> The mechanical actions and the physical presence really helps in retention of the materials.
Although this is the case for many people, I personally struggle to process information and write it on paper at the same time. Thus, I strongly prefer digital note-taking and use Obsidian or just vim instead of paper.
I'm not trying to be offensive, but I don't see how typing it into a computer is significantly different than writing it on paper.
Is there something stopping you, or anyone from writing it down and taking notes in class and then reviewing it later as needed? Not just process it in lecture time, but regurgitate it to physical form for later review.
Also, I would definitely constrain this into educational groups, where K-6 are much different from college (post mandatory) education.
If I may, people write (with pens) slower than than can speak, and thus to take good notes you need to synthesize the material you are being explained. You need to understand what you're writing.
Many people can type as fast/faster than they talk, and when typing it is possible to try and type verbatim what is being said. In this case, there is no understanding. (If you've ever taken a class not all that is said is pertinent and not all that is pertinent is said)
I personally don't revisit my written notes their purpose is uniquely for me to remember/understand what I've written.
I highly doubt this is unique. Some teachers (at least when I was in school) said stuff, repeated it, no problem writing it verbatim. Some others put it on the board for you to copy it verbatim, and later in uni.. most people definitely did not type fast enough to capture every word.
Writing down stuff has always been what you make of it.
Just because there arepeople who type slow doesnt invalidate the point that typing has a much higher speed ceiling. It's like saying well cars can go slower than some people who walk. So we may as well walk everywhere.
>I don't see how typing it into a computer is significantly different...
I haven't read up on it much myself, but any discussion along the lines of this subthread re: "handwriting > typing" is probably discussing research that's starting to be talked about more and more in the past 5 years or so (maybe the pandemic and online learning accelerated interest?)
here's a 5m clip of a neuroscientist presenting to the US Senate this year on correlation between dropping academic performance and use of tech in classrooms in many countries over many years, and asking for more research into mechanisms and causation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd-_VDYit3U
and here's a paper from a couple years ago describing differences in observed brain activity between handwriting and typewriting and some discussion of how this could be a mechanism of the kind the video was talking about https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10....
>Is there something stopping you from...
No, but I feel like it's not hard to argue that default are important.
And the only way to win this lottery is by using an automated script that starts sending automated requests as soon as the new day starts at Beijing time.
Although you will have to buy a used phone in order to pay less than 250$, it seems like GrapheneOS is the best solution for that problem. Not optimal, but the best among what we have.
I was thinking the same. But it worries me that these news about Motorola in particular doing shady shit. I was looking forward to the upcoming GrapheneOS/Motorola partnership :(
How about the FairPhone running /e/os (which is de-googled)? You can buy it preinstalled directly from Murena.
Although this is not at your target price point. But /e/os can be used on hundreds of android phones (as opposed to GrapheneOS). So you can probably install it on your current phone
Having no GMS implementation at all or using microG introduces compatibility issues for a lot of proprietary software. GrapheneOS is the only ROM which supports running GMS in an isolated manner, without giving it direct access to privileged system APIs such as geolocation (which is sent to Google just because they can).
The pixel 9a was on offer recently here in Spain for 319€ and that includes 21% tax. At major chain called media markt. That phone is one of the few supported by grapheneos.
>we'll even buy compute from China if we can sell Anthropic models there.
Considering that Anthropic mass-bans Chinese users accounts based on using VPN (used to circumvent the Chinese firewall) and then demands an ID or a residence permit of a country where Claude officially works to ensure that the user doesn't live in China, seems unlikely.
If the Chinese government tells Anthropic they can freely sell Claude in China, Dario is suddenly going to be kissing China's ass instead of saying how we can't let China win the AGI race for democracy and western values.
They told the US government no on using Claude for approving lethal military strikes.
China can get plenty of value from Claude without needing to use it for anything similar.
They very specifically avoided a trap where the next time the US blows up a school full of children they were very obviously going to blame Claude for it.
While I agree with the sentiment, $200 Million is really not a big contract for Anthropic when they're on $44 Billion annual revenue. It's less than half a percent.
It would have been much better to be able to disable telemetry without losing basic functionality such as navigation and safety updates. Having to choose between being spied on and having no connectivity at all is a false dichotomy.
Any connectivity at all is telemetry. The connection itself reveals where you are. Navigation reveals where you are down to the meter, along with everywhere you've been, where you're going, speed, etc. What else are you worried about if not that?
It reveals where you are to the cell towers, but not to the car company. My phone already reveals where I am based on its cellular connectivity, so I'm not too worried about that.
I’m not OP but I just want to point out that navigation doesn’t need to mean I am always sharing telemetry with multiple third parties
I have a garmin watch which is great for overland hiking, multiple day expeditions etc
I download the maps and the watch has GPS to plot where I am on that map. My watch doesn’t have an eSIM at all.
Rivian is an adventure brand so if they wanted to design a maps system like that, where I am not continually downloading tiles from open maps or google and sending my location to them and others, they probably could
I just don’t think they have space for those types of features most people don’t care about while they are trying to compete in a rough industry and deliver new vehicles
It's telling just how completely successful the social media revolution has been, when we don't remember that two short decades ago 3rd-party car navigation options that relied on maps loaded on the device and GPS input and that's all. No SIM cards (though they could have done so at the time), no telemetry.
The experience was even comparable to today's experience - I've been auto-routed around a road closure, like, twice in 5 years? And it _failed_ to route me around a road closure probably twice as well?
Why would you be sharing that? There's no reason why the navigation system needs to constantly tell a remote system where you are. Navigation systems don't even need an Internet connection for basic routing.
Navigation through gps means you're connected to a satelite at all times. has nothing to do with an internet connection. You're directly connected to the U.S. government (Space Force)
A GPS receiver is passive, it doesn't send any signal to the satellites. The satellite broadcast their position and what time it is from their point of view, and the receiver computes its position from that.
Also, there are now several countries that sent positioning constellations (obviously to not have to rely on the US for positioning), and most receivers support several: GPS (US), Galileo (Europe), Glonass (Russia), Beidu (China).
GPS and other similar technologies work by passively listening to the satellite signals without having to respond to them in any manner. Location is calculated based on time it took for the signal from difficult beacons to arrive.
I personally explicitly avoid parallel agents, since it creates too much cognitive debt, and sometimes an agent may need steering towards an architectally sane solution mid-work.
Agreed. With simple stuff it works. But then again with simple stuff it’s pretty fast to do it sequentially.
With complex stuff I often have open the “thinking” output so I can stop/interrupt with guidance. Without that it’s often garbage output that I then have to work to fix, which is difficult to do while you’re also doing the same with a parallel process.
Totally agree, the more parallel agents you spawn the more the probability of you vibe coding rather than guide coding. There comes a point when my mind says just commit and move on, which I fight to not do it.
reply