Recent comments in /f/explainlikeimfive

TheSkiGeek t1_j6p31rr wrote

“Integrated graphics” or an “integrated GPU” these days almost always refers to a small(er)/weak(er) GPU that is included in the CPU itself.

From the perspective of the operating system, a ‘discrete’ GPU and the ‘integrated’ GPU are both rendering devices that it can access. In a laptop with discrete graphics, both of these are usually able to output to the built in display, so a game or other application can choose to render to either one. That’s usually where you see things getting confused, as the BIOS or OS might be configured with the integrated graphics chip as the first/default rendering device.

It’s also possible to do pure software rendering using only the CPU. Nobody actually wants to do this these days for real time applications, since it is painfully slow. But it is an option.

1

BobbyThrowaway6969 t1_j6p2not wrote

Double precision is the black sheep of the family. It was just thrown in for convenience. GPUs don't have double precision because what do you care if a vertex is a millionth of a pixel off or a billionth? Graphics has no use for double precision so why make the chip more expensive to produce?

Compute programming might need it but not for the general public.

3

phiwong t1_j6p2mbr wrote

Water systems even if owned privately for profit are a regulated monopoly and behaves as a public utility (through regulation).

Certain systems are natural monopolies since it would be infeasible for multiple providers to set up and run the system. It would simply be too expensive for the consumer.

Capitalism isn't solely about consumer choice. It is related to the use of private capital for the provision of goods and services. There are many instances of cities collecting taxes and setting up municipal owned water systems (which is the complement of capitalism - the use of public capital raised through taxes).

Neither public nor private funding guarantees access, quality of services or low cost of services. So it would be a mistake to conflate one with the other. There is no free lunch - one way or the other someone has to pay for the service. Declaring something a "human right" is rhetorical because it says nothing for how such a "right" is to be provisioned or provided. (I can just as easily claim that everyone being a millionaire is a human right, but that doesn't make it happen without bad consequences)

1

BusydaydreamerA137 t1_j6p2dxu wrote

Language is deeply connected to culture and a universal language would mean that many cultures would be at a great disadvantage due to giving that up for the universal language. The only way it could be done without favouring a culture is to create a new language. If they kept a common language as well as other counties, there will be social punishments due to the universal language being more “efficient”.

1

Ok_Construction_1638 t1_j6p2b0n wrote

Most places it's a public utility, with some cities having theirs run by a private company. There's a few countries like England where we decided it was a good idea to privatise the whole lot and now we've got sewage pumping into the ocean and the reason why it's run that way is so that private companies can profit from it and not bother investing in any improvements

1

bachmanity t1_j6p1ua4 wrote

The Fungal Infection Mammalian Selection hypothesis says that the killing mechanism was unchecked fungal infections as the temperature dropped. Modern cold blooded creatures suffer from bone infections if their body temperature stays too low.

1

Glad_Significance778 OP t1_j6p18ib wrote

Thanks for your explanation, so basically the sensor is made out of subpixel and when light hits it, those subpixels generate an electrical turrent. The lens then filters the light based on its wavelength and bends it so that it hits the exact pixel. Then the sub pixels turn into pixels, which are scanned in rows or columns and then saved?

1

the_digital_merc t1_j6p156p wrote

The “point” of Christian colleges is to collect exorbitantly high private school tuition from wealthy Christian parents who get suckered into thinking they will set their kids up to be better Christians. A secondary purpose is to control the narrative being fed to young developing minds to create more advocates for their interpretation of what it means to be a Christian.

−1