Dempf

Look, honestly I don't really know who Ryan Grim is, but I googled "Ryan Grim" and "The Gray Zone" and apparently "the grayzone crowd comes after [him] all the time".

https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1696331666980053126

I also don't know enough to really get into a discussion about Israel / Palestine, and I don't know anything about the drama with WaPo in the article you linked so I can't say whether or not it's 100% factual as you say.

Maybe in this specific instance, The Gray Zone is correct, and in agreement with Ryan Grim. I don't know. But the thing is, you are I are in a discussion about bias and source quality. And I'm saying to you that, in my view, The Gray Zone doesn't pass the smell test.

That's the whole point of MBFC: to get a smell test of whether a source is worth considering or not.

What I am saying is, I'm not going to spend hours of my life going through your source to check it out, and possibly verify it, or refute it point by point. Especially when the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article on it is:

Coverage of The Grayzone has focused on its misleading[25][26] and false reporting,[27] its criticism of American foreign policy,[1][4] and its sympathetic coverage of the Russian, Chinese and Syrian governments.[4][21][28][29] The Grayzone has downplayed or denied the persecution of Uyghurs in China,[33] and been accused of publishing conspiracy theories about Xinjiang, Syria and other regions,[34][35][36] and publishing disinformation about Ukraine during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which some have described as pro-Russian propaganda.[32][36]

The article about Xinjiang that I linked to you was just from a random source I clicked from Wikipedia.

I realize that I am probably coming across in a rather dismissive way, but honestly I think that's the point -- if I can convince myself this quickly that a source looks suspicious, it's in my interest to dismiss it just as quickly. In the past I've spent dozens of hours doing deep dives on random sources that friends have sent me, and in every case it's been a waste of time because I ended up coming to the same conclusion that I did in 5 seconds of reading Wikipedia.

I know some people love doing these deep dives, but I've realized for myself -- like back in 2010 when one particular person was sending me crap from Natural News -- that unless I truly get "this needs the benefit of the doubt" vibes, all that time I spend just makes me feel bitter and angry at the world, and I end up having gained nothing and learned nothing from the experience.

So again, I'm sorry. Your source may be correct. But it looks seriously suspicious. Personally, I'm not willing to look any deeper than that.

I don't know if I would take thegrayzone.com as a good source, personally:

https://www.axios.com/2020/08/11/grayzone-max-blumenthal-china-xinjiang

Yeah I mean look what instance this was posted on.

Probably they will ban me just for saying that.

Don't know a lot about Mondoweiss, but I found this article that cites Weiss saying some pretty out there stuff:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/04/mondoweiss-is-a-hate-site/

I don't know that I like it if MBFC is just taking pro-Israel advocate at their word, but another commentator said they rated other pro-Israel sources as questionable as well. Example:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/israel-war-room-bias/

Another commentator brought up Mondoweiss, which is interesting. I don't know that I disagree with MBFC's rating, as Weiss has previously said some pretty out there stuff:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/04/mondoweiss-is-a-hate-site/

But I mean I'm far from an expert in the Israel-Palestine conflict, and in fact I'm pretty ignorant to be honest.

The comments in here feel pretty weird. At best, people are following a trend that I hate, where we are on a link-aggregator platform, but someone assumes that you already have all the context and refuses to post a link. At worst? Well there's that guy threatening the mods that he'll spam the community if the mods don't let him have his way.

It has been getting so bad that even boring regular phone trees will hang up on you if you insist on talking to a human. If it's ISP / cellular, nowadays I will typically just say I want to cancel my account, and then have cancellations route me to the correct department.

Yeah /u/[email protected] kind of understated the problem. They were seeing insane failure rates in data centers like 50%. At this point, any 13th or 14th gen CPU that has experienced any crash or instability should be considered faulty unless you know the cause of the crash is from something else. This isn't just me saying this, mainstream outlets like Gamers Nexus are saying it.

If you're a consumer and have one of those CPUs a replacement is probably in your future. And I wonder if Intel even has stock to replace that many at once....

I can't think of anything like this ever happening on this scale before in computing history.

The bill didn't need to pass with a 60 vote margin. The House is simple majority, and it passed the house. It's a little murky to me what happened next, but it seems like the Democrats were arguing that it could be treated as budget reconciliation in the Senate, only needing simple majority. However, the parliamentarian said it's not budget reconciliation, and so it would have needed 60 votes total in the Senate to get past the filibuster, which it didn't have.

Then, strangely, the Senate amended the entire title and text of the bill and turned it into a general appropriations bill, which passed both houses and became law, but with the entire original text of the bill struck.

Maybe someone a little more familiar than me with the machinations of government can fill in some of the gaps of what exactly happened and why. My point is, you're right that it didn't pass, but neither house of Congress requires a 60 vote margin. The Senate requires 60 votes total for a bill to be filibuster proof.

It was already settled long ago by the Supreme Court, but evangelicals are trying to use private action as a way around it, and I bet they're hoping that one of several current lawsuits makes its way up to our new and corrupt court.

Oxidation in the fab process. They have simultaneously claimed that oxidation isn't causing any issues, and that it's caused only "some" crashing issues. Because they've been so wishy washy, it's probably safe to assume that any 13th or 14th gen CPU that experiences any kind of crash or BSOD is degraded and should be RMA'ed immediately, otherwise you risk getting stuck with a permanently physically degraded CPU.

Intel says they identified the issue sometime in 2023 and fixed the fab process. So the good news is that any newly manufactured Raptor Lake CPU shouldn't have this issue. The bad news is that Intel won't give a date range of when the fab issue occurred, or exactly what CPUs it affected (by date code), so really the only choice consumers have at this point (before we get to the inevitable class action lawsuit) is to RMA at the slightest sign of instability.

Intel is also planning to release a microcode update in August, but there's a lot of doubt that this can be fixed via microcode.

This was affecting 50% of Raptor Lake CPUs in data centers, and it's become clear via video game telemetry that it has also affected a significant number of consumer chips.

https://youtu.be/OVdmK1UGzGs

Apparently they call her "momala".