To be fair, they're not exactly wrong. Worth repeating with N=10,100,... until we get a robust conclusion, but as it is, there's not much to go on in this one
Exactly. We're not researchers and many of us will internalize the finding without the proper confidence weighting. I wish reporting and HN had a higher standard for studies linked on the site with higher N and ideally some independent replications.
If the results is really interesting and novel then why aren't others racing to replicate it? Because it is not. Yet we're reporting it here with N=1.
The lack of an option on Windows makes it harder to justify when alacritty + nvim achieves great speeds as well, with all the customizability and what not.
Can anyone chime in on whether using zed on wsl is viable, or loses all the speed benefits?
This is such an all-or-nothing thought. We can aim for "better", or even just "good enough", without aiming for absolute perfection or mediocrity, and things will still keep getting better.
His point is excessively perfectionistic at best, to the point of detriment, and at worst... well, it's pedantic.
To follow this analogy, isn't it possible then for someone to study precisely what the difference is, and become an expert, thus bringing us back into the level of expertise we were at at the start of the analogy?
Surely the experts didn't all learn from each other; who was the first expert? That expert surely learned in some other way, so the only thing lost at the start of the analogy is the time required for someone interested to (re)achieve mastery.
Sure, related to tuning because it's a pretty closed problem. The expertise in terms of tuning was developed over about ~800 years, but the math for modern tuning was known 500 years ago. It's conceivable that one could re-invent equal temperament and then quickly re-invent the modern tuner given everything we know about electronics and audio processing. However, that knowledge all builds on itself. If we decide that all audio processing is done with RNNs/ML instead of objective ("old") mathematics, then we're going to lose the ability to make a tuner, too, and eventually we'll need a new Fourier to come back up with the Fourier transform.
About the tomatoes in the other comment chain? Your guess is as good as mine whether we can recover that knowledge.
I heard that pianos have stretched harmonic series due to string tension/weight/something, so piano tuners actually have to tune upper notes higher and lower notes lower, while ensuring various harmonics interact well. There's quite a bit of art to it rather than pure numeric ratios (which may or may not be possible to encapsulate in ML).
