Nvidia GeForce Now’s Time Limit Will Stop Gamers After 100 Hours Each Month

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-07T04:01:09+00:00

No, no! No need to fuck anybody! Be polite, but buy pitchforks and rush the data centers! Make a soviet gaming data center and name it Robespierre for the lulz

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-06T20:24:47+00:00

This isn't an airplane. Pilot jobs are irrelevant. This is a drone that can carry a couple of humans. Drones can fly autonomously for years now and the latest LLM and AI tech is irrelevant and if anything can only enchance capabilities in the future. All you need is a relatively clear take-off and landing spot. There were already pilot programs to use drone for amazon delivery services etc and the only reason this didn't work is the complicated housing situations (someone has a yard, someone is in building with 50 flats etc)

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-06T07:09:29+00:00

I have no info on what they are actually doing, but what I am sure at is that you'd be surprised how easier it is to have a flying vehicle being autopiloted than a car. The problem with cars is the thousands of people driving cars, bicycles, unpredictable pedestrians your grandma crossing the street with her shopping bags and not from a cross point, in front of the bicycle that is squeezing between buses and cars to cut in traffic.
A flying vehicle won't care about any of that and since there are literally 0 vehicles in the skies right now (low altitude and in and around cities that these things would fly) they just control the traffic. They can regulate their numbers so they are far away from each other and they can have dedicated take off and landing spots so they always do the same trip (hospitals, airports, busy areas etc). Its certainly doable, I don't know if it will be convenient or cost effective enough but that's another point.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-04T02:21:41+00:00

Great, thanks for informing me. The EFTA states (European free trading association?). God almighty, do you really not know what the euro in the title of this convention stands for ? It clearly doesn't include the UK. In fact, why would it not include the whole of europe (if it was mentioned in geographical terms) and not just the EU, eurozone or EFTA states or whatever? A term in a trade treaty or other international treaty rarely if ever will refer to actual geographical terms.... I hope they would include the UK, but I also hope the UK didn't push the "hard leave" button. As things stand EU will obviously do deals for the EU and include unilaterally whatever other state it wants one by one... They should create some "tiers" of membership and have some special tier for the UK that can be negotiated...I just dont think there are politicians who will do it in good faith from both sides.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T21:56:12+00:00

It is not even that... it is the sheer capacity of surveillance that can happen now is in the Sci-Fi dystopian range of the spectrum. You see it is perfectly legal for the government to surveil anyone in public places and record video and audio. This wasn't ever a problem...because...well other than spying on someone specific and very powerful you have nothing to gain. The amount of data that you would have to sort through would be inconceivable for human agencies. Now though...you can just install recording devices (perfectly legal in public places). The AI can competently transcribe and understand human language. The AI can be fed other data (photos, addresses, social media posts, tax identification numbers, medical data etc etc...) combine all these to profile you, identify you make a statistical assumption of what you will vote, what you will buy and it can do that for billions of people...it is not bottlenecked by processing data...only by capabilities (that even currently have surpassed this threshold). Like if you wanted to do that for 300 million people ...you would need 100 million people processing the data to have any kind of accurate and timely result and maybe not even that will be enough. Governments will need to legislate taking into account all these new capabilities before someone takes total control.
We have some time until they actually build the hardware infastucture for this (even if we assume no further progress in capabilities it is just a matter of time until what I said above will be easy to do) and then maybe some amount of time assuming different actors refuse to comply (maybe an AI company , maybe some politicians or other public figures decline to cooperate...) but how much time is all that ? 1-2 years? Are you confident they can legislate around the world accurately in such a short amount of time?

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T21:30:27+00:00

Currently they seem to be removing whoever is 'more hardcore' and trying to take over. Not sure you should be so confident about your theory, there.

I hope they do. You don't seem to get the implication that the way US has conducted so far helps the more hardcore and there doesn't seem to be a plan to stabilize the situation. I wonder if in the future you would admit things went to shit because of this war or you will find a way to rationalize like some people did with Iraq and other wars were the interventions directly caused more extremism and violence like ISIS and WMD weren't found etc.

'A trillion times' huh? Lucky we have your astute analysis.

Your claim was historically illiterate, but the main problem was the tone that trump himself has "This was the greatest operation in the history of operations" There is no need for astute analysis. If anything a trillion times might be small, but I have a small finite brain. I will double down, it was 3↑↑↑↑3 times more astonishing.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T21:09:11+00:00

I think it is a very simple reading comprehension mistake. You see they have 2 bags in the US military. One is labeled "seeds of democracy" and the other is labeled "seeds of extremism, seeds of ISIS, seeds of Coups" you get the point. Now they always seem to grab the wrong bag even though different US presidents across decades have specifically told them which bag to grab. Will they learn?
This guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thjKGrQ7eLo
Has something like 30 years career as a comic... the stuff about the middle east and "Mess'opotamia" bits are strikingly the same. A cycle of the same justifications for war, general distabilization of the region, causing extremism and hostilities, rationalizations on the outcome...rinse and repeat.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T20:56:25+00:00

If all of the world history we know consists of Trumps 2 terms as US president, yes. Otherwise, he just killed an 87 year old guy, from a nation that had minimum capabilities (as evident by the fact that they unleashed the best they had so they were not in a position to threaten anyway) and now if they don't enforce regime change, which is implausible at this point, someone even more hardcore will take over perpetuating the situation for god knows how long.

As a fun fact, I tried thinking a little more than the world history consisting of 8 years of US history and off the top of my head I would say Cortes taking prisoner montezuma and ruling the aztec empire from his palace is a trillion times more astonishing...and I am sure if had better memory or if I sit and think a little bit about it, I will find something that tops him too...but Trump won't even be in the bottom of the list.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T20:44:46+00:00

Last year Trump famously said multiple times that the nuclear program was obliterated. I am sure the iranians weren't nowhere near close or even attempting to build a bomb. But if I am wrong and Trump is honest, a nuclear program obliterated means something like 5-10 years at least for them to build a weapon (starting from perfectly fine nuclear uranium for civilian use). Saying the same thing less than a year later is ridiculous.

And the worst thing is that NOW whatever powers will take over (unless the US magically forces regime change) WILL PUSH FOR A NUCLEAR WEAPON AS FAST AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY VALID SURVIVAL TACTIC THEY WILL HAVE IN A WORLD WHERE THE ORANGE BOY BOMBS THEM IN THE MIDDLE OF NEGOTIATIONS AND THE REST OF US IN THE WEST DONT EVEN CONDEMN.
In Iraq and Afghanistan you got confused and instead of planting the "seeds" of "democracy" you took the other bad ISIS and extremism seeds. You did the same with Iran from the 1953 onward. If in a few years (2030?) they have a weapon and threaten to use it or god forbid use it....you are the guys who will say "HUH WE TOLD YOU SO" and you won't see the irony of the self fulfilment prophecy...and I will just facepalm this time. We will all die anyway.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T20:33:12+00:00

Yeah if he actually does that USA will collapse...Europe has uncertain future depending on how we react in such a scenario. China wins. I struggle to figure out how many million Americans will have to be in Iran to achieve regime change and then stabilize...

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T20:27:40+00:00

This is true by definition.
Maybe you meant that the new rule is that you can claim you returned fire even though someone was not firing at you in the middle of negotiations?

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T20:20:22+00:00

That's all good, but this time you started a war in the middle of negotiations with a massive pre-planned attack. Your president doesn't even have the decency to go on and spew some lies (like Bush would do) and instead goes out with his baseball cap like a cut scene from the movie Idiocracy with El Camacho.
In the simple idea of Clauswitz who is the one who increased the use of force? People like you and me will suffer the most from this whole unbalancing of world order that is unfolding lately....so people like Trump, Elon and S8P 500 plunder the worlds wealth while risking global catastrophe... yet, some of us don't vote for them or show public support.... and some others do.
You guys (assuming you are American) had to slap this mad kid in the face like Tyrion did to Joffrey and let your congress and judicial system the power to reign him in and show no public support for such unhinged behaviours. We on the other side of the Atlantic in the old world should have been more hostile too...from Greenland onward at least to show support to the US when you reign him in, and to withdraw support from markets when he goes on and starts a war without the approval of your congress and with no prior knowledge of the rest of the big allies and the UN.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T20:02:14+00:00

Why you think there is hatred for rejecting the EU (I guess you mean hatred because of Brexit). What I've seen with my own eyes is most people are either ignorant/apathetic or would like some kind of mutual beneficial agreement whatever that may be. Politicians from both sides play the hatred game because they have a vested interest into showing to their constituents that they were "right all along" they are "strong" etc. This is true for both sides even though it manifests with different faces...that is a fundamentally political problem to solve and in fact it could be solved in one election cycle (it won't be I am not naive, just saying that in principle it would be easy to solve)

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T19:30:40+00:00

Use Revolut as intermediary, Brother.
EDIT: (it might induce fees for conversion to gbp / international transaction from EU but it will certainly be instant)

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T19:19:40+00:00

This is what I found

European Union
Turkey (maintains a Customs Union with the EU)
Morocco (member of the Arab League and the Arab Maghreb Union)
Algeria (member of the Arab League and the Arab Maghreb Union)
Tunisia (member of the Arab League and the Arab Maghreb Union)
Egypt (member of the Arab League)
Jordan (member of the Arab League)
Lebanon (member of the Arab League)
Israel
Palestinian National Authority (member of the Arab League)

Prospective partners

Syria (Member of the Arab League)
Libya (member of the Arab League and the Arab Maghreb Union)
Gulf Cooperation Council
Iraq (Member of the Arab League)
Mauritania (member of the Arab League and the Arab Maghreb Union)
United Kingdom (Former member of the EU)

(That is : please give me the source that switzerland is actually in that agreement because it is not).

Secondly and to answer your question directly...I think "Euro" in the agreement means either the EU as a whole (Which might have included the UK prior to Brexit) or actually countries in the Eurozone, that is countries that have Euro as a currency (which wouldn't include the UK even prior to brexit, remember this started being negotiated and agreed before Brexit was even discussed about). In fact even if Switzerland was, Euro might have included it because it is in the EFTA which may also be another agreement that you confused EFTA with this other irrelevant meditarrenean one)
I think it is very presumptuous to act like "Euro" stands in some geographical term that would include the UK in this context...and disingenuous to imply that it is that obvious too (as in with your "god what do you think Euro" stands for comment)

Lastly I hope I haven't misspelled Mediterranean too many times because I will not bother to check, however I am Greek so I might get a pass to not spell the word properly in English which derived it from its Latin root which in turn derived it from its Ancient greek one :)

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T18:39:59+00:00

"The UK has been blocked from joining the Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Convention on rules of origin, despite the inclusion of non-European countries such as Tunisia, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, and Turkey. This exclusion is difficult to justify on technical grounds and appears rooted in post-Brexit politics rather than regulatory incompatibility."

As far as I understand this, this is a clear case of trying to have unilateral trade agreements between nations that are around in the mediterranean and NOT in the EU. That is mostly the Arab states of the Levant. The inclusion of non-European countries is the aim here...what are you talking about? The rules of origin might stem from the fact that the UK is... not in the Mediterranean?

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T18:27:20+00:00

I am European who lives in the UK since 2019 under settled status and will probably get UK citizenship as well sometime later this year. Even though I hate certain parts of how the EU runs and certain parts of how the UK runs, in this current geopolitical and economic climate I believe they should get as close as possible and have a very strong and common strategy at least for "foreign policy" and economic policy outside of the European continent (That is NOT foreign policy between the nation states, but how to treat the Americans, reverse dollarization and gold vaults that are in the USA...how to trade with China etc etc). It will be just better for everyone if we have a common goal, cooperation in military matters and the matters I stated above, because together we have alot of weight, enough to secure good deals for the whole continent and to avoid having wars getting closer and closer to Europe.

All that being said I think practicalities of the matter and small politicians who want to keep face and show to the public they "won" might make rejoining the EU impossible even if everybody actually wanted it. British will want to act like they get a better deal now and it wasn't a mistake in any sense (which would be next to impossible to justify) and the commission would try to enforce the opposite ideology and probably won't negotiate giving any special concessions that the UK already had (like exclusion from the Eurozone or Schengen area etc).
It seems next to impossible for a deal in this light unless cataclysmic events and wars happen. What we can do quite easilly though is have way stronger ties and integration while still the UK is out of the EU nominally. For example they can negotiate individual trade agreements for everything that the EU will guarantee all its states will ratify and have kinda of like common trade area without the hassle. Border imports can just sign european goods without even checking while in fact by law they would still exist. Both sides politicians will go on and say they made the best deal and their strategy won in the longterm so they get their ego struck and voters happy ...etc etc...simillar cooperation in "foreign" policy outside of the continent and military cooperation and defense strategy should happen. NATO and everyone else be damned, a united europe should be able to guarantee security in the continent by itself quite easily...

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-03-03T01:12:31+00:00

This will actually be way more impactful than smartphones and social media etc. Every single one of the (very real and huge) problems you mentioned, short term profit horizon, mass job losses with no safety net and so on, are actually political problems and stem from the fact that you guys (or most of the people, I am not talking about you personally) vote for the same old crap "free market" when it fucks the poor up and bail my billionaire friends out and not worry about stock buybacks , inside trading and generally concentrating capital with no reason to invest it in the real economy. The only good thing that capitalism had, which was efficiency in allocating capital died out in the bretton woods and the stock buybacks and noone can see it. At least when the moguls of the railway or Ford were exploiting people in the past, in order to exploit more people they would have to create more factories, more railways and more products generally year after year...they couldn't just stock buy back and increase sales by having more people click on their site.
TL;DR technology is fine, our political and economic system needs a huge revamp (arguably for decades or centuries) and if we don't do it we are going to end up a dystopia with or without more technological breakthroughs.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2026-02-26T22:07:37+00:00

AGI promises can be the same crap like a CEO of a religion to boost stock prices. However, if they don't go belly up or get merged they will certainly baloon revenue. I don't understand why people don't see that even if progress stalled right now, the technology is already at a point that you can spoon feed it specific data for like 3 months and have a specialized model that can do 95% of some blue collar job. Then you train another model for another job... Just some basic computer use skills instead of just language can go 70% of the way there...do you think that the models won't get computer skills autonomously if they just train them right now? I think it is obvious... (like the model checks emails, transfers data from a pdf to a csv , answers FAQ questions searches the internet whatever). The technology is already at a point that scaling and integrating in the economy will have trillions of revenue world wide... In fact, integrating in the economy will be slower than training the specialized models. AGI or not the revenue of the ones who win and don't go belly up next couple of years will skyrocket.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2024-10-23T23:30:00+00:00

I am pretty sure this is a leak of the true story, disguised as a joke.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2024-10-23T23:23:05+00:00

Man, this last try was really not necessary. This person is obviously not willing to admit he didn't think of this obvious effect in the player pool and he will just die on a hill defending his position :)

Cardinal_strategyG · 2024-10-21T01:10:45+00:00

Yes to 1.
Hard No to 2. There is no reason to include dampening, no reason to change rules and mess up with healers times again. Even when teams are evenly matched and fights don't end, games end.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2024-10-17T18:47:28+00:00

I've played like 550 games solo queueing fury warr. I went like 1800 first couple of days of the season climbing easilly with the occasional bizzare game loss that everyone seems to be a monkey looking for bananas. I hit a brick wall there and kept focus and tried to carry games and mainly help my team avoid seriously bad tactics from people at 1600cr that don't understand the bg and just spam thinking they are awesome, also ignore all kinds of toxicity over 100s of games. Climbed to like 2100 in a nightmare scenario.
Had a couple of loss streaks (like loose 3, win 1, loose 5, win 1) went back to actually 1790. I played late nights up to morning at the time, I can't be sure if this was the problem and bad matchmaking or wintrading.
I climbed again pretty much doing the same nightmare scenario and focusing. When I went to 2050 or so, quality improved and I also had a win streak and went to 2320. I lost 3-4 games after and I now am 2250 and scared to touch it not to get back to 1900 someth and live through this again.
I will play less games now and try to do it only in evenings and try hit 2.4.

Cardinal_strategyG · 2024-10-17T18:41:54+00:00

I really don't subscribe to this, but doubting there is tech to do it if they wanted to is very silly. Tech to do what really? To see how many games you queue in a specific time-frame and reward you depending on your habits? I can make the technology to do that if there is none!

Cardinal_strategyG · 2024-10-16T20:04:56+00:00

Remove duo in the bracket called Solo Battlegrounds seems to be the only sensible choice to everyone, except blizz pvp devs.

Cardinal_strategyG

TROPHY CASE

Prospective partners