much, no matter how many cores you have. So you might be able to switch out the algorithm and go with a different one that accomplishes the same job. Or you re-order tasks and rethink how you’re using the data you have available.

    Practical example: The game Factorio. It has thousands of conveyor belts that have to move items in a deterministic way. As to not mess things up this part of the game ran on a single thread to calculate where everything landed (as belts can intersect, items can block each other and so on). With some clever tricks they rebuilt how it works, which allowed them to safely spread the workload over several cores (at least for groups of belts). Bit of a write-up here (under “Multithreaded belts”).

    Teaching software development involves teaching the theory. Without that you would have a difficult time to decide what can and what can’t benefit from multi-threading. Absolutely no one says “never multi-thread!” or “always multi-thread!”, if you had a teacher like that then they sucked.

    Learning about Amdahl’s law was a tiny part of my university course. A much bigger part was actually multi-threading programs, working around deadlocks, doing performance testing and so on. You’re acting as if the teacher shows you Amdahl’s law and then says “Obviously this means multi-threading isn’t worth it, let’s move on to the next topic”.