• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Anyone just given up on looking for a new GPU?

OspreyO said:
Is this not how its always worked though. What's really different.
Click to expand...
No, not really. Having read a little about it (no expert by any means) the sole focus on shareholders was a thing that really started in the 80s. Prior to that, the customer was king.

Now the customer and the product are incidental to pleasing the shareholders. CEOs today specialise in stripping companies to the bone ("streamlining"), screwing both their staff and their customers, in order to maximise short-term shareholder profits.

As the other chap said, it's totally unsustainable. It's also terrible for your customer and your workforce and the environment, because they literally don't matter. Only shareholders matter directly, and other things only matter in that they are good or bad for the shareholders.
 
FoxEye said:
No, not really. Having read a little about it (no expert by any means) the sole focus on shareholders was a thing that really started in the 80s. Prior to that, the customer was king.

Now the customer and the product are incidental to pleasing the shareholders. CEOs today specialise in stripping companies to the bone ("streamlining"), screwing both their staff and their customers, in order to maximise short-term shareholder profits.

As the other chap said, it's totally unsustainable. It's also terrible for your customer and your workforce and the environment, because they literally don't matter. Only shareholders matter directly, and other things only matter in that they are good or bad for the shareholders.
Click to expand...

I agree with this entirely, apart from one point, i'm sure it is totally unsustainable, as it's been going on 40 years already and things only get worse as time progresses. Govt's work hand on hand with big business and therefore shareholders, entirely in opposition to the interests of ordinary people.
 
Th0nt said:
Yeah I agree. Was wondering if its an American thing which ends up being based on greed and dog eat dog mentality?
Click to expand...

Well, modern Capitalism began in the US and was exported around the World, after the war when tthe US became a superpower, it's always really been based on greed and the dog eat dog mentality, though it was always sold to the peasants differently. It's based on several great myths.

1. That competition would result in greater choice, and services - the direct opposite as happened, as it was bound to, because if you're company A and you're not a ruthless as company B, then company B will eat company A, as has happened. So less choice (see the UK utility market recently where nearly every small provider has gone into admin leaving the big providers as pnce again a cartel)

2. Trickle down economics, that comes from Reagan in the 1980s, and was spouted over here, where if we allow the rich to get richer, they spend wealth, and it trickles down the socio-economic ladder - yeah right, the rich hoard wealth and use it gain more power and wealth, which was always going to happen.

3. Privatisation - need I say more? national industries, and services, were said to be "inefficient" - and privatising them would create better services and choice for consumers, when obviously you just have to refer back to point 1 to see how flawed that was. Utilities and public services like transport have never been worse.

Basically, the system works as it was always intented or was bound to do, given how it works, businsses are involved in a race to the bottom for the consumer, while all the so-called "efficiences" are actually cost savings borne by the workforce and the consumer, while the cost savings to a business are all passed onto shareholders, and execs. On top of the gutting of regulation has led to businsees so large like Amazon etc, they're basically the de facto govt's who operate as they please without paying any tax, helped along by elected govt's who do their bidding.

On top of that of course, when privatised services like rail fail financially, they're bailed out by the tax payer, ditto banks of course, as they're "too big to fail" now they have been allowed to grow too large by eradicting competition, whilst making "efficiency" savings which only they benefit from. And of course what we'll see with envorinmental concerns is that businesses bottom lines won't suffer, as the costs will be borne by the consumer/tax payer, while they virtue signal about how green they are. Obviously Hollywood is already lecturing and virtue signalling about the environment while jetting round the World wily-nily - a real life Hunger Games.

I'd also expect another knock on effect of environmentalism though this may come later as resources dwindle, is a lowering of production of consumer items, while the price increases, therefore not impacting company profits, ordinary people will just be priced out, like they are already in the housing market. Fortced scarcity is a tactic I'm suprised they haven't picked up on much sooner, why mass produce everything, when it's just cheaper and more profitable to make less and it more profitably.

Let's say the idea that the kind of Capitalism we see today IS unsustainable, who do you think will carry the costs of it collapses in some way, me and you or the big business?
 
Darujhistan said:
Well, modern Capitalism began in the US and was exported around the World, after the war when tthe US became a superpower, it's always really been based on greed and the dog eat dog mentality, though it was always sold to the peasants differently. It's based on several great myths.

1. That competition would result in greater choice, and services - the direct opposite as happened, as it was bound to, because if you're company A and you're not a ruthless as company B, then company B will eat company A, as has happened. So less choice (see the UK utility market recently where nearly every small provider has gone into admin leaving the big providers as pnce again a cartel)

2. Trickle down economics, that comes from Reagan in the 1980s, and was spouted over here, where if we allow the rich to get richer, they spend wealth, and it trickles down the socio-economic ladder - yeah right, the rich hoard wealth and use it gain more power and wealth, which was always going to happen.

3. Privatisation - need I say more? national industries, and services, were said to be "inefficient" - and privatising them would create better services and choice for consumers, when obviously you just have to refer back to point 1 to see how flawed that was. Utilities and public services like transport have never been worse.

Basically, the system works as it was always intented or was bound to do, given how it works, businsses are involved in a race to the bottom for the consumer, while all the so-called "efficiences" are actually cost savings borne by the workforce and the consumer, while the cost savings to a business are all passed onto shareholders, and execs. On top of the gutting of regulation has led to businsees so large like Amazon etc, they're basically the de facto govt's who operate as they please without paying any tax, helped along by elected govt's who do their bidding.

On top of that of course, when privatised services like rail fail financially, they're bailed out by the tax payer, ditto banks of course, as they're "too big to fail" now they have been allowed to grow too large by eradicting competition, whilst making "efficiency" savings which only they benefit from. And of course what we'll see with envorinmental concerns is that businesses bottom lines won't suffer, as the costs will be borne by the consumer/tax payer, while they virtue signal about how green they are. Obviously Hollywood is already lecturing and virtue signalling about the environment while jetting round the World wily-nily - a real life Hunger Games.

I'd also expect another knock on effect of environmentalism though this may come later as resources dwindle, is a lowering of production of consumer items, while the price increases, therefore not impacting company profits, ordinary people will just be priced out, like they are already in the housing market. Fortced scarcity is a tactic I'm suprised they haven't picked up on much sooner, why mass produce everything, when it's just cheaper and more profitable to make less and it more profitably.

Let's say the idea that the kind of Capitalism we see today IS unsustainable, who do you think will carry the costs of it collapses in some way, me and you or the big business?
Click to expand...

I would say Capitalism began in the UK (enclosure acts etc), and Marx writing against what he saw but the USA ran with it.

For the UK , Thatcher swept away the union power , money was offshored and we had a huge explosion of neo-liberal economics. Anyway - RSA ANIMATE: Crises of Capitalism - YouTube , do like RSA Animate stuff ;)
 
People don't understand, it's not just mining, you can rent out your GPU for other things too. In the end the overall demand for them from all sectors is just that high. There's not going to be a return to MSRP any time soon.

https://vast.ai/
 
Harlequin said:
I would say Capitalism began in the UK (enclosure acts etc), and Marx writing against what he saw but the USA ran with it.

For the UK , Thatcher swept away the union power , money was offshored and we had a huge explosion of neo-liberal economics. Anyway - RSA ANIMATE: Crises of Capitalism - YouTube , do like RSA Animate stuff ;)
Click to expand...

I only referred to US driven Capitalism post WW2, as it is most relevant to what we see today, I know its roots, Marx etc but I didn't see the point in going over hundreds of years of History.

I haven't seen RSA animates, I'll have a look. :)
 
Darujhistan said:
I only referred to US driven Capitalism post WW2, as it is most relevant to what we see today, I know its roots, Marx etc but I didn't see the point in going over hundreds of years of History.

I haven't seen RSA animates, I'll have a look. :)
Click to expand...

Sorry thats my bad, planning an essay on the internal contradiction of capitalism or why surplus is such a problem.
 
Harlequin said:
I would say Capitalism began in the UK (enclosure acts etc), and Marx writing against what he saw but the USA ran with it.

For the UK , Thatcher swept away the union power , money was offshored and we had a huge explosion of neo-liberal economics. Anyway - RSA ANIMATE: Crises of Capitalism - YouTube , do like RSA Animate stuff ;)
Click to expand...

Not seen that channel before, i liked that video.

Not buying fully into capitalism via working long hours to pay for "wanted" things, like those who are refusing to buy new cards is a definite short term fix. What would happen long term from that i dread to think however.

I would like to know how many cards are coming into stores and at what rate would be good to know. There's a lot of 6700xt, flagship, and some other cards seemingly sat around, or are these ranges just getting their numbers replenished?
 
Poneros said:
People don't understand, it's not just mining, you can rent out your GPU for other things too. In the end the overall demand for them from all sectors is just that high.
Click to expand...

I did, was exploring the grid computing since I got given it as a topic back in the uni days, science had just adopted the computation sharing which saw SETI etc but yes the rent a service is quite a popular model just look at AWS. Mining has only been so rapid as money was instantly available, no I.O.U elements but GPU's were always different and not just a gamers tool at the end of the day.

The_Arbiter said:
I would like to know how many cards are coming into stores and at what rate would be good to know. There's a lot of 6700xt, flagship, and some other cards seemingly sat around, or are these ranges just getting their numbers replenished?
Click to expand...

Yes quite this, observed it myself. Some retailers are not shifting them so it must be partly down to mindshare (people quaffing at AMD) and chiefly down to ridiculous price point. Sensibly the public deem above £700 for such a card is laughable and it has to be so because they would be sold out otherwise.
 
I recently managed to get a 3080 Fe and am looking at trying to move my 1070 on, what's the requirements for the MM?

Kinda wanna refrain from using eBay, as I've seen so many horror stories with scams.
 
Darujhistan said:
1. That competition would result in greater choice, and services - the direct opposite as happened, as it was bound to, because if you're company A and you're not a ruthless as company B, then company B will eat company A, as has happened. So less choice (see the UK utility market recently where nearly every small provider has gone into admin leaving the big providers as pnce again a cartel)
Click to expand...

You do realise one of those company's was nothing more than a pyramid scheme to enrich the people who set it up too. There was far too little regulation in who actually sold us energy too.

We have farmed all our labour out to cheaper countries in the race to the bottom and basically cut the bottom of the ladder off for far too many people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom