Message from @Mimi
Discord ID: 523139286439034890
```I'm going to assume you're not talking about the graphics card company```
Yes, I am talking about nVidia. They are one of the most evil companys, right at the same level as Intel is or was.
They basically forced their partners to not sell competing Products with the Gaming Label.
THAT let for example ASUS to change the name of their AMD Cards to MARS (IIRC) and other "funny" stuff. But they were not allowed to sell them under the same label as their nVidia Product.
It wasn't done because Kyle Benett from HardOCP blew the Whistle on this shit and called nVidia out for that crap - no other person had the balls to do that and some even defended nVidia for this shit or even after that attacked Kyle for what he did.
Jesus
The worst thing I knew of nVidia doing was the RTX cards XD
I never knew they were that shitty in their business practices
Oh yeah and their laptop graphics cards sucked ass until like very very recently.
They always were known for having issues
Intel and nVidia have had their heads up their asses for too long and AMD is on track to steal huge sections of their respective markets if they don't wise up.
lol
Good
Ban stupidity.
hey now, liberals deserve to be able to express their opinions too
```I never knew they were that shitty in their business practices```
Yeah, they are worst. Just look at the Crysis 2 shit that happned. Not visible highly tesselated water.
Or all the shit they did with the tesselated hair from their Hairworks bullshit in Witcher 3 (and in the German PCGH, there was an interview where the lead programmer shat on nVidia as best as he could and called it a "business decision")...
Or their closed source Gameworks Libary that normally don't allow the developers to change the code or even look at it.
and if you think that the Gameworks Libery does one thing and the nVidia Graphics card something different, you might be right.
And if you think well, that smells like anti-competitive behaviour and damaging your competition, you'r etotally right.
seafoam is the ocean ejaculating. change my mind
The seafoam is that ginger mermaid tho
that's not what I meant
and you feckin' know it
Anyone know if this is true?
```We would see near-UV as magenta if we could see those wavelengths with our cones. We can't because our lenses filter out most of the light in that range and so it falls below the threshold of photopic (cone based) vision. People who have had their lenses surgically replaced with artificial lenses that are more UV transparent do in fact see near UV light as a magenta or magenta haze.```
Horseshoe theory of colour is commie propaganda.
I want to share a thought I have in regards of "what is the Truth?".
Is it matter of perspective or not?
Let me express a hypothetical situation I 've been thinking:
```There are two persons, one with a condition that doesn't allow him to feel pain (Congenital insensitivity to pain and anhydrosis(CIPA)), and another that is normal. Both of them are hit with a stone in the head. So, the person with CIPA would not feel any pain, while the regular person would be squirming on the floor. ```
So, pain would be a matter of perspective, right? One feels it the other doesn't.
But, both of them got hurt, so the truth is that both persons were hurt. Hurt is the truth.
Thoughts?
you might be moved by the momentum of the brick hitting you, and maybe dazed by the jolt to your brain.
but you wouldn't FEEL the pain. your brain would not register the pain as it was.
Yes.
you'd be injured, but you wouldn't register it
The damage is the truth. It is measurable. Pain is someone perception of it. It is opinion.
We can both be standing in front of a picture. That is the truth. Whether or not it is a good picture is perception.
I guess it depends on your definitionof hurt.
Yes, I should have used damage.
then of course. Not feeling pain doesn't make you bullet proof.
facts don't care about your feelings.
hahaha, @Poppy Rider, your example is shorter.
😉
@Mimi I'll use damage, rather than hurt
Would leaving Afghanistan be a good idea? When we left Iraq, it caused a power vacuum and ISIS came into power. Will we be responsible for the deaths caused by a neo-Taliban after we leave?
We can’t stay forever and I don’t think those countries will ever have stability.
Best to leave and just have a travel ban for people from those countries.
.....
I would say, extreme migration policy for them.
Oh of course. Destabilizing the Middle East *never* comes back to bite the West in the ass
Also when we try training/arming them so they can fight terrorists they always end up using it against us.
That's because the CIA likes to pick extremist groups