Random
|
(03-22-2016, 09:48 PM)admin89 Wrote: You will see more of this once Trump becomes US president Let's hope he won't. Seriously. I've seen a lot of ridiculous politicians but this guy beats them all
[color=#ff0000][color=#006600]i5 3570K @ 4.5GHz/GTX 660 Ti/RAM 4GB/Win7 x64[/color][/color]
03-23-2016, 05:32 AM
(03-22-2016, 06:57 PM)Anti-Ultimate Wrote: Is primusrun not working fine for you? Did you try "vblank_mode=0 primusrun" as command? I gave up on primus and switched to nvidia-prime. Everything is running through the dedicated card and the general graphical performance is way better. The only issue left is screen tearing that randomly occurs everywhere, currently there's no way of forcing a specific refresh rate when running directly on the dedicated card, as far as I searched. I thought the recent NVIDIA update would improve something on this aspect but I tested it and it remains the same as before =/
Avell A70 MOB: Core i7-11800H, GeForce RTX 3060, 32 GB DDR4-3200, Windows 11 (Insider Preview)
ASRock Z97M OC Formula: Pentium G3258, GeForce GT 440, 16 GB DDR3-1600, Windows 10 (22H2) 03-23-2016, 06:02 AM
admin89 Wrote:You will see more of this IF Trump becomes US president Fixed that for you.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 03-23-2016, 06:03 AM
(03-23-2016, 06:02 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: Fixed that for you. tbh, i dont know the exact numbers here but towards the world his popularity and stupidity is scaring us and it looks like he will win. specially his popularity. and everyone keeps saying "oh oh its a joke, he wont win". however, joke has lasted long enough and if this keeps up... however, again , i dont know the exact numbers of the pre election soooo 03-23-2016, 07:28 AM
(03-23-2016, 03:32 AM)DacoTaco Wrote: which afaik the us military is not involved in ? or am i wrong here ? The US is definitely bombing Syria. I'm not sure about Iraq. I know that Britain is bombing both, having been asked for help by Iraq and being forbidden by Assad from bombing Syria. The missiles the UK is using are fancy ones which can supposedly kill an insurgent who's using a civilian as a human shield without harming the civilian, whereas the US is using much less precise ones which were designed for anti-tank and anti-building applications.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X RAM: 48GB GPU: Radeon 7800 XT 03-23-2016, 02:44 PM
Anti-Ultimate Wrote:Not like that won't happen. Possible but statistically improbable. His victories only show how poorly designed the primaries are. His national polls for the general election are still poor. He needs to win over the moderates/independents to be able to win the general which he cannot do at this point. AnyOldName3 Wrote:The missiles the UK is using are fancy ones which can supposedly kill an insurgent who's using a civilian as a human shield without harming the civilian, whereas the US is using much less precise ones which were designed for anti-tank and anti-building applications. Source please. My skepticism is tingling.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony NaturalViolence Wrote:Possible but statistically improbable. His victories only show how poorly designed the primaries are. His national polls for the general election are still poor. He needs to win over the moderates/independents to be able to win the general which he cannot do at this point. The thing about national polls, even on election day, is that they're not accurate once you throw in our crappy Electoral College system. It'd be different if more states were competitive (i.e. swing states or "purple states"). Although, given the dislike for Trump, and the possibility of some Republicans launching a third-party candidate (which would kill Trump and more or less give Hillary the presidency) I can honestly see traditionally red states turn blue. I can't wait for this to be over though. I swear, political junk is all CNN talks about. That's all the Chicago Tribune writes about. And they do it every 4 years for 1.5+ years. The presidential elections, the debates, the 24/7 media, it's all poop, and it needs to go away. I mean, what kind of political system expends 25% of its energy just running presidential elections? I mean, not even Kafka thought of stuff like this... 03-24-2016, 01:06 AM
(03-23-2016, 02:44 PM)NaturalViolence Wrote: Possible but statistically improbable. His victories only show how poorly designed the primaries are. His national polls for the general election are still poor. He needs to win over the moderates/independents to be able to win the general which he cannot do at this point. The word supposedly is important. I can't find a source any more (it would have been easier were it not months since I read it) but I know it wasn't just some random reddit comment, as it does sound pretty implausible, and I'd have wanted to check it.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X RAM: 48GB GPU: Radeon 7800 XT |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 63 Guest(s)