Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




so what's the quantum dot jazz about, de-marketified?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




drat that is a sweet rear end screen you've got there. how does the curvature feel? as for nits and srgb, thats brightness and colour. 350 is p deece, and 15% sounds off - their page advertises 125%, which is p deece too. probably does hit neither of these numbers in real world, but it still should be way above average.

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




and yeah there is drought of non-tn 144hz screens. acer, asus, and benq have like 2 each, and thats about it i think. even less when you separate freesync and gsync

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Fuzzy Mammal posted:



i guess you'll need $2k worth of gpus to get any sort of decent framerate on this. Nice stats and i've seen em way uglier but lol at i420.
you won't pull a stable 4k@144 in any game where you may want 4k resolution. heck, even stable 1440p@144 is barely possible in most scenarios

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Jimmy Carter posted:

out of curiosity, would SLI-ing like 4 1080ti cards together be able to come even close to driving that?

no. sli performance gains are far from linear, and sli is bad tech both as such, and specifically for using more than 2 modern cards at one. dual 1080ti will get your witcher 3 up to 70ish average frames per second in 4k

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




games where you will want 144hz, twitchy online stuff, you will anyways play on low setting for clarity, so in many cases a single 1070 or 1080 will do the trick for 1080p.

also, sli can lead to outright performance loss even in some modern games, not to even talk about stutters, tearing, and frametimes in general

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Silver Alicorn posted:

Well I found some response time settings on my monitor... setting it to Ultra Fast does actually noticeably clear up ghosting in Elite: Dangerous. but what am I sacrificing by using it?

what is your monitor

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Silver Alicorn posted:

Viewsonic VX2858Sml
looks like the usual, so highest responsiveness settings may induce overshoot (aka inverse ghosting)

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




ConanTheLibrarian posted:

if im not supposed to use vlc, what the heck is the alternative ??
mpc-hc or -be or whatever was that .net artisanal directx player. vlc is crocs of media player world

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




ConanTheLibrarian posted:

but it just works
much like every actually good alternative lol

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013






https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/01/lg-4k-43ud79-b-monitor-four-displays-in-one-panel/

LG's Apple-flagship 5K monitor may have stumbled on its release, but the company's newest display looks like it'll cover all the bases in terms of sheer flexibility and screen real estate. The LG 43UD79-B, as it's cleverly called, is a 42.5-inch UHD panel with a 3840 × 2160 resolution, plus a nice range of gaming and productivity-focused features.

On it's face, the 43UD79-B is an IPS panel with 1000:1 contrast ratio, wide 178-degree viewing angle and support for over 1.07 billion colors. Although its 60 Hz refresh rate won't quite stack up against the latest gaming monitors, according to a press release from LG the 43UD79-B does boast a Game Mode, Black Stabilizer and Dynamic Action Sync mode. For gamers with Radeon GPUs, compatibility with AMD's FreeSync dynamic refresh rate technology will also prevent screen tearing and visual stutters.

Around back, you'll find two HDMI 2.0 inputs, two HDMI 1.4 inputs, one DisplayPort 1.2a port with FreeSync and a USC-C port that can also handle a DisplayPort signal. With all those ports, the monitor can act as a screen for up to four different devices simultaneously, using a variety of split-screen configurations and picture-in-picture support. Using the two standard USB 3.0 ports, the monitor can also control two computers from a single mouse and keyboard. Finally, with two built-in Harman Kardon speakers and an included remote control, the panel could easily double as a 42.5-inch 4K TV once all the spreadsheets are closed.

According to AnandTech, the 43UD79-B goes on sale in Japan on May 19th for about 83,000 Yen (or about $745 US), but pre-order pages have started showing up stateside for a hair under $700.

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Ocrassus posted:

so I was unironically looking at this laptop (without the side displays) for a desktop replacement and what they've done is supplied it with a 220 watt power brick which is nowhere near enough to power everything inside, so they've gimped the gently caress out of the gtx 1080 tdp. it performs more like the lower model 1070 but razer gets to slap 'THE BEST GRPHICS :byodood:' on the spec sheet and charges $3799 of your earth US dollars for the 512gb.

:eyepop:

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




my goth gf posted:

if you put more pixels into a computer it gets heavier

its just science

not a monitorian here, but

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




qirex posted:

"3.84k" performed horribly in market testing

you surely mean 2016p or hd-plus

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




carry on then posted:

ultra hd

lmao imagine a world where we called it hi-di

lomarf

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




echinopsis posted:

lomarf plus

surely himarf

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pagancow posted:

There is not a professional monitor shipping with more than 25ms "input lag" right now Part of that calculation is the screen refresh time.

pro monitors have even lower input lag times because they dont have to process the image to make it look good

25 is awful tho

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pagancow posted:

mine is 16ms. which is one frame. You can't get any faster than rendering one frame to the screen after input.

buying a monitor for input delay is dumb because it's always the refresh rate of the display, Input delay is only a thing for consumer trash tvs because they shove modes into it

16 is dece for 99% cases ya

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Silver Alicorn posted:

what's a halfway decent 4K TV for under 1 grand

I would like 55" but could go smaller I guess

theres no point in 4k tellys

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




whichever misuse or misconception of the elusive hdr this is, the reality is such that there is barely any 4k content that isn't upscaled

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pagancow posted:

yall be like 'duh this thing that is going to be sliced bread 4.0 is gonna be DUMMMMM' and you haven't even seen it, and cannot even see it because you refuse to spend money or walk into a store becuase ads

do you like work on a secret google monitor factory or something

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pagancow posted:

PAGANCOW WANTS YOU TO BELIEVE THAT HDR IS GREAT AND YOU SHOULD DROP YOUR HARD EARNED DOLLARS ON IT< BUT ITS JUST BIG MONITOR SPEAKING THROUGH THE "ASTRO TURF" MOUTHPIECE THAT IS KNOWN AS CAPITOLISM...RARRR ADS BAD, ALSO DONT LISTEN TO YOUR DOLBY DIGITAL PROPERLY JUST CRANK THAT poo poo 400 PERCENT, ALSO NEVER EVER BUY A CAMERA THAT CAN SHOOT A HIGHER DYNAMIC RANGE OOPS I FAILED I BOUGHT A SMARTPHONE AARRGGGGGHH BIG MONITOR OUT TO GET ME AGAIN!

im all for hdr even for large figgies, just confused with your ad policys

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pagancow posted:

does nobody read a single thing i put on here? outside.

this fairly accurately reflects arguments on internet

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pram posted:

quick reminder: For twelve years, you have been asking: Who is John Galt? This is John Galt speaking. I am the man who loves his life. I am the man who does not sacrifice his love or his values. I am the man who has deprived you of victims and thus has destroyed your world, and if you wish to know why you are perishing—you who dread knowledge—I am the man who will now tell you.” The chief engineer was the only one able to move; he ran to a television set and struggled frantically with its dials. But the screen remained empty; the speaker had not chosen to be seen. Only his voice filled the airways of the country—of the world, thought the chief engineer—sounding as if he were speaking here, in this room, not to a group, but to one man; it was not the tone of addressing a meeting, but the tone of addressing a mind.

“You have heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis. You have said it yourself, half in fear, half in hope that the words had no meaning. You have cried that man’s sins are destroying the world and you have cursed human nature for its unwillingness to practice the virtues you demanded. Since virtue, to you, consists of sacrifice, you have demanded more sacrifices at every successive disaster. In the name of a return to morality, you have sacrificed all those evils which you held as the cause of your plight. You have sacrificed justice to mercy. You have sacrificed independence to unity. You have sacrificed reason to faith. You have sacrificed wealth to need. You have sacrificed self-esteem to self-denial. You have sacrificed happiness to duty.

“You have destroyed all that which you held to be evil and achieved all that which you held to be good. Why, then, do you shrink in horror from the sight of the world around you? That world is not the product of your sins, it is the product and the image of your virtues. It is your moral ideal brought into reality in its full and final perfection. You have fought for it, you have dreamed of it, and you have wished it, and I—I am the man who has granted you your wish.

“Your ideal had an implacable enemy, which your code of morality was designed to destroy. I have withdrawn that enemy. I have taken it out of your way and out of your reach. I have removed the source of all those evils you were sacrificing one by one. I have ended your battle. I have stopped your motor. I have deprived your world of man’s mind.

“Men do not live by the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those who do. The mind is impotent, you say? I have withdrawn those whose mind isn’t. There are values higher than the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those for whom there aren’t.

“While you were dragging to your sacrificial altars the men of justice, of independence, of reason, of wealth, of self-esteem—I beat you to it, I reached them first. I told them the nature of the game you were playing and the nature of that moral code of yours, which they had been too innocently generous to grasp. I showed them the way to live by another morality—mine. It is mine that they chose to follow.

“All the men who have vanished, the men you hated, yet dreaded to lose, it is I who have taken them away from you. Do not attempt to find us. We do not choose to be found. Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not recognize such duty. Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don’t. Do not beg us to return. We are on strike, we, the men of the mind.

“We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the dogma that the pursuit of one’s happiness is evil. We are on strike against the doctrine that life is guilt.

“There is a difference between our strike and all those you’ve practiced for centuries: our strike consists, not of making demands, but of granting them. We are evil, according to your morality. We have chosen not to harm you any longer. We are useless, according to your economics. We have chosen not to exploit you any longer. We are dangerous and to be shackled, according to your politics. We have chosen not to endanger you, nor to wear the shackles any longer. We are only an illusion, according to your philosophy. We have chosen not to blind you any longer and have left you free to face reality—the reality you wanted, the world as you see it now, a world without mind.

“We have granted you everything you demanded of us, we who had always been the givers, but have only now understood it. We have no demands to present to you, no terms to bargain about, no compromise to reach. You have nothing to offer us. We do not need you.

“Are you now crying: No, this was not what you wanted? A mindless world of ruins was not your goal? You did not want us to leave you? You moral cannibals, I know that you’ve always known what it was that you wanted. But your game is up, because now we know it, too.

“Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom—while you went on crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?—by what standard?

“You wanted to know John Galt’s identity. I am the man who has asked that question.

“Yes, this is an age of moral crisis. Yes, you are bearing punishment for your evil. But it is not man who is now on trial and it is not human nature that will take the blame. It is your moral code that’s through, this time. Your moral code has reached its climax, the blind alley at the end of its course. And if you wish to go on living, what you now need is not to return to morality—you who have never known any—but to discover it.

“You have heard no concepts of morality but the mystical or the social. You have been taught that morality is a code of behavior imposed on you by whim, the whim of a supernatural power or the whim of society, to serve God’s purpose or your neighbor’s welfare, to please an authority beyond the grave or else next door—but not to serve your life or pleasure. Your pleasure, you have been taught, is to be found in immorality, your interests would best be served by evil, and any moral code must be designed not for you, but against you, not to further your life, but to drain it.

“For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to your neighbors—between those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of ghosts in heaven and those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for the sake of incompetents on earth. And no one came to say that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it.

“Both sides agreed that morality demands the surrender of your self-interest and of your mind, that the moral and the practical are opposites, that morality is not the province of reason, but the province of faith and force. Both sides agreed that no rational morality is possible, that there is no right or wrong in reason—that in reason there’s no reason to be moral.

“Whatever else they fought about, it was against man’s mind that all your moralists have stood united. It was man’s mind that all their schemes and systems were intended to despoil and destroy. Now choose to perish or to learn that the anti-mind is the anti-life.

“Man’s mind is his basic tool of survival. Life is given to him, survival is not. His body is given to him, its sustenance is not. His mind is given to him, its content is not. To remain alive, he must act, and before he can act he must know the nature and purpose of his action. He cannot obtain his food without a knowledge of food and of the way to obtain it. He cannot dig a ditch-or build a cyclotron—without a knowledge of his aim and of the means to achieve it. To remain alive, he must think.

“But to think is an act of choice. The key to what you so recklessly call ‘human nature,’ the open secret you live with, yet dread to name, is the fact that man is a being of volitional consciousness. Reason does not work automatically; thinking is not a mechanical process; the connections of logic are not made by instinct. The function of your stomach, lungs or heart is automatic; the function of your mind is not. In any hour and issue of your life, you are free to think or to evade that effort. But you are not free to escape from your nature, from the fact that reason is your means of survival—so that for you, who are a human being, the question ‘to be or not to be’ is the question ‘to’ think or not to think.’

“A being of volitional consciousness has no automatic course of behavior. He needs a code of values to guide his actions. ‘Value’ is that which one acts to gain and keep, ‘virtue’ is the action by which one gains and keeps it. ‘Value’ presupposes an answer to the question: of value to whom and for what? ‘Value’ presupposes a standard, a purpose and the necessity of action in the face of an alternative. Where there are no alternatives, no values are possible.

“There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence—and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not; it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible, it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and-self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it does; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept of ‘Value’ possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.

“A plant must feed itself in order to live; the sunlight, the water, the chemicals it needs are the values its nature has set it to pursue; its life is the standard of value directing its actions. But a plant has no choice of action; there are alternatives in the conditions it encounters, but there is no alternative in its function: it acts automatically to further its life, it cannot act for its own destruction.

“An animal is equipped for sustaining its life; its senses provide it with an automatic code of action, an automatic knowledge of what is good for it or evil. It has no power to extend its knowledge or to evade it. In conditions where its knowledge proves inadequate, it dies. But so long as it lives, it acts on its knowledge, with automatic safety and no power of choice, it is unable to ignore its own good, unable to decide to choose the evil and act as its own destroyer.

“Man has no automatic code of survival. His particular distinction from all other living species is the necessity to act in the face of alternatives by means of volitional choice. He has no automatic knowledge of what is good for him or evil, what values his life depends on, what course of action it requires. Are you prattling about an instinct of self-preservation? An instinct of self-preservation is precisely what man does not possess. An ‘instinct’ is an unerring and automatic form of knowledge. A desire is not an instinct. A desire to live does not give you the knowledge required for living. And even man’s desire to live is not automatic: your secret evil today is that that is the desire you do not hold. Your fear of death is not a love of life and will not give you the knowledge needed to keep it. Man must obtain his knowledge and choose his actions by a process of thinking, which nature will not force him t9 perform. Man has the power to act as his own destroyer—and that is the way he has acted through most of his history.

“A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the history of man has been a struggle to deny and to destroy his mind.

“Man has been called a rational being, but rationality is a matter of choice—and the alternative his nature offers him is: rational being or suicidal animal. Man has to be man—by choice; he has to hold his life as a value—by choice: he has to learn to sustain it—by choice; he has to discover the values it requires and practice his virtues—by choice.

“A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality.

“Whoever you are, you who are hearing me now, I am speaking to whatever living remnant is left uncorrupted within you, to the remnant of the human, to your mind, and I say: There is a morality of reason, a morality proper to man, and Man’s Life is its standard of value.

“All that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good; all that which destroys it is the evil.

“Man’s life, as required by his nature, is not the life of a mindless brute, of a looting thug or a mooching mystic, but the life of a thinking being—not life by means of force or fraud, but life by means of achievement—not survival at any price, since there’s only one price that pays for man’s survival: reason.

“Man’s life is the standard of morality, but your own life is its purpose. If existence on earth is your goal, you must choose your actions and values by the standard of that which is proper to man—for the purpose of preserving, fulfilling and enjoying the irreplaceable value which is your life.

“Since life requires a specific course of action, any other course will destroy it. A being who does not hold his own life as the motive and goal of his actions, is acting on the motive and standard of death. Such a being is a metaphysical monstrosity, struggling to oppose, negate and contradict the fact of his own existence, running blindly amuck on a trail of destruction, capable of nothing but pain.

“Happiness is the successful state of life, pain is an agent of death. Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values. A morality that dares to tell you to find happiness in the renunciation of your happiness—to value the failure of your values—is an insolent negation of morality. A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life, man—every man—is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose.

“But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims. Just as man is free to attempt to survive in any random manner, but will perish unless he lives as his nature requires, so he is free to seek his happiness in any mindless fraud, but the torture of frustration is all he will find, unless he seeks the happiness proper to man. The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live.

“Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no values, no code of behavior. They, who pose as scientists and claim that man is only an animal, do not grant him inclusion in the law of existence they have granted to the lowest of insects. They recognize that every living species has a way of survival demanded by its nature, they do not claim that a fish can live out of water or that a dog can live without its sense of smell—but man, they claim, the most complex of beings, man can survive in any way whatever, man has no identity, no nature, and there’s no practical reason why he cannot live with his means of survival destroyed, with his mind throttled and placed at the disposal of any orders they might care to issue.

“Sweep aside those hatred-eaten mystics, who pose as friends of humanity and preach that the highest virtue man can practice is to hold his own life as of no value. Do they tell you that the purpose of morality is to curb man’s instinct of self-preservation? It is for the purpose of self-preservation that man needs a code of morality. The only man who desires to be moral is the man who desires to live.

“No, you do not have to live; it is your basic act of choice; but if you choose to live,. you must live as a man—by the work and the judgment of your mind.

“No, you do not have to live as a man; it is an act of moral choice. But you cannot live as anything else—and the alternative is that state of living death which you now see within you and around you, the state of a thing unfit for existence, no longer human and less than animal, a thing that knows nothing but pain and drags itself through its span of years in the agony of unthinking self-destruction.

“No, you do not have to think; it is an act of moral choice. But someone had to think to keep you alive; if you choose to default, you default on existence and you pass the deficit to some moral man, expecting him to sacrifice his good for the sake of letting you survive by your evil.

“No, you do not have to be a man; but today those who are, are not there any longer. I have removed your means of survival—your victims.

“If you wish to know how I have done it and what I told them to make them quit, you are hearing it now. I told them, in essence, the statement I am making tonight. They were men who had lived by my code, but had not known how great a virtue it represented. I made them see it. I brought them, not a re-evaluation, but only an identification of their values.

“We, the men of the mind, are now on strike against you in the name of a single axiom, which is the root of our moral code, just as the root of yours is the wish to escape it: the axiom that existence exists.

“Existence exists—and the act of grasping that statement implies two corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives and that one exists possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists.

“If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms. A consciousness conscious of nothing but itself is a contradiction in terms: before it could identify itself as consciousness, it had to be conscious of something. If that which you claim to perceive does not exist, what you possess is not consciousness.

“Whatever the degree of your knowledge, these two—existence and consciousness—are axioms you cannot escape, these two are the irreducible primaries implied in any action you undertake, in any part of your knowledge and in its sum, from the first ray of light you perceive at the start of your life to the widest erudition you might acquire at its end. Whether you know the shape of a pebble or the structure of a solar system, the axioms remain the same: that it exists and that you know it.

“To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was—no matter what his errors—the greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it: Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.

“Whatever you choose to consider, be it an object, an attribute or an action, the law of identity remains the same. A leaf cannot be a stone at the same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze and burn at the same time. A is A. Or, if you wish it stated in simpler language: You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.

“Are you seeking to know what is wrong with the world? All the disasters that have wrecked your world, came from your leaders’ attempt to evade the fact that A is A. All the secret evil you dread to face within you and all the pain you have ever endured, came from your own attempt to evade the fact that A is A. The purpose of those who taught you to evade it, was to make you forget that Man is Man.

“Man cannot survive except by gaining knowledge, and reason is his only means to gain it. Reason is the faculty that perceives, identifies and integrates the material provided by his senses. The task of his senses is to give him the evidence of existence, but the task of identifying it belongs to his reason, his senses tell him only that something is, but what it is must be learned by his mind.

“All thinking is a process of identification and integration. Man perceives a blob of color; by integrating the evidence of his sight and his touch, he learns to identify it as a solid object; he learns to identify the object as a table; he learns that the table is made of wood; he learns that the wood consists of cells, that the cells consist of molecules, that the molecules consist of atoms. All through this process, the work of his mind consists of answers to a single question: What is it? His means to establish the truth of his answers is logic, and logic rests on the axiom that existence exists. Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A contradiction cannot exist. An atom is itself, and so is the universe; neither can contradict its own identity; nor can a part contradict the whole. No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge. To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one’s thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one’s mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality.

“Reality is that which exists; the unreal does not exist; the unreal is merely that negation of existence which is the content of a human consciousness when it attempts to abandon reason. Truth is the recognition of reality; reason, man’s only means of knowledge, is his only standard of truth.

“The most depraved sentence you can now utter is to ask: Whose reason? The answer is: Yours. No matter how vast your knowledge or how modest, it is your own mind that has to acquire it. It is only with your own knowledge that you can deal. It is only your own knowledge that you can claim to possess or ask others to consider. Your mind is your only judge of truth—and if others dissent from your verdict, reality is the court of final appeal. Nothing but a man’s mind can perform that complex, delicate, crucial process of identification which is thinking. Nothing can direct the process but his own judgment. Nothing can direct his judgment but his moral integrity.

“You who speak of a ‘moral instinct’ as if it were some separate endowment opposed to reason—man’s reason is his moral faculty. A process of reason is a process of constant choice in answer to the question: True or False?—Right or Wrong? Is a seed to be planted in soil in order to grow—right or wrong? Is a man’s wound to be disinfected in order to save his life—right or wrong? Does the nature of atmospheric electricity permit it to be converted into kinetic power—right or wrong? It is the answers to such questions that gave you everything you have—and the answers came from a man’s mind, a mind of intransigent devotion to that which is right.

“A rational process is a moral process. You may make an error at any step of it, with nothing to protect you but your own severity, or you may try to cheat, to fake the evidence and evade the effort of the quest—but if devotion to truth is the hallmark of morality, then there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.

this

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




mishaq posted:

pornographic actors do labor
i think they all are on contraception

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Stymie posted:

i don't think i'd want to kiss someone whose idea of kissing comes from pornography
i wonder how murderous of a fascist you find average nerd then in this hypothetical world where fiction and reality are apparently indistinguishable

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Bloody posted:

wait but average nerds are p. fash these days

much like the general population that elected donlad yee trump

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




BONGHITZ posted:

just use that weird triangle graph, it should work

vlc is bad

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




mpc hc or mpc be both do everything vlc does only better, like since forever

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




The_Franz posted:

except run on a non-garbage os
mplayer and its forks, please. mpv, for example

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




Instant Grat posted:

is there a way to make a mixed-dpi multi-monitor setup not poo poo??

i have a high-dpi (200% scaling) laptop that docks into two normal-dpi monitors at work, and boy oh boy there are a lot of programs that don't like that

visual studio and chrome do not like being on a monitor w/ a different dpi scaling than that of whatever monitor is designated the "main" one

windows 10 supports individual scaling settings for multimotor setups

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




pagancow posted:

also wtf i leave for a week and yall get all porn and lighting questions in the monitor thread? hahaha
what else did you expect leaving for 6.9 days

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




MALE SHOEGAZE posted:

confession time: I bought a 27inch 4k/UHD asus "gaming" monitor for programming with.

anything dark scene is impossible to see, even in a dark room. if the sun is out forget it, even with the blinds closed. no UI i've thrown at it scales properly and it's impossible to read tiny fonts. so all those pixels are totally wasted.

dumbest purchase i've ever made.

27" 4k is indeed dumb, unfortunately. you have to, on wandows, use the system scaling, and that won't work with some apps either, and will utilise the pixels about as much as setting a 1440p resolution will

not sure what's on with dark scene in dark room tho, that poo poo is figured out. just find least-bad "preset" and then gently caress it up further, maybe get a calibration config somewhere on the internet

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




MALE SHOEGAZE posted:

i think pagancow would say something about the gamer trash monitor having a bad panel / backlight / we. idk how that poo poo works. it was only $300 so i'm not super upset but still kicking myself for not doing at least a little bit of research.

??? $300 27" 4K? from asus?? what on earth did you even buy lol

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




the two asus gamertrash 27" 4Ks are sure gamertrash, but the panels are more than enough to display your monokai-themed ide in any light condition that isn't a directed projector beam. but neither of them is cheaper than $800

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013





that's not even republic of gamers. either way, a $300-400 tn 4k panel does sound suspicious, although it should be able to manager a dark ui in a dark room. daytime i wouldnt be surprised if there are problems, but i also havent used a tn panel exposed to direct light in a long rear end while

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




MALE SHOEGAZE posted:

return window already closed, i'm stuck with it for life
*in announcer voice* during the day, he is a regular yosposter, but at night - he becomes productive

:rip:

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




surebet posted:

can someone run me through the pro/cons of a superwide display? i'm looking at the u3417w in a mildly color sensitive context and it looks needs suiting

if you don't need to do fullscreen something then it's fine, otherwise many things don't play well with the resolution. vertical space might also feel somewhat limited, and you'll need to actually spend on vesa mount that can hold it.

but that's practical stuff, so wait for pagancow to tell about panels and colours

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




MeruFM posted:

call something 4k
nothing over 4k

marketing just ran out of something-hd and 1234p is getting old after the age of 1080p domination

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

cinci zoo sniper
Mar 15, 2013




akadajet posted:

my dell p2715q owns. sorry shags, you're wrong again.

is that a 27"? kinda not sold on sub-35" 4ks

  • Locked thread