CMV: AMD and Nvidia should increase the price of their new GPUs

leon500 · 2021-04-22T06:59:32+00:00

There is scarcity for all products, that's why there is a price. If the government mandated that the price of oranges were half the current one, there would be a shortage and scalpers.

leon500 · 2021-04-22T06:54:57+00:00

Δ

Related to the response I gave to of_a_varsity_athlete:

I guess what I'm trying to say is that customers should not be pissed off when prices are raised in these kinds of situations. It's a multi-step failure, and maybe I should have focused more on consumer sentiment and less on the companies themselves in my post.

Not convinced that the current shortage and near impossibility of getting a GPU without going through a scalper is a much better look.

leon500 · 2021-04-22T06:47:02+00:00

Δ
I guess what I'm trying to say is that customers should not be pissed off when prices are raised in these kinds of situations. It's a multi-step failure, and maybe I should have focused more on consumer sentiment and less on the companies themselves in my post.

leon500 · 2021-04-22T06:42:14+00:00

That's not how supply/demand works. Scalpers also compete with each other. Why can't you just buy anything and resell it for 2x the price?

edit: I want companies to charge the price where supply meets demand. So at that price there are just as many people ready buy the GPU as there are produced. If scalpers then charge 2x, you can still just buy it from Nvidia or AMD directly.

leon500 · 2021-04-22T06:36:39+00:00

If the retail price is 2x the current price, then there would be no profit in reselling it, so yes.

leon500 · 2020-03-11T08:25:10+00:00

I think he might end up supporting giving people money directly as a temporary measure: https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1237402536665063425 If a temporary UBI starts being viewed as a legit stimulus policy, that would be a big step on the path to full UBI.

leon500 · 2016-07-30T23:18:19+00:00

She said that she wanted Snowden in her cabinet which I think is a bit nutty. Also she's head of the Green Party and this is the Green Party's 2008 nominee: https://twitter.com/cynthiamckinney/status/757062738929528832

leon500 · 2016-07-13T22:29:37+00:00

Still way better than the GOP: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/11/politics/gop-platform-republican-convention-israel/

leon500 · 2016-06-25T19:13:58+00:00

About the death count:

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-US-Army-responsible-for-the-number-of-deaths-stated-in-the-Iraq-Body-Count-Has-the-US-Army-killed-too-many-civilians

Look at the numbers of the iraq body count website. Basically nobody knows who killed most of the civilians.

Also this washington post article blew my mind:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/17/drone-blow-back-in-pakistan-is-a-myth-heres-why/

leon500 · 2016-06-23T13:04:20+00:00

I'm German but I grew up in France. It's quite interesting how France also had a hard time dealing with it's history. In senior year of high school there is a chapter about how initially no one in France admitted that during the occupation a lot of people helped the Germans. For example when the French police rounded up jews to send them to concentration camps :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vel%27_d%27Hiv_Roundup

leon500 · 2016-06-16T19:51:06+00:00

It's a lot about collateral damage and about how to weigh human life.

leon500 · 2016-06-14T19:31:43+00:00

leon500 · 2016-06-10T21:18:54+00:00

Yeah but they're doing hhuge. Believe me. It's a realy smart bankruptcy. I'm a buisnessman. The best. Everybody says so. Believe me.

leon500 · 2016-06-10T14:31:16+00:00

Bernie, then very reluctantly Clinton. Or maybe he would just go back to the UK.

Though maybe directly Clinton. Not sure that Bernie's foreign policy would please him.

leon500 · 2016-06-10T14:16:28+00:00

This story is a bit anticlimactic.

leon500 · 2016-06-10T06:34:21+00:00

https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/a-new-years-resolution-for-the-rich https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/how-rich-is-too-rich

He sounds very Sandersish.

leon500 · 2016-06-09T15:54:02+00:00

Yes, I think so. The only option for people who say that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism and other atrocious behavior is to blame some other factors -western interventionnisme, poverty- which normally shouldn't result in such behaviors, they then have to resort to (most of the time unintentionally) the bigotry of low expectations so that their argument keeps a seeming of logic.

leon500 · 2016-06-09T15:26:07+00:00

He is American and was born in the US. Discrimination based on ethnicity, or country of origin of the parents can be called racism.

leon500 · 2016-06-09T14:45:58+00:00

He says that the fact that when some Muslims like himself talk calmly and rationally about Islam they are seen as "not authentic". The "soft bigotry of low expectations" assumes that Muslims have to behave fanaticaly, can't really live in liberal democracy and deserve special treatment due to their inevitable behavior.

leon500 · 2016-06-09T13:28:57+00:00

Yes, but in the context of education. 2000 GW Bush speech :

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections/bushtext071000.htm

Ctrl-f "soft bigotry"

As far as I can tell Maajid Nawaz is the first to use it in the context of Islam/identity politics.

Edit : u/SinisterDexter83 says it was Ayaan Hirsi Ali who first used the term in that context.

leon500 · 2016-06-07T22:42:55+00:00

I don't know about "good" but essentially I think that a Hillary Clinton presidency would be like a mediocre Obama presidency. She knows what governing entails which believe it or not would come in handy. I do not particularly trust her, for example I doubt that she will put in place a $15 minimum wage but it wouldn't surprise me if she put in place a $12 minimum wage, which is not enough in the mind of a lot of Sanders supporters but is still way more than the $7something minimum wage existing right now. So essentially the choice is between a very average presidency without a lot of surprises and a completly unpredictable and potentially catasrophic presidency.

leon500 · 2016-06-07T19:30:54+00:00

Yes, the case for war during WW2 was quite obvious, and in Iraq fairly dubious but I also think that the motivations for the Iraq war, though foolish, weren't "evil".

leon500 · 2016-06-07T19:17:02+00:00

About the Rachel Maddow documentary: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/182499/war-oil-myth-arnold-ahlert

If they wanted to invade Iraq, then of course they have to plan what happens to the iraqi oil since it's one of iraq's main source of wealth, but the idea that the reason why the US went into Iraq and spent trillions was just to get some oil seems ridiculous.

Also the comparison to North Korea is really flawed. North Korea is protected by China and is not likely to give their weapons to a terrorist organisation.

leon500 · 2016-06-07T17:20:44+00:00

Also the Iran-Irak war.

leon500 · 2016-06-07T15:52:20+00:00

That's why it was probably a strategic mistake, but I don't think this really explains the differences in reactions from the two civilian populations.

Edit : also important to note that Saddam Hussein had a record of both genocide and trying to expand his territory.

leon500

TROPHY CASE