>The SoC has access to 16GB of unified memory. This uses 4266 MT/s LPDDR4X SDRAM (synchronous DRAM) and is mounted with the SoC using a system-in-package (SiP) design. A SoC is built from a single semiconductor die whereas a SiP connects two or more semiconductor dies.
SDRAM operations are synchronised to the SoC processing clock speed. Apple describes the SDRAM as a single pool of high-bandwidth, low-latency memory, allowing apps to share data between the CPU, GPU, and Neural Engine efficiently.
In other words, this memory is shared between the three different compute engines and their cores. The three don't have their own individual memory resources, which would need data moved into them. This would happen when, for example, an app executing in the CPU needs graphics processing – meaning the GPU swings into action, using data in its memory. https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/19/apple_m1_high_bandwid...
It's my understanding Trump supporters are mad their concerns aren't taken seriously. Most court cases were dismissed on technicalities, without looking at the provided evidence or testimonies.
Maybe procedural grounds was the wrong word but this is a good example of what I meant.
"I don't want to see the evidence that may disqualify votes because it will disqualify other votes." is basically the logic. It seems weird to me but I'm not a lawyer so I could be wrong and this is perfectly normal ruling from a judge.
I did see it but it was also flagged so I couldn't reply.
The thing about those affidavits, multiple people said the same thing about different polling places which makes it more believable in my eyes than if it was just one person for each allegation.
I do think there was fraud, I'm sure there is even some amount of fraud every election. The real question should be, was the fraud widespread and did it make a difference? I don't know but the fact that people can't even debate this is concerning to me.
It used to be that the tech companies where champions of free speech, the ideal. It changed when generation woke entered their workforce. There has been a generational change brought on by changed values in American universities. That's what really is happening.
> We asked whether people believe that citizens should be able to make public statements that are offensive to minority groups, or whether the government should be able to prevent people from saying these things. Four-in-ten Millennials say the government should be able to prevent people publicly making statements that are offensive to minority groups, while 58% said such speech is OK.
Even though a larger share of Millennials favor allowing offensive speech against minorities, the 40% who oppose it is striking given that only around a quarter of Gen Xers (27%) and Boomers (24%) and roughly one-in-ten Silents (12%) say the government should be able to prevent such speech.
My point was that liberals have their own biases and can be ignorant. For example, in the nurture vs nature debate, the blank slate has been disproven for years. Everything is heritable, yet the left clings to the idea of all disparities being caused by culture because it fits their ideology. -> You can't fix nature with policy but you can if it's nurture.
So far it has not. The courts have shot down the the lawsuits on procedural grounds without looking at the evidence. Several states have held hearings were a lot of these allegations are discussed in detail. The hour long hearings are on youtube.