Right, updated. Can't have too much religious divergence.
What's your view of Next-Gen Rumor Religions? +Poll! *excommunicado thread*
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- stupid thread
https://www.resetera.com/threads/ne...ark-tower-see-staff-post.159131/post-27450333
anex: 64CU at 12TF?
Klee: bingo
And another post where he said he literally have both spec sheets.
Sorry, where's the 10% ref? Everything I quoted above implies a slight edge?
Also, he could have just been confirming that the math was right
I can't find it again, doesn't matter, he said within 10% but maybe it was the disciples. A "slight edge" would mean what percentage in classical hebrew?
I know, I know...I'm just trying to be clear on what's said so when the fan is in position and it starts flying I can fully understand how justified it is!
Since we are on a religious _ _ _ _talk thread and nothing too serious...
edits: mine
Philosophy of Religion
The Burden of Proof
BURDEN OF PROOF
Why is it that few people seem to have problems with the burden of proof when it comes to the innocence or guilt of a murder suspect, but then cannot apply the same exact logic to more esoteric issues, such as the existence of ghosts, gods, and the 13-15TF PS5 alike?---Massimo Pigliucci, 2010
Most people as young children appear to have a “commonsense” understanding of the burden of proof. When young people hear a claim being made and it is, in their minds and experience, an extraordinary claim being made, quite often the response is one of asking for something to support the claim. The most common retorts are along the line of “Prove it”, “What makes you say that”, “Sow me” or something like “Oh, yeah?”. Somewhere along the way too many humans lose that sense and too often suspend their inclination to accept the principles underlying the “Burden of Proof”. Going a bit further it is to be noted that not all people care to be considered as being rational or reasonable or willing to use their intellect as best as possible but for any person who cares at all about being rational and using reason then operating with the "Burden of Proof" rule of reason:
You cannot claim that "miracles exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "souls exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "angels exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "deities exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "13-15 TF PS5s exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
The Burden of Proof as presented below applies to claims that are cognitive and empirical. The principle applies to claims about what exists or does not exist.
The instances of circumstances that provide nuanced exceptions (see below) to the rule are so few and misleading to let it appear they nullify the rule that it is far better to just state that the burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist. It is a fallacy to claim that X exists unless you prove that there is no X. What is improper is for a person to claim that "X exists" and when asked to prove it, then the person who made the claim uses as a defense of "X exists" the next claim that no one has proven that X does not exist.
If a person claims that a 9.2 TF PS5 exists and is real then the burden is on that person (AbsoluteBeginner) to supply some support for that claim, some evidence or proof that others can and should examine before accepting it (check). It is incorrect to think that X exists and is real until someone can prove that there is no X. It is also wrong to think that just because you can not prove that X exists that does not mean that X does not exist and therefore X does exist.
Why is it that the burden is on the person (Klee and others) who makes the claim that there is a 12+ TF PS5? Well think whether or not it is a better way to proceed through life to accept anything and everything that people claim to be so. Experience should instruct every thinking human that there is a high probability that not everything that people claim to be true is actually true. Some claims might be made with the claimant aware that the claim is not true and some claims might be made with the claimant thinking that they are true but being mistaken. As it is for most humans not a very good idea to proceed through life based on beliefs that are false and thinking beliefs and claims to be true when they are not, most humans and those who would use reason to guide them will want some evidence and reasoning to support a claim being asserted to be true. So the burden is on those who make claims to offer reason and evidence in support of those claims.
*** http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialscien...ER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm
edits: mine
Philosophy of Religion
The Burden of Proof
BURDEN OF PROOF
Most people as young children appear to have a “commonsense” understanding of the burden of proof. When young people hear a claim being made and it is, in their minds and experience, an extraordinary claim being made, quite often the response is one of asking for something to support the claim. The most common retorts are along the line of “Prove it”, “What makes you say that”, “Sow me” or something like “Oh, yeah?”. Somewhere along the way too many humans lose that sense and too often suspend their inclination to accept the principles underlying the “Burden of Proof”. Going a bit further it is to be noted that not all people care to be considered as being rational or reasonable or willing to use their intellect as best as possible but for any person who cares at all about being rational and using reason then operating with the "Burden of Proof" rule of reason:
You cannot claim that "miracles exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "souls exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "angels exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "deities exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "13-15 TF PS5s exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
The Burden of Proof as presented below applies to claims that are cognitive and empirical. The principle applies to claims about what exists or does not exist.
The instances of circumstances that provide nuanced exceptions (see below) to the rule are so few and misleading to let it appear they nullify the rule that it is far better to just state that the burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist. It is a fallacy to claim that X exists unless you prove that there is no X. What is improper is for a person to claim that "X exists" and when asked to prove it, then the person who made the claim uses as a defense of "X exists" the next claim that no one has proven that X does not exist.
If a person claims that a 9.2 TF PS5 exists and is real then the burden is on that person (AbsoluteBeginner) to supply some support for that claim, some evidence or proof that others can and should examine before accepting it (check). It is incorrect to think that X exists and is real until someone can prove that there is no X. It is also wrong to think that just because you can not prove that X exists that does not mean that X does not exist and therefore X does exist.
Why is it that the burden is on the person (Klee and others) who makes the claim that there is a 12+ TF PS5? Well think whether or not it is a better way to proceed through life to accept anything and everything that people claim to be so. Experience should instruct every thinking human that there is a high probability that not everything that people claim to be true is actually true. Some claims might be made with the claimant aware that the claim is not true and some claims might be made with the claimant thinking that they are true but being mistaken. As it is for most humans not a very good idea to proceed through life based on beliefs that are false and thinking beliefs and claims to be true when they are not, most humans and those who would use reason to guide them will want some evidence and reasoning to support a claim being asserted to be true. So the burden is on those who make claims to offer reason and evidence in support of those claims.
*** http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialscien...ER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm
And how would nvidia know that? And just to clear it up. The slide in that presentation was pointing out that a >$2000 laptop with an nvidia 2080 max q was more powerful than a next gen console.
He was confirming JUST the 12tf.Sorry, where's the 10% ref? Everything I quoted above implies a slight edge?
Also, he could have just been confirming that the math was right
AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
No, he confirmed CU count. Confirming JUST TF number days after he already "confirmed" it makes 0 sense.
Sounds like a guy who confidently knows the specs..
I mean just reading some of his post history he gives very little in the way of numbers. After a few posts he typically says "Sorry gotta go guys" before anyone can really ask him anything of real substance. And after the Github leaks requested to be banned.
I mean....
How quickly doth everyone forget the tragedy of SweetVar26, the prophet of previous eon.
He said he will come back just before PS5 reveal. He was just not happy by people insulting him in mp or some people using other sites or twitter to talk about him. The biggest difference I saw part of the crap he received.
All the insiders agree it's equal or less than the PS5.
That's just prediction and guesswork. There are no Holy people to follow for different beliefs.
These are the 3 follow ups to the "bingo" comment.
poster1
poster2
To which Klee replied
At 12 Tflops RDNA the Xbox Series X is not below 2080 at all.*
We will have to see about that ;P
One can also wonder, how does a 'Klee' know it? Or any other Troll?
AbsoluteBeginner
Regular
And that happened day after he "bingo'd" 64CUs post.
Replies got rampant and everyone assumed 64CUs, but shortly after,there were some suspicious voices saying "wtf would they go for so much CUs and such low clocks for Navi".
Because, again, it makes 0 sense to "confirm" such post after he repeatedly said 12TF after MS AND after WC. So I think he realized it was mistake after he saw some repplies.
I'm going to point and laugh in the general direction of everybody if xbsx ends up 10 and ps5 ends up 7.5
I am the god of pessimism.
I raise my glass to drink in agreement.