So their consistent position is consistently internally inconsistent.

Wonderful.

I have had a lot of opportunities to post this lately, so here we go again:

New York City cops… they ain’t too smart.

Please tell me this also comes with a new map set in Ohio.

Here’s the quote, for people allergic to reading the update in the article.

Update: Nvidia sent us a statement: “We are aware of a reported performance issue related to Game Filters and are actively looking into it. You can turn off Game Filters from the NVIDIA App Settings > Features > Overlay > Game Filters and Photo Mode, and then relaunch your game.”

We have tested this and confirmed that disabling the Game Filters and Photo Mode does indeed work. The problem appears to stem from the filters causing a performance loss, even when they’re not being actively used. (With GeForce Experience, if you didn’t have any game filters enabled, it didn’t affect performance.) So, if you’re only after the video capture features or game optimizations offered by the Nvidia App, you can get ‘normal’ performance by disabling the filters and photo modes.

So, TomsHW (is at least claiming that they) did indeed test this, and found that its the filters and photo mode causing the performance hit.

Still a pretty stupid problem to have, considering the old filters did not cause this problem, but at least there’s a workaround.

… I’m curious if this new settings app even exists, or has been tested on linux.

So I have no actual source on any kind of coinshot…

But why not use half pennies?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half_cent_(United_States_coin)

Yes, the US used to have half pennies.

Imagine buying an apple for $0.03½

Anyway, they stopped being minted in 1857, but that’s still within the early timeframe of ‘The West’, and I’d bet they were still used in circulation for another decade or two.

That’d be cheaper than using nickels, haha.

The even shorter, more direct version is:

‘Local community’ actually means ‘Official representatives of the local community.’

EDIT: And ‘great relationship’ means ‘we do business with whatever entity regularly, and that business we do is more advantageous to us than it is to them’.

… Also… I’m in America so… maybe this is somehow different in various Euro countries, but I seriously doubt it…

There’s no way Amazon invests in local roads.

I’m from Seattle.

Our roads are absolute ass, I’m talking worse than the average road in a small town in South Dakota or Montana.

They certainly don’t directly fund any roadwork around Seattle, despite having many logistics hubs in and near the city.

They’re more likely to strong arm a city, even literally sue them, into upgrading their roads than they are to… like directly contribute some share of their revenue or profit directly into the city’s road maintenance or construction budget.

0 chance Amazon directly funds building of any roads beyond the roads on their property.

Provide computers to schools? Sure, I believe that.

But I am highly doubtful that Amazon directly contributes to building local roads.

Only way I can even see that kind of making sense in a roundabout way is if the city has some kind of specific tax on heavier vehicles or vehicles used in delivery/logistics…

In which case … this would apply to any delivery/logistics vehicle of any kind that either transits through or is based out of the city.

By that logic anyone that pays a sales tax or property tax in the city pays for new roads, likely significantly more, as a group.

“Amazon wont pay a living wage due to its great relationship with the local community”.

So, taken by a normal person, not aquainted with corpo speak… that is some astounding anti-logic.

But if you know a bit of corpo, what that actually means is something like:

We have the local city government by the balls, greatly overexagerated the economic benefit our warehouse would bring to the city, got them to subsidize our construction costs, relax zoning laws or fees, change tax laws or give us a special carve out so that we pay less than if anyone else tried to build a warehouse here…

… and now if the city gov goes for policies/laws we don’t like, we’ll just shut down this location, I’ll go work the same job somewhere else, everyone else is unemployed, and then we’ll tell the media that’s because of the city government, and they’ll likely lose their elected positions.

Oh yeah, I was trying to stick to retailed products, but yes, homebrew shotgun rounds have been around for basically as long as shotguns.

Another kind of homebrew shot is coin shot:

https://www.alloutdoor.com/2020/06/17/shooting-pennies-shotgun/

I’ve heard anecdotally that people have been doing that for quite a while.

I did not know an actual anti drone, net round existed!

Not especially useful against drones, nor open warfare, there are also less than lethal rubber rounds…

… and a self contained taser round:

https://www.forgottenweapons.com/taser-x12-xrep-a-taser-in-a-shotgun-shell/

I don’t know if the xrep is still actually manufactured though.

Oh right! Dragon’s breath! Illegal in half the country!

https://www.firequest.com/G12-113.html

I heard that guy’s a real crack shot.

Hah, I suppose that could work!

Reminds me of ratshot .22 rounds.

Maybe somebody will start properly manufacturing basically ratshot 5.56 rounds.

Other people have already pointed out that your conception of shotgun spread is essentially based in video games, where the spread is (in all but basically milsim games) greatly exaggerated.

You’ve countered that drones can fly higher than an actual shotgun range.

Yep. They can.

… Did you read the article I posted?

Shotguns are being used fairly commonly by both sides.

It doesn’t matter what you or I think about how practical or useful they are…

The people fighting the war think they are practical and useful.

…

Nonetheless, here’s my attempt to explain the popularity of shotguns in Ukraine as anti drone weapons:

This is not a solution geared toward being able to shoot down any drone, of any size or capability, at any range, at any altitude.

Obviously a shotgun is not going to be able to shootdown a greyhawk or reaper style drone.

Most of the small FPV drones that attack infantry or ground vehicles do so by basically either dropping a bomb or grenade or mortar round from maybe 25 to 150 feet in the air…

Or just being rigged with some kind of an explosive to explode on contact or via a remote trigger.

(Also, these cheap FPV drones do not really handle altitudes above roughly 150 ft that well (though this will vary by exact model). Unless its a dead calm day, gusts of wind easily blow them around, draining its limited batteries as it tries to keep its position steady, severly shortening the drone’s range.)

These kinds of drones are extremely cheap, plentiful, and effective against infantry and many ground vehicles…

When it comes to these kinds of drones, shotguns are also extremely cheap and plentiful, and practical self defense weapons.

Shotguns are more useful against these kinds of FPV drones than an average assault rifle, due to the spread of shot.

They are way, way more cost effective than using a tunguska or gephard or some kind of MANPADS platform designed to shoot down jet aircraft.

Shotguns are also just more numerous, and don’t require specialized training/equipment like a dedicated AA platform or EM jamming and all the equipment that entails.

You can just give a few out to every squad or vehicle crew, and thats way, waaay better than just hoping you’re operating near enough to an expensive friendly AA platform that exists in far more limited numbers, or being SOL if you’re not.

Further, a shotgun is also just useful as a general combat weapon.

Sure, buckshot has limited range, but sometimes fights occur within tight conditions… namely trenches or an urban environment.

Also slug rounds exist and can give you more range than buck or birdshot.

Also you can use door breacher rounds, or slugs in a pinch, to blow apart door hinges and locks.

There are some, handheld firearms that are used as a last-ditch / cheap anti drone solution in Ukraine, by both sides.

Drum roll…

https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2024/analysis-shotguns-emerge-as-a-frontline-defense-against-drones-in-evolving-military-and-security-tactics

Its shotguns.

Because they have a spread of multiple shot pellets instead of a single bullet.

Fucking obviously duh, they’ve been used to hunt small, evasive birds routinely, everywhere, for like 150+ years.

Hunting a nimble flying object with a sniper rifle is a laughably absurd idea.

This actual post from this woman is so stupid I would have thought it was from a 12 year old whose only experience with guns is from CoD… but nope, its a 50ish(?) year old woman.

Guess she’s never hunted birds, and thinks its just the same as hunting deer or hogs or something???

Yep. Thats actually even less bone thickness in the way than the roof of your mouth, and is more likely to destroy more of your brain, with the bullet trajectory going through most of it.

Short version:

Basically, the roof of your mouth presents skull bones which are much thinner than many other parts of your skull.

Longer Version:

If you hold the gun with the grip facing downward, as others have said, I guess the hope is you get a shot straight through your medulla oblingata.

If you obliterate that, bam, instant brain death basically.

But if your angle is off, you may only sever your spinal cord, now you get to be mostly conscious, in extreme pain, as you collapse and asphyxiate.

Or you may just blow part of your jaw off. That might not even kill you.

If, on the other hand, you go grip facing up/out, the ole’ Bud Dwyer…

You have a much greater liklihood of obliterating a whole lot of your brain’s frontal lobe, the executive decision part.

probably? You’d lose consciousness completely within seconds, 10(s?) of seconds at most, your brain activity would grind to a complete halt as the massive bleeding would just stop the remainder of your brain from working.

But also: Phinneas Gage.

Sometimes people can survive insane bullshit like this.

Personally, I once met a guy that claimed he’d been shot with a .22 in the forehead, that that was the source of his scar there, and that his forehead skull was actually just thick enough that it stopped the .22 without the fracture creating any spall of loose bone fragments into his brain.

Yeah, this means nothing.

Did people already forget that Trump just basically stole a small library worth of classified documents after his first term, lied about giving them all back, got raided by the FBI?

That Trump was just having meeting with fucking whoever and showing off various classified documents?

Trump can and will give Elon anything he feels like giving him, he has less than 0 care for any concept of security classes.

Oh right, did people forget that’s all legal now too?

Trump’s defense: Uh giving Elon the nuclear launch codes had to do with my official duties as President.

Bombed out, radiation soaked ruins of fallout ghoul supreme court: Yep, checks out.

… The only thing constraining Trump’s ability to just do shit like that in his first term was that most of his staff and other government officers/liasons did eventually turn out to have limits, they were not all pure sycophants.

Now THEY ARE.

Neither of the two articles are well sourced.

But you acted like yours was credible, until I presented another one, whereupon you admitted they are both equally valid.

That’s assuming that the random article you found is correct, the veracity of which I can’t verify any more than the interesting engineering article…

That is to say, you cannot verify either of these articles at all, ie, they are both of dubious legitimacy.

You accused someone of being racist based of an article you admit you cannot verify, posted a bunch of related research papers that indicate, sure, they’re trying to develop the thing your article claimed they did… but doesn’t indicate that they actually developed it.

…

I can link you a patent for a triangular shaped aircraft, listed as filed by a US Navy Scientist that claims to outline how to create an electromagnetic, gravity negating field around the craft.

That would not be evidence that the US Navy officially announced that they basically built a UFO, that it works, and there’s a video of it, all officially documented and released.

But to you, it would be, if China had done all those things.

…

I am not saying China certainly has or has not developed a hypersonic passenger liner.

I am saying your source for this claim is dubious.

I am saying that you believe(d?) it credulously, without any skepticism, got very hostile with people who doubted its claim less tactfully than I did, and now you admit you got hostile based on a claim that you now admit is dubious, and shifted the burden of proof from the article making the claim to the skeptic questioning it.

Again, this is the logic of a fanatic.

If we just pick which dubiously sourced claims we believe based on vibes, truth stops existing.

So, you just assumed a unsourced, unverified story is true because you have a bias in favor of China, and put the burden of proof onto the other person to disprove it, and are completely fine with calling the other person a ‘sad racist’, despite now admitting that the veracity of the claim they are skeptical of is in fact not well established.

This is the argument/personality style of a fanatic, a religious fundamentalist, a QAnon adherent, an Elon Musk simp.

This is how we got ‘the Trump assasination attempt was staged!’

Please stop posting trash tier misinformation as ‘technology news’, please stop jumping to ‘everyone who disagrees with me is rascist’, this level of unjustified vitriol only makes you appear manic.

So… then… you agree that this entire Interesting Engineering article you posted is wrong?

Are you going to apologize to Sarah Brown for calling her a ‘sad racist’ when she expressed doubt as to the veracity of the dubious article you posted?

Ok so 24+ hours later and I now see a few different websites I’ve never heard of before that basically have the same article as this:

https://scienceinfo.net/chinese-hypersonic-aircraft-prototype-reaches-mach-6-speed.html

Still no actual link to the apparently original source somewhere on some social media site.

Now whats being said is that this was a flight test that actually occured 3 years ago, and was classified until now.

And they do provide an image, and credit it to CAS (without an actual link, I still can’t find this on CAS’ english site, but again maybe they are still writing a proper English post?)

This is a test article, that doesn’t appear to have any intakes for scramjet. I think I can make out two small rocket bells inside the thing, but the image quality is very low.

It’s just a test article, launched by a rocket, that Inwould guesstimate to have a wingspan of about… 4 meters, ish?

This new article also mentions that Cui, the team lead, did not mention anything about the current status of the hypersonic passenger jet which this was a test article for.

So… this test article got up to mach 6.5, 3 years ago.

Absolutely nothing about whether or not a successful test flight of a passenger jet sized craft achieved hypersonic speeds with an air breathing turbo ramjet / scram jet or something like that.

Completely different than the originally report.

… This is why I wanted an actual source.

If this very poorly sourced article from this random, clickbait style website is more accurate than the OP article (another poorly sourced article from another clickbait style website) is more accurate, that would mean SCMP, and everyone in this thread saying China has built an air breathing hypersonic jet liner is wrong, and everyone saying that this is basically comparable to the X15 is correct.

(Differences being the X15 was carried up to 45 thousand feet by a B52 instead of a rocket, and the X15 was manned, and this test article is presumably unmanned.)