There are rumors AMD won't do high end cards anymore. So 7900xtx becomes the last one to compete with NVidia on that front.
Honestly, after owning 7900xtx for one year, I find it difficult to saturate it with tasks. I only play non-graphics heavy games like rimworld or aoe2de. Sometimes I play Hogwards Legacy with my partner, and the performance there is not the highest imaginable. But I read online that is because the game is not well optimized. Perhaps, you don't even need more powerfull graphics, since games are oriented at mid-market anyways.
>There are rumors AMD won't do high end cards anymore.
No there aren't. There are rumors AMD isn't doing a high end card for the next generation. That isn't the same thing.
In any case, graphics cards are improving faster than the ability to make use of the power, especially with upscaling technology. Now that "midrange" cards are able to hit 144hz at 1440p with maximum graphics, the market for high-end is probably going to dry up a bit, at least until full path tracing is viable, or 4k monitors get cheaper.
What would make sense for AMD is to spend less time on fancy hardware architectures (dual-chip GPUs) and more time focusing on getting AI working well, improving their software stack, and not having issues like the "power bug" that supposedly held back the 7000 series GPUs from reaching their intended performance goals. I expect that's what they're doing.
The rumor is that RDNA 4 is a mulligan gen for AMD while they get chiplet based GPUs ready for RDNA 5 in 2025. While Nvidia is going fully monolithic for Blackwell and won’t be using chiplets until at least the 6000 series. So there’s a chance AMD could actually pull out in front of Big Green in two years.
It would be very nice if they would publish a libreoffice spreadsheet, yes.
Heck, it would be very nice if they would create a libreoffice spreadsheet, even if they don't publish it. If they had to read their own document, it would probably be far better written.
> If they had to read their own document, it would probably be far better written.
Perhaps not; I've always had a strong impression, whenever reading documents derived from tax policy, that the "architecture" of such documents is the way it is mainly for maintainability.
Which is to say: the effective tax code at any given moment, is the emergent result of the interactions of all the current tax laws on the books. And there are many such laws. And those individual laws can be updated or repealed; and new laws can also come in that, through a few simple statements, make sweeping changes to the meanings of other laws.
As such, the tax-filing instructions, ideally, have to be constructed in such a way that they cope efficiently with someone being able to pull a single jenga-block out of the tower that is tax law, that topples over a whole slew of other instructions and definitions. The team of tax lawyers and technical writers that maintain the instructions should not have to sit down and rewrite every instruction on every schedule/form, just because one of the core definitions changes. Because that's gonna happen a lot! Every year, even!
If I was in charge of a team of (automation-minded) lawyers and technical writers maintaining the tax-filing instruction repository, I'd probably, ideally, want to factor out the instructions into separate modular files per law — with each file acting as a sort of Aspect-Oriented equivalent of Javadoc. (Or, actually, something very much like Inform 7. See e.g. https://i7-examples.github.io/Bronze/source_1.html)
So you'd see:
• Paragraphs that interpolate definitions as constants from other laws' modules;
• paragraphs that have implicit AOP hooks for other laws' modules to inject additional language into;
• the ability of a law to override specific sentences or wording of the language of the laws so far;
...and so forth.
This would be hell to read, but it'd sure make the job of dealing with changes in the law easy. (And it wouldn't be something you'd really read anyway — more often, it'd be something you'd carefully poke at, while watching the compiled result change live in a split pane. Like writing LaTeX in LyX.)
---
To be clear, I don't imagine that any existing set of tax-form language is actually maintained using some weird AOP DSL.
Rather, I imagine that the maintainers are manually doing the same business process that use of such an AOP DSL would formalize.
They're maintaining a very non-intuitive "storage architecture" for all the instructions that go into these forms, to minimize re-working when the law changes; and then — mostly manually, but maybe with a bit of Excel — collating them together into new schedules and forms each year.
And it's that "storage architecture" — despite not being something as rigid as source code — that still nevertheless forces the language of the instructions into the form you see at tax-filing time, with the weird grammatical shapes, the distant definitions, etc.
The law is the way it is because of the influence of lobbyists. Those lobbyists include lobbyists for companies that do things like payroll. They would like the system to be complex to provide a regulatory moat that keeps other businesses from competing with them. And by siding with this or that special interest that cares about their piece more than how sensible the whole is, the law is easy to turn into a mess.
Why would they do that? If it's all out there in the open, then everyone can find bugs/issues and then they'd have to deal with them.
Also they'd probably lose a lot of revenue they collect from fines.
Personal anecdote about how you don't fuck with the CRA. Back in college in I got "free" room and board for year because I was a resident advisor. When I, an idiot 20 year old, filed my taxes, I did them wrong and under reported by around 1k. First time doing Canadian taxes as a US citizen. A few years later I got a fine for around $5500, which was a huge sum for a college kid working part time. Turns out BC can match the fine levied by the CRA. In hindsight, I would have been better off just not having that job - I think I would have come out ahead. For the rest of the time I lived in Canada I hired a CPA.
The IRS is warm and fuzzy by comparison. At least if you screw up, the fine is proportional to the amount you under report. (unless you're super rich...but that's a different thing)
Honestly, I've always found CRA friendly, competent, and responsive.
But, I also don't run a small business, and am just a tax payer. Though when I had a small consultancy and corporation they were also actually fine to deal with.
Do you have kids? If so, did you try to deduct extracurricular activities? I did and was audited, also 100% of my friends were audited for the kids related deductions.
Anecdata of course.
Also I find Canadian personal taxes are way too complicated. I can think only of Italy where allegedly personal taxes even more complex.
I used to do those deductions for my kids, yep. Never had a problem.
I seem to recall from the last 4 or 5 filings that those deductions are gone now. The only thing I had to do each year was figure out the capital gains on my RSUs (in USD, so a bit fiddly). And now this year I have nothing like that, so it's just "here's my RRSP contributions, and yes, those T4s look like mine, confirmed, ok bye"
You're throwing around the word "audit" far too casually. In all likeliness, you and your friends were not audited. The CRA probably asked you to submit supporting documents such as receipts and other written records to prove your claim, as you are legally required to do.
Hm... it's up for me? If you just tried cloning, I linked directly to the web view of the VC branch, since that's what they asked for. This is the clone link https://git.robbyzambito.me/mirror/re3.git
Hmm, just checked and it seems that it doesn't work when I'm connecting through some Mullvad VPN exits, but works when I disconnect. Oh well. I assume you have something like fail2ban.
I have not cleaned it up for release or anything, so it's a bit messy, but feel free to use it under the licence terms of cgit (GPLv2.0-only) and if you don't mind, put an attribution somewhere, like at least at the top of the CSS file.
EDIT: You will also need this in your <head>, otherwise you won't have a mobile-friendly layout:
I like gecko / chromium source codes. My knowledge of javascript and browser APIs helps understand browser source code even if there is no documentation.
Honestly, after owning 7900xtx for one year, I find it difficult to saturate it with tasks. I only play non-graphics heavy games like rimworld or aoe2de. Sometimes I play Hogwards Legacy with my partner, and the performance there is not the highest imaginable. But I read online that is because the game is not well optimized. Perhaps, you don't even need more powerfull graphics, since games are oriented at mid-market anyways.