The biggest difference for me for PCIe 5.0 has been additional bandwidth for my M2 drive.

Faster M.2 drives are great, but you know what would be even greater? More M.2 drives.

I wish it was possible to put several M.2 drives in a system and RAID them all up, like you can with SATA drives on any above-average motherboard. Even a single lane of PCIe 5.0 would be more than enough for each of those drives, because each drive won't need to work as hard. Less overheating, more redundancy, and cheaper than getting a small number of super fast high capacity drives. Alas, most mobos only seem to hand out lanes in multiples of 4.

Maybe one day we'll have so many PCIe lanes that we can hand them out like candy to a dozen storage devices and have some left to power a decent GPU. Still, it feels wasteful.

> Alas, most mobos only seem to hand out lanes in multiples of 4.

AFAIK, the cpu lanes can't be broken up beyond x4; it's a limitation of the pci-e root complex. The Promontory 21 chipset that is mainstream for AM5 does two more x4 and four choose sata or pci-e x1. I don't think you can bifurcate those x4s, but you might be able to aggregate two or four of the x1s. And you can daisy chain a second Prom21 chipset to net one more x4 and another 4 x1.

Of course, it's pretty typical for a motherboard to use some of those lanes for onboard network and what nots. Nobody sells a bare minimum board with an x16 slot, two cpu based x4 slots, two chipset x4 slots, and four chipset x1 slots and no onboard perhipherals, only the USB from the cpu and chipset. Or if they do, it's not sold in US stores anyway.

If pci-e switches weren't so expensive, you might see boards with more slots behind a switch (which the chipsets kind of are, but...)

The M.2 form factor isn't that conducive to having lots of them, since they're on the board and need large connectors and physical standoffs. They're also a pain in the ass to install because they lie flat, close to the board, so you're likely to have to remove a bunch of shit to get to them. This is why I've never cared about and mostly hated every "tool-less" M.2 latching mechanism cooked up by the motherboard manufacturers: I already have a screwdriver because I needed to remove my GPU and my ethernet card and the stupid motherboard "armor" to even get at the damn slots.

SATA was a cabling nightmare, sure, but cables let you relocate bulk somewhere else in the case, so you can bunch all the connectors up on the board.

Frankly, given that most advertised M.2 speeds are not sustained or even hit most of the time, I could deal with some slower speeds due to cable length if it meant I could mount my SSDs anywhere but underneath my triple slot GPU.

> I could deal with some slower speeds due to cable length

Observing server mainboards reveals many PCIe 5.0 connectors for cables to attach PCIe-SSDs looking similar to SATA ones.

Agree that M.2 is fiddly. PCIE cards with M.2 sockets are nice nice for desktops and servers, then one can just unplug it to do operations.

There are add-in cards with PCIe switch chips that will let you put a large number of drives into a single PCIe slot.

Including ones that have controllers, if your motherboard doesn't have enough lanes or it doesn't support bifurcation. I have a Rocket 7608A, which gives you 8 M.2 slots in a PCIe 5.0 x16 card: https://www.highpoint-tech.com/nvme-raid-aic/gen5/rocket-760...

I really wish I would've bought 192G when it was less than a few thousand dollars!

Heh. It was a luxury purchase at the start of the year when I was only worried about tariffs. Wanted to lock in a new build good for years. Every once in a while I have a machine learning project that needs over 100GB and so it is nice not to have to overthink things. Honestly, I’m kicking myself I did not go all the way with 256GB.

I assume you're using 4 modules of memory, so the while the capacity is high, the bandwidth is low.

> How are we supposed to fact-check this!

You aren’t.

The chose you are given is to either not listen to anybody and stay uninformed or listen to "experts" and become mis/disinformed.

It's incredible that in some cases people who know nothing about the topic have way less (in percentage) stupid and incorrect facts than people who try to actively educate themselves through "experts".

There are other options besides those. You have two pieces of information: If you trust experts or "do your own research" and if you are correct or not. This leads to four choices:

- You trust experts, and the experts are right -> You are right

- You trust experts, and the experts are wrong -> You are wrong

- You do your own research and are right -> You are right

- You do your own research and you are wrong -> You are wrong

Now, if I had to guess, the people who are more knowledgeable on a subject would likely have a better idea on the truthiness of a statement regarding that subject. Your argument appears to be the opposite.

> It's incredible that in some cases people who know nothing about the topic have way less (in percentage) stupid and incorrect facts than people who try to actively educate themselves through "experts".

I assume this is just an anecdote but could you extrapolate on this point a bit?Is there a study you could show me where they tested "do your own research" people's knowledge vs domain experts? What topics do you think have the highest chance of the "experts" being stupid and incorrect?

We miscommunicated past each other.

I did not mean that those 2 choices I mentioned are the only ones. I meant that the "deep legacy media"/"experts" are trying to convince you that only these two choices (listen to the "experts" or not to listen to anybody; "don't trust anybody else, trust me when I tell you that") exist. This leads to the 2 outcomes I painted: being not informed or being misinformed. Everything else that doesn't fit the current official narrative is branded with bad words.

Obviously, this is a false dichonomy and one should do the right thing (educating oneself with different sources, to form a full picture) despite the namecalling.

I don't have any study (I don't know if they exist) and was purely talking about the topic dear to my heart that I have following on for 25+ years: the Finnish expertise on Russia/Putin. It is horrendous. And I am not even talking about crazy expert opinions that one can disagree with, but core problems with logic and basic facts.

It is even sadder because Finland is trying to brand itself as The Russia expert in EU, is succeeding and this incompetence has real consequences.

The quality of expertise in this example is so terrible that we get the incredible situation when not informed people, using only their common sense, have a higher percentage of reasonable/truthful takes than people who are trying to be informed using "homegrown talent". This is an unbelievable consequence!

I am not saying that this is a general trend or that "experts bad". It's just in this particular case I know the topic and have the knowledge to access the correctness of people who are performing as experts on Russia. I have been having presentations on this topic.

Also, obviously, political "sciences" is different from actual sciences.

This reminds me of the Onion's expert panel on Nigeria, with the difference of journalists also being clueless (not their fault, they can't ask critical questions and challenge "experts", if their whole world view also comes from these "experts"). https://youtu.be/Pwom49awRKg

Because to the vast majority of people doing their own research involves reading random pages on Facebook and consuming fakes.

I am sorry but that's how it goes and that's how I see it in my country. Self proclaimed free-thinkers who eat everything that's on FB.

Right. I shouldn't do my own research because other people believe what they read on Facebook. Nor should you either, of course. Never research!

That studio has produced a lot of great video games, too. But we need more variety in ownership. Not everything can be owned by conservative leaning billionaires.

> Not everything can be owned by conservative leaning billionaires.

Well, it can be, that’s the problem :-(. But it would really, really suck.

I’ll take my chances with Netflix rather than an empire of media moguls.

Steve is great, but everyone is partisan.

Both can be true.

Of course! And everyone is different. In my specific case, only one was true. Treating the root cause fixed all the related symptoms. Others will have different experiences.

I prefer the 35mm version, at least when viewing the scene with the soldiers.

I’d imagine recent uptick in using services like Upstash may make it harder for people to know if they are vulnerable or not. Is this mitigated by disabling Lua script execution?

Upstash wouldn’t be vulnerable - Upstash doesn’t run upstream redis, it’s a protocol-compatible proprietary implementation.

I would guess it is.

Also:

> Exploitation of this vulnerability requires an attacker to first gain authenticated access to your Redis instance.

That pausing issue is plaguing me with several other titles. I think it tracks with background downloading of game updates, but haven’t had enough hours to entirely confirm it. What I did notice is that after installing Decky there are background jobs from some of the plugins that run native Linux updates (flatpak) and snapshotting.