The argument is so bad that a part of me is starting to wonder if it might be a deliberate signal from a judge under extrajudicial pressure. Like a hostage trying to blink morse while reading a message from his captors into the camera.
"Do what they ask for but do it so badly that perhaps some people start asking the right questions"
It's both. The court has ruled that they can't make a copy of the book, but if they scan and destroy the original then it's fine because it's not creating additional copies.
By that insane logic a digital copy isnt a copy. So a digital copy of a bluray isnt a copy either. I guess piracy isnt piracy as long as i destroy the original. Sweet! Are we finally seeing the "lets treat digital as if corporial" concept crumbling?
Even if you ignore the nonavoidable copies which happen during normal usage of digital files there is no way they don't dozens of different real copies of their training dataset across many different servers accessible by many people.
Plus you just know in a few months they are going to be stale and reference code that has changed. I have even seen this happen with colleagues using llms between commits on a single pr.
OP if you want to improve sight reading faster, I would recommend using non-random notes - context is very important when sight reading and if you get a professional pianist to sight read random notes they will be much, much slower.
Sight reading factory is one site I know that does this a bit better
I agree. Reminds me of that story about chess grandmasters having incredible memory for valid chess positions but performing no better than average when remembering random piece arrangements. There's likely some efficient compression you can achieve by playing real-world music patterns rather than random notes. And it sounds better!
An interesting middle ground might be using LLMs to generate plausible melodies based on real-world music patterns and emphasizing the unfamiliar patterns, but if the goal is to play real music fluently, nothing beats practicing with actual pieces from the repertoire you want to play.
This is the first thing I noticed when I saw a sample of music. How useful could sight reading random notes actually be? I can't imagine it's completely useless but a lot of music is remarkably similar and quite predictable. I'd imagine practicing sight reading music with real structure would be far more useful for understanding those patterns and helping learn new and more complex pieces.
I think the author is discounting their own design sense which is necessary to come up with the ideas! (Or even to take inspiration from other sites.)
Side note, better not animate with useState when you can use CSS animations, react renders are cheap but they add up and can't match the browser's layout/styling engine!
I am a full stack developer specializing in Typescript. I'm comfortable with bringing greenfield apps from conception/design to deployment, database and api architecture and implementation, web design, and even more niche tech-adjacent fields such as teaching and the arts.
I pride myself on initiative, curiosity and high productivity. I also like playing the viola and studying Chinese :)
Throat singing is just a band-pass filter. Having a rich set of frequencies can be helpful, but it's unnecessary for producing the overtones. Throat singing and "whistle singing" are effectively the same technique, except that in throat singing a wider collection of overtones is selected for (not necessarily wider band, but wider "matching partials" to the fundamental frequency)
Are we talking about the same thing? I mean the Mongolian throat signing in that YouTube link, which has crazy low fundamentals (I have a deep bass voice and it's much lower than I can sing).
No, you aren't, and it isn't vocal fry. Overtone singing is a distinct technique in Tuvan throat singing, and comparing it to a bandpass filter is accurate — as a whole, Tuvan throat singing is a set of techniques designed to induce vocal sounds with extremely rich harmonics, which can then be modulated and selected for by shaping the mouth.
What you're thinking of is called "Kargyraa", a particular subset of Tuvan techniques that involves singing with the vocal cords as normal, but also tightening the voicebox such that your "false vocal cords" (some flaps somewhere in your throat) are struck at a frequency an octave below the sung note — for every full cycle your vocal cords complete, the false vocal cords complete half of 1. It creates a rich sound which can be useful for the "bandpass" technique, but is fundamentally something different.
Take this with a small grain of salt, I came to this technique through the modern beatboxing community who independently discovered it as the standard "throat bass" and only bothered researching the Tuvan equivalent a long time ago.
There is a bass singing technique called "subharmonics" that uses something similar (identical?) to vocal fry to create interference with a sung note for a similar effect.
