If it's over 5 years then it's 200 million/year which makes it worse.

He talks about that if you read the article

It's not a privacy based phone. It's a phone they're hoping to sell to mass market consumers that so happens to be about to run a privacy based OS.

You are not the target audience and will continue to not be unless people like you become the dominant consumer of such a device. The problem is the people who enjoy this community, by and large, own a pixel 3 and won't purchase anything unless it's got every feature they want.

Even more unfortunately is those features only end up on cheap phones because manufacturers correlated them with poor people. Need a headphone jack? Must be too poor to afford Bluetooth headphones. Need an sd card slot? Must be too poor to afford a cloud subscription or bigger phone. Need a removable battery or to repair your device? You obviously can't afford to buy a new phone every 2 years.

The bottom line is you are all too sensible to spend the money and influence design decisions so this is what you get.

How'd you get to that number?

Is your instance a publicly usable instance or are you just showing the domain? I don't have any interest in running my own but wouldn't mind having access to one

Just to be clear, I'm not arguing against your point. I'm largely agreeing with you. People do genuinely care more about enjoying their hobby than whatever principals they should be upholding to ensure it's future. For most people the politics involved isn't a consideration for something that's usually an escape from reality. My goal was to explain why the status quo is the way it is and most of it does come down to whatever makes the games the prettiest. I can't fault people for that. Everything in life shouldn't require research and an ethics check. These kinds of issues are why we have elected officials and governing bodies and it's their failures you should be upset at.

Personally I think they're recent losses are probably a result of the fact that Nvidia is so dominant and Intel entered the market. It's hard to compete against someone who's got ~70% market share while a new guy shows up and manages to only steal from your slice. The advantage Nvidia has of being the world's most valuable company has got to be near insurmountable for AMD at this point. Even if AMD had an outright better product there's a, not so small amount of people, who would probably still buy Nvidia just to be on the winning team.

Not having problems is the bare minimum. But my point is that the reason we have such a skewed market is because despite AMD making good cards, Nvidia makes better cards. They're more feature packed and more performant. The only thing they're not is cheaper than AMD. Cheaper gets you some customers but as long as the goal is to eventually "upgrade" to an Nvidia card they'll never be the market leader. People just want to play games and whatever is able to play games the best is what they'll want. Politics be damned. AMD has had 20+ years to fight Nvidia and their own reputation but failed at nearly every turn. That's why we're here.

Blaming consumers for AI doesn't truly track to me when these companies feed into each other's profits like some kind of snake of Ouroborus. Gamers never asked for ai. Games just became another place where ai is (unfortunately).

I honestly blame AMD for consistently missing every opportunity to actually be competitive in the space. So much so that they've spawned a phrase. "AMD never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity".

It's not hard for Nvidia to capture the market when AMD doesn't compete at all for anything other than the low end market except in a blue moon. Their name is synonymous with mid range at best cards. If you want high end you literally only have one choice and I say that as someone who owns a 7900 XTX. Even that card, which was designed to be competitive with the 4080, comes with a whole lot of compromises that make the card only competitive in pure raster performance, Linux compatibility, and literally nothing else.

You mentioned some of the technologies that Nvidia cards have. You're right that not everyone needs every feature but being on the other end of that spectrum also sucks. Not having compatible hardware encoders means you take a performance hit every time you screen share your game in discord. Not having CUDA means your card is basically ONLY good for video games (yes I know rocm exists but trying to use it is a frustrating experience compared to CUDA). Having Ray tracing performance that's so far behind the competition means you'll always be making a sacrifice in either quality or performance. Choosing AMD means consistently watching Nvidia create new technologies and waiting for AMD to reinvent them a generation later to lackluster support.

This is such a lukewarm thought. They're a grocery store. Of course they sell unhealthy options. They're being called out as noteworthy here because they go above and beyond other grocery stores and checking to make sure that the food is actually healthy and not going to give you diseases. Take your "both sides" style argument somewhere else.

To own a digital asset that only had one original. Something that could have an identifiable, singular owner despite being a digital asset. Problem is no one gives a shit if you're the original, provable "owner" of a jpg someone else made. Which makes these worthless to all but idiots who fell for it.

At least Dad got to touch something for his money. NFTs don't even deliver on their sole mission statement