>Intel Meltdown
Alarmists were screaming about a 5-30% performance hit from the security patch addressing meltdown and surprise surprise, It's fucking nothing.
This is your country on soy. Aggressive big-titty women and submissive check-out-of-society men.
>it only affects servers
Which everyone knew, but were desperate to meme otherwise.
>actual testing finding no impact of the security patch is automatically lying and/or paid off
>anecdotes aligning with confirmation bias are automatically true
The left's new favorite buzzword is "fetish": >>>/pol/11060168 It's often far too obvious that they all operate like a colluding cliquish hive mind parroting the same shit and not just those in the press but nobodies on social media consume those shitty articles and then spout the same narratives with the same rhetoric and the same brainless meaningless empty platitudes. It wouldn't be so annoying if they could move one single molecule outside of that bubble and question their dogma.
His arms look so tiny in this image. Like a T-Rex.
The batteries in Apple products actually are shitty though. After enough usage the battery wears down and the product has random shut offs which is what the patch was supposedly meant to address by cutting performance thus cutting stress on Apple's garbage batteries.
I dunno if that's true, but would a company admit that their batteries are shit?
>If you think that losing a bunch of performance is negated by the fact that some things run fine
Never said that. My gripe was poster here >>14108379
>it only affects servers
>Which everyone knew, but were desperate to meme otherwise.
Most consumers are not affected, but there is a mentality of "look it's the next big disaster" and everyone hypes it up to the point of lying about it. Even if I show them benchmarks of a bunch of games and production software not being affects they're like "Naw, that's paid, that's fake." They want their big disaster no matter what and they'll lie to get it.
It's like this.
>> 14108588
>> 14108590
>> 14108592
>> 14108594
I guess /v/ has to ban ''(that >>14108599
thing you don't like)'' now.
Or your posts will be deleted and no one will give a fuck when you're gone.
>they're too small and charged too quickly, so they get deep cycled often and that makes them wear out really fast
How is that the best money can buy if it wears out and causes the device to have shut offs? Sounds like a bad design. Manufacturers have to operate within certain tolerances and make compromises or you wind up with an exploding Galaxy Note 7.
If the kekistani autists claimed to love blacks would SJWs endorse segregation? Some already do.