You can take kahnclusions' word for it, or you can take Eugene Wigner's:
> I have known a great many intelligent people in my life. I knew Planck, von Laue and Heisenberg. Paul Dirac was my brother in law; Leo Szilard and Edward Teller have been among my closest friends; and Albert Einstein was a good friend, too. But none of them had a mind as quick and acute as Jancsi (John) von Neumann. I have often remarked this in the presence of those men and no one ever disputed. But Einstein's understanding was deeper even than von Neumann's. His mind was both more penetrating and more original than von Neumann's. And that is a very remarkable statement. Einstein took an extraordinary pleasure in invention. Two of his greatest inventions are the Special and General Theories of Relativity; and for all of Jancsi's brilliance, he never produced anything as original.
Neumann was a human calculator + encyclopedia in one. If there was ever intellectual olympics track and field, he would dominate the single sprint event.
What Einstein had was a deep curiosity, damn near super-human persistence, and some measure of an inventor's creativity. Even in mundane interactions, his curiosity stood out.
Really cool! Like i_c_b mentioned my only feedback is that, even in the practice mode, there's a lot of negative feedback.
I'd recommend adding a step to the practice mode where whatever highlighted region of the fretboard you're practicing has all of the notes visible, and then over time the notes are taken away as you build up your memorization.
Noted! Thank you! I'm planning on building a Duolingo style spaced repetition system for this. I really wanted to work on more modules like Intervals and Triads (for selfish reasons) but enough people have made the point you made that I think its logical to address the issue.
Could you talk a bit about the negative feedback in practice mode? Is it the unpleasant buzzing when you tap the wrong note? What would be an alternative?
Thanks for the insight! At a high-level, how did Likes work when you were at Twitter? Were a certain amount of Like requests batched then applied at the DB level at the same time to ease writes?
Not too long ago I tried getting Haskell Language Server, GHC, Cabal, Stack, etc. to play nice together in Neovim but didn't have much luck. Has anyone else here had luck with Neovim + Haskell?
`Foldable` is basically the FP equivalent of `Iterable` in Java if you're familiar with that. It's an abstraction you can write against if you want to support all sorts of data structures that can be iterated on (e.g. arrays, lists, trees, etc.).
This appears on all threads. I understand some people don't like it, I'm a developer and I have mixed feelings (prefer touchbar for somethings, keys for others), but in general, I feel normal folks prefer the touchbar. I just got the mbp which after a few tests, will be my girlfriend's computer. She asked for the MBP over the Air because of the touchbar that she enjoys alot in her current mbp
Yup, this was my main reason for choosing the Air over the Pro. The touch bar is so unfortunate -- Apple could probably do something interesting with it, but ultimately they've basically left it untouched since they released it.
I suspect the only reason for its continued existence is to look cool in marketing photos.
The next upgrade that puts apple chip in the 4 port pro would be the ideal version to purchase without a Touch Bar impacting usability and battery life.
You say this like it's a negative thing. For me, personally, computer fan noise is uniquely aggravating. I wanted to buy the 2015 Macbook specifically because it was fanless, but decided against it because a x86 CPU trying to run in that fanless form factor essentially made it a $1K netbook. Now that we're seeing the M1 MacBook Air rival the 16-inch MacBook Pro from last year in an extended CineBench test (even through Rosetta!), it's a different story entirely.
I'm not saying active cooling doesn't help, obviously the Air is going to thermal throttle in cases the Pro wouldn't. But I am saying that the new chipset needs active cooling a lot less than the old one did; not just cause it's RISC vs CISC but its also 'cause it's TSMC's 5nm process vs Intel's 14nm one.
Also, I'd give up on the hope that they'd get rid of their stupid meme bar on the Pro. They seem committed to it.
I'm actually not sure about that. Did the MacBook Air ever have a Touch Bar? It seems like this particular MBP has one mostly because they used the exact same case and keyboard and screen and webcam and ports and etc from the previous MBP. Every review I've seen says other than the processor, it's exactly the same.
So there's a chance that this MBP has a Touch Bar merely because the previous one had it and they did not change the case for the M1, which would mean they could still make the change whenever they come out with a new case.
The active cooling might not make as big a difference as you think… in The Verge’s benchmarks, literally the only place they saw a significant difference in speed was a multicore benchmark involving 30 solid minutes under full load. https://www.theverge.com/21569603/apple-macbook-air-m1-revie...
The results are excellent and give me hope they will be able to keep the chips from throttling with active cooling under the most stressful loads.
My current work laptop is a the 16 inch 2019 Macbook Pro with 8-Core Intel Core i9 at 2.3 GHz, and using the Intel Power Gadget, the form factor can not achieve the max frequency of 3.6ghz on a single core. I have the machine elevated on a stand with the maximum air flow, even with no external monitors connected, it still throttles.
> Through 2015, the Airbus A320 family has experienced 0.12 fatal hull-loss accidents for every million takeoffs, and 0.26 total hull-loss accidents for every million takeoffs; one of the lowest fatality rates of any airliner.[3]
> I have known a great many intelligent people in my life. I knew Planck, von Laue and Heisenberg. Paul Dirac was my brother in law; Leo Szilard and Edward Teller have been among my closest friends; and Albert Einstein was a good friend, too. But none of them had a mind as quick and acute as Jancsi (John) von Neumann. I have often remarked this in the presence of those men and no one ever disputed. But Einstein's understanding was deeper even than von Neumann's. His mind was both more penetrating and more original than von Neumann's. And that is a very remarkable statement. Einstein took an extraordinary pleasure in invention. Two of his greatest inventions are the Special and General Theories of Relativity; and for all of Jancsi's brilliance, he never produced anything as original.