Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, morphine, SecretSquirrel
NovusBogus wrote:the hilariously low probability of actually making something like this stick
Kougar wrote:So does this apply to the Titan V's or not? I recall reading the Titan V still uses the Geforce driver line.
Duct Tape Dude wrote:Why not instead offer premium support/licensing options for GeForces in the datacenter?
Duct Tape Dude wrote:This feels like first-amendment violations of a computer processor. There's no way this will be enforceable.
Duct Tape Dude wrote:To skirt around this limitation, what's stopping someone from bootstrapping their existing code with a single call to git or some other blockchain tech?
Duct Tape Dude wrote:Why not instead offer premium support/licensing options for GeForces in the datacenter?
Duct Tape Dude wrote:Ugh. Stupid nvidia.
Duct Tape Dude wrote:This feels like first-amendment violations of a computer processor.
bthylafh wrote:Duct Tape Dude wrote:This feels like first-amendment violations of a computer processor.
Kougar wrote:Call me selfish, but as a consumer I'm for this simply because it helps protect me from price inflation, supply shortages, and whatever else massive companies might cause as a result from massive consumer graphics cards orders/deployments.
Topinio wrote:That's unsupported and contrary to evidence. The only thing that protects you from NVIDIA increasing prices on its consumer parts is competition from AMD, and that isn't happening as people are not buying AMD's products.
just brew it! wrote:Yeah, fair point. Maybe that's enough of a reason to do it.Duct Tape Dude wrote:This feels like first-amendment violations of a computer processor. There's no way this will be enforceable.
It's about as enforceable as any other arbitrary EULA limitation that isn't backed up with some form of DRM. IOW, yeah, not really. It'll scare some potential users off, while others will ignore the EULA restriction and use them anyway.
just brew it! wrote:If nvidia allows blockchain processing, it seems easy to sneak in a use of a blockchain (like say, git or an iteration of any hashing algorithm) into any code and claim it's not against the EULA. It's trivial to play the "WELL TECKNIKULLY *pushes up glasses*" card.Duct Tape Dude wrote:To skirt around this limitation, what's stopping someone from bootstrapping their existing code with a single call to git or some other blockchain tech?
Not even sure what you're suggesting here. I read the words, yet they seem to have no meaning.
just brew it! wrote:Right, I get what Quadro/Tesla are for, and it'd make sense to just block GeForce altogether from the datacenter, or you know, refuse to support GeForce in compute applications altogether. Instead they want to block specific workloads on GeForce from the datacenter. It'd seem more apt if they just left out the blockchain part.Duct Tape Dude wrote:Why not instead offer premium support/licensing options for GeForces in the datacenter?
As NovusBogus already pointed out, that's essentially what Quadro/Tesla are.Duct Tape Dude wrote:Ugh. Stupid nvidia.
From a business perspective it may actually be a pretty smart move.