I just wished IP bans actually worked. Or maybe only axum has that power...

IP bans only work with static IP's.   Thanks to the limitations of IPv4, classless addressing and NAT/PAT, the majority of the world uses dynamic IP's.   Meaning the IP address you have today may not be the same IP address tomorrow and some dude in another state may have your old IP address....and would be banned for no reason.

Can you not ban entire I.P ranges?
Because even dynamically allocated I.P addresses are limited in "range" via the ISP.

http://www.newelectronics.co.uk/electronics-news/tsmc-takes-on-intel-after-claims-about-transistor-density/59122/

Argh, I missed Ninja's alt...

Yes, you can ban entire IP ranges but what happens if another user on this site is using the same IP range as the offender ? Personally speaking though I would rather deal with the offender's ISP to restrict him from going to this site. 

I knew you'd bring this up but what you've shown to me is clear cut damage control from TSMC ... LOL 

They didn't outright deny Intel's claim of their density so instead they resorted to saying this ... 

In fact, Dr Liu claims TSMC has the better performance. "We took the approach of using the FinFET transistor to improve the performance on top of the similar back end technology in our 20nm process. This transistor performance, and innovative layout methodology, can improve the chip size by about 15%. Because transistor drive is much stronger, you don't need such a big area to deliver the same driving circuitry." 

What their basically saying is because of the improved performance of moving to FinFET TSMC feels that they can superficially improve density by deliberately making the chip smaller but little did they know that Intel or samsung could do the same thing. They were being totally misleading with that statement if not maybe even dishonest because it was clear from that response that they didn't improve transistor density. 

Even you can go ask soleron about it and he'll agree with me on this. It's so sad to see TSMC getting outdone by a failure of a semiconductor foundry such as globalfoundries but then again they got piggybacked by daddy samsung. 

This ^^^

Infamous Second Son and Mario Kart 8 (when it's released) are going to be the two best looking games from this gen so far...but there are better looking games to come after that, particularly in around 2 and a half to 3 and a half years time when this generation is coming to end. I can't wait.

Also makes me wonder just how good things are going to be looking in 20 years time. Just compare games from 1994 to games this year and I can believe that it's going to be very difficult to tell the difference between CGI and reality.

Honestly, I don't really care about it. I'll enjoy the game, as I've enjoyed previous ones. I'll pick up a PS4 and Xbox One somewhere later down the line and play the exclusives on them as well. Maybe an Xbox One first, for Ryse: Son of Rome, which looks incredibly fun. To me, it doesn't matter how powerful the Wii U is or isn't. I'll have fun with the games, as I did last gen with the Wii, Xbox 360, and PS3.

The point is though, using various techniques you can increase density at the fab level on the same process, which is not dependent on the chip designer.

True, however I personally like his arguments. :P

I just explained how this isn't increasing transistor density ... 

If games like Mario Kart 8 and Art of Balance look this great in the Wii U's second year, I can't wait to see what the prettiest third year titles look like, as they get more familiar with the hardware and learn how to squeeze the most out of it.