I think you’ll appreciate #ffcc66

That’s fair. I’ve put it there as more of a possible use case rather than something you should be consistently doing.

Although iGPU can perform quite well when given a lot of RAM, afaik.

If games, modding uses a lot. It can go to the point of needing more than 32gb, but rarely so.

Usually, you’d want 64gb or more for things like video editing, 3d modeling, running simulations, LLMs, or virtual machines.

I work in IT as PM, you’re pretty close.

Modern technology is glued together NOT random shit that somehow works.

Everything created has been built with a purpose, that’s why it’s not random. However, the longer you go on, the more rigid the architecture becomes, so you start creating workarounds, as doing otherwise takes too much time which you don’t have, because you have a dozen of other more important tasks at hand.

When you glue those solutions together, they work because they’ve been built to work in a specific use case. But it also becomes more convoluted every time, so you really need to dig to fix something you didn’t account for.

Then it becomes so rigid and so convoluted that to fix some issues properly, you’d have to rebuild everything, starting from architecture. And if you can’t make more workarounds to satisfy the demand? You do start all over again.

Negotiations happen when one or, more likely, two sides don’t see a way to improve their positions with military force.

The rumors you’re speaking of are a direct consequence of Russia being an autocracy. When you have a country whose ruler doesn’t leave on their own (a dictator), people start speculating on when he’s going to die. These rumors have been going around for about a decade, I believe, and are pretty much meaningless.

Now, about “securing a legacy.” I think it’s much more trivial than that. Invading Ukraine was a good way to secure presidency for the next 1-2 terms and to eradicate opposition within the country. If that’s the case, then, in a sense, he got what he wanted, although he likely also expected the war to be short and victorious (judging by the state media narrative at the time). That didn’t happen. And now there are other issues at hand for him.

I look into those regularly. Those are credible sources that are often used by our scientists, but you have to be very careful with statistics during war periods.

What do you think the majority of people hear when asked, “Do you support actions of Russian military in Ukraine?”. They hear, “Are you a traitor?” and answer accordingly. The majority (4 out of 5, I believe, if not more) refuse to answer at all. So, it’s not exactly representative.

What we look at instead is questions that are not this direct. Such as “Do you think Russia should continue or start peace talks?”. The majority (58%) is for peace talks. This number has increased since September 2022 by 10%, whilst the number of pro-war people decreased from 44% to 34%. Their quality also changed. For “absolutely should start peace talks” went from 21% (out of all votes) up to 26%, whilst for “absolutely should continue military actions” went from 29% down to 21%.

The longer things continue, the less support Russia’s government has. That’s what can be said for certain. The other conclusion we can derive is that war isn’t popular.

Edit: Oh, and the youth, 67% of the youth (18-24) is for peace talks, 23% pro-war. 65% for ages 25-39, only 25% pro-war.

The vast majority of pro-war people are elderly. Can you guess who also watches the TV the most? And who the TV is controlled by?

For the full picture, I’ll also add “they started it, so it’s their responsibility, we had no choice in it” This phrase explains the whole mentality of Russians very well.

The government claims it’s Google’s hardware getting outdated. Google says that’s bs.

I think that it’s convenient how they’re telling that to us right before throttling YouTube only with certain providers (and seems to be with only certain regions as well).

They’re crap. People will be and are looking for ways to evade restrictions.

Right now, they’re only limiting speed with certain providers in certain locations. There are at least three ways that I know of to avoid it.

The thing is, I don’t know how far they’ll take it. Blocking YouTube is a major political risk. Practically, everybody uses it for one reason or another. So, unlike their “special military operation,” this (as mercantile as it sounds) will potentially have a bigger impact on everybody’s lives. But you really can never be sure with our mafia-in-charge anymore.

Not unless you’re making videos from abroad.

YouTube doesn’t serve ads when viewed from Russia anymore, so there is no revenue from this audience. And you can’t take money out from within Russia due to sanctions.

Russian YouTubers are pretty much screwed and have to re-locate. The only other option is earning from product placements.

Can’t the same be said about what we have right now, though?

No system is flawless, but you’d be surprised the lengths people will go to uphold the ones that work.

The reason why people are struggling with one tag may also be exactly because it’s only one tag.

It’s difficult to categorize gray as black or white, after all.

Imo, the real issue is how not to go overboard, adding more and more tags, and keeping things easy to filter.

My guy, that’s a common business practice. If the third party skewed the results to favor their client, they risk massive reputation and monetary losses.

That’s how any auditing works.

Look up Arthur Andersen and what happened to them.

Finance management major here, I’d argue that governments aren’t inherently inefficient.

On a local level, government organisations are essentially the same as non-profits. The only difference is in who they are accountable to. Even KPI are pretty much the same.

The inefficiency of a government in contrast to the free market is in its inability to adjust to people’s needs quickly on a global scale. Imagine a company that has to sell a little bit of everything and then some. What kind of resource does it need to have to fully satisfy the demand? It’s practically impossible to make a vertically integrated system that would do this amount of research, let alone organize all the production and supply chains. It doesn’t matter if it’s a government or an entity. They all will drown in beurocracy, except the government is usually stricter as they tend to play it safe.

Hence, it’s really a non-issue if a government takes control over parts of the market. And because they can’t facilitate it all, they take over socially significant parts of it, like municipality governance, military, and healthcare.

Also, you (the person reading, not the person I’m responding to) should never be mistaken in thinking that the free market is perfectly efficient. It isn’t. Creating points of inefficiency drives a lot of revenue. Think purposefully limiting demand to drive prices up. This is what’s happening with insulin in the US, for example. If you have perfectly inelastic demands, you can make your product infinitely expensive.