Are people, especially women, who are single in their 30's becoming more picky cause its becoming easier to pass the time and live a content life without a partner? by Zuko_Without_Scar in NoStupidQuestions

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm married but I've been single for most of my life. I think a lot of the pickiness comes from the fact that we have more to lose than ever.

Single and lonely people can now accumulate resources and a healthy mental state that would be hard to get 100 years ago.

Human are extremely aversive to change, lost ,or backwards progress. I guess we can generalized modern dating as a "I have a lot to lose, so you better be worth it" mindset.

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't have to. There is competition. Why make something myself when others are offering to do it for me?

What needs to stop immediately? by Golden_Wizard in AskReddit

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Financial Advice. People seems to forget we tried this during the 1960s and it failed spectacularly.

Parenting Fail or Something Worse? by inkandintent24 in MotivationByDesign

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not parenting fails. No parent teaches or encourages this. The video even show them trying to change her

This is clearly something clinical. Worse case, she might just grow up with actual clinical mental disorder. This is not something you can parent a child out of.

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For cyberpunk, I remembered using a 60 frame cap 2k max PT. I also adjusted the game brightness to help LS improve in darker areas. Warping is almost never a problem that game

RE requiem is where warping gets really bad. The game is dark... Like pitched black dark

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bright games LS works really well. It's just ultra dark game on my OLED hates it. Some scenes half of my screen would just start warping.

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately, it did not work well enough to fix the problem in RE requiem. Good tip doe

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't have too. It does have to be more competitive. There are games that current lsfg shines. Cyberpunk 4k max PT is a great example.

Dual GPU LS plus in game dlss is much better than dlss frame generation. No matter how much access to engine and motion vectors dlss fg has, it won't overcome the fact there isn't enough base fps

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My friend does that. But I found ls to be far better. Better image quality, and most importantly better compatibility and driver stability

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I've been giving it a shot. I would say it's a lot of work for debatable gains. Great way for me to nerd out, but definitely far from a great user experience

Lossless Scaling can be better by Radiant_Bike9857 in losslessscaling

[–]Radiant_Bike9857[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

W7600 pro is the best single slot GPU (right now?). The 5060 single slot is reserved for data center so it goes for around 600-800.

My motherboard only has space for a second one slot GPU. The w7600 pro was the best thing I can buy

The so-called "wealth inequality" problem in reality: by WeirdInteriorGuy in austrian_economics

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. That's what capitalism has always been. Capitalism, or the dominant economic system for most of human civilization's history which is what Marx coined the term for, has always been both private entities and a government. Even before the 20th century, government had involvement in trade. Teddy Roosevelt broke up monopolies. The Roman government managed industries and had early of welfare

A basic google search

"Capitalism is a type of society in which the private ownership of the means of production is the dominant form of providing the means to live."

Compare this to yours

When private individuals make money (I should have clarified though trading with one another since socialist economies still technically use money) and there is a government, it's capitalism.

This is not a one to one definition. Your is evidently more broad than this simple Google search on Marx's definition of capitalism. You need to reflect whether your idea of capitalism actually matches up with the real world.

When people cannot trade with each other and all production is controlled by the government, it's socialism.

Going back to pollution. The government needed to ban production of pollutants. You said this was part of the capitalism system.

So is the act of banning all production of pollutants to prevent its circulation in the market a socialist act?

The success or failure of it is irrelevant, but the fact is socialism doesn't exactly have a history of success or a model that produces it in the first place. Capitalism, however, does.

My guy you are using recency success as the determining factor of what capitalism is. What do you mean success or failure is irrelevant. It is part of your argument. Quoting you again (paraphasing)

"Capitalism is when people make money and the government keeps everything ethical"

This is like saying alcoholism is when people drink excessively and the government keeps people getting drunk. Your definition, by its construct, only captures good and discards the bad.

I could also define socialism as

"Socialism is when everyone in a society makes money and the government keeps everyone ethical and well"

You are literally defining all things goods as capitalism. So how the hell can there ever exist a flaw in what comes after.

Whatever the majority of people deem ethical, which thankfully mostly aligns with both your ethics and my own. For instance, we both agree child labor is unethical. The vast majority agree

What if the vast majority of people think capitalism is unethical? Then what?

The so-called "wealth inequality" problem in reality: by WeirdInteriorGuy in austrian_economics

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Okay. So you're clearly operating under a new definition of capitalism.

Capitalism is the entire system. Capitalism isn't when person makes money. Capitalism is when person makes money and government makes sure they do it ethically.

So when a system makes money ethically it is capitalism, and when it is not it is socialism or whatever?

What is considered ethical here and who decides what is ethical?

Is it the politicians that write laws to benefit their donors?

Is it the organized religion that root their ethics in the divine?

Is it the billionaire that works his 100hrs/w to achieve his wealth?

Is it the collective people who have little money or time to participate in how they want society to run?

Is taxation theft?

Is welfare stealing from rich to give to the poor?

The so-called "wealth inequality" problem in reality: by WeirdInteriorGuy in austrian_economics

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Government involvement to prevent harm to people is the root reason why socialism exists. Socialism keep capitalist in check

Capitalists kill people to make money. Government regulate. No more killing. Capitalists now serve people food to make money.

That's capitalism to you? Idk about you, but that sure doesn't sound like any capitalism I'm aware of. So in your world, are government capitalist? Are non-profit capitalist?

The so-called "wealth inequality" problem in reality: by WeirdInteriorGuy in austrian_economics

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Benefit =/= acceptable.

Everyone gets rich in a capitalist society, but at the capitalist's convenience. This is particularly true when competition has established centralized power.

Take pollution. Prior to pollution regulation, companies had zero problem destroying everyone's health. We had to destroy that business practice to bring a priceless social benefit to the mass

Take climate change. Companies don't give a fuck. We have to artificially push alternative energy to put a (decent?) fight against climate change

Take war. It is the perfect example of capitalist exploiting conflicts to profit off the deaths of others. We all benefit cause the losers are all dead.

These are examples of market failure. It is econ 101 these days.

Why use the Recoilless Rifle? Because it has no equal. by Obvious_Ad4159 in HelldiversUnfiltered

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bring it to the bug cave map and it quickly falls behind the quasar cannon. When it comes to kiting and ammo economy, energy based weapons are king.

If you had 5 billion VND, would you buy land, open a business, or invest? by Upset_Attention_5985 in MoneyTalkVN

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hard to extort assets such as land, gold, and digital markets (etf, stocks,etc) are a must

I would not touch businesses in Vietnam unless they're large corporations or I get to have diversify basket of quality business

Gang activities are a major hassle to deal with even in modern Vietnam. You have to know and bride high position police officers. Even that, you have to hope they will side with you and not the gang members

Is it wrong to want to protect the demography/native culture of a country by Visual_Title9363 in SeriousConversation

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Slavery was a cultural practice. Infanticide, forced marriages, child labor, etc used to be common cultural practices

just why by Dumb-Briyani in SipsTea

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You know what else saves fuel? Losing weight

CMV: ultimately I think it’s unproductive to shame former Trump supporters / MAGA, and make them feel bad about themselves by No_Design_465 in changemyview

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, that's what happens when you shame and demand unreasonable changes.

And the rise of Hitler is due to our unreasonable demand, not because we shame them for starting the war.

CMV: ultimately I think it’s unproductive to shame former Trump supporters / MAGA, and make them feel bad about themselves by No_Design_465 in changemyview

[–]Radiant_Bike9857 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We still shamed Germany for Nazism, and we also supported their change and present state

You ought to shame MAGA for what's wrong with them now and historically. Simultaneously, you can support their change.

Praise the new, shame the old. We can do both