Monomorphisation is the name of the technique of producing a different version of the code for each set of type parameters that are used in the program. C++ and Rust use monomorphisation instead of doing runtime checks because they're trading off slightly bigger binaries for greater speed.
By not doing runtime checks you get to skip that work at runtime, obviously, but you also get to enable other optimizations like inlining the monomorphised version.
We're planning on following that one up with a more robust study, because our users do get great results with HRV and it's an interesting topic.
One of our former neuroscientists published a meta-analysis, but it's a bit outdated now re: what we're doing. Still, it's on our site or in the journal if you're interested. :)
On the brain.fm they list results, but they are super flimsy. For focus, for example, n=17, and the difference between music vs non-music is much smaller than the standard deviation of either group.
So it's possible this stuff helps you focus, but it doesn't appear to be showing up on these studies.
It's actually a really good result, for a number of reasons. But I'll let Giovanni respond to this later and clarify (he's the neuroscientist that wrote the paper).
I apologize for the delay, he's dealing with some family and health problems right now. But I promise we'll clear this up.
My first thought was Lumosity [1]. I'd love for these claims to be real, but I'm just not willing to believe claims like these until I see a significant result in a randomized controlled trial.
It's pending publication, but it'll get there. And now we have enough info to start a double blind. Sleep one is also pending publication.
The HRV (stress/anxiety) trial is already published, and was completely independent. We didn't even know about it until it was published. There's more in the science section too.
I remember when that Lumosity BS came out. We'd been around for 4 years already at that point. Now that it's finally us taking off, we're pouring everything into the science. We're going to do this right.
(oh, sorry, I just realized I'd already replied to you above. I'll leave this here though, for anyone who's interested)
Hi Adam, I love that you did an RCT. What journal did this get published in?
I've been using Brain.FM since yesterday, first with speakers in another room, then with speakers in my office and separated by about 2m, and finally today with Bose noise canceling headphones (I can kind of hear the 3d effect, but it is vastly outweighed by my ears overheating in the headphones). I liked #2 the best; some tracks the 3d effect was pronounced. I tend to like the percussion tracks a lot more --- going back to the webpage to skip etc is a pain. Why not provide a list of effects that you can select from and if I hate violin (bad example) then I can exclude tracks that use it.
In the past I've used rain / thunderstorm recordings. I have a Marpac noise machine with a actual mechanical fan inside. I found that machine great for sleep - but then I had a baby and she confiscated it for her own use :-)
This post (http://stackoverflow.com/a/194207/438615) makes a good case for "computation builder." Also, as there are abstract data types (stack, queue, etc), monads are abstract control flow types. Another answer there suggests "control type". Something even better is probably possible, but I like both of those better than "monad".
Professional ethics of software engineering is definitely something we're going to have to grapple with more and more. Another aspect is being asked to use Dark Patterns in a UI or build a skinner box into a game or app. There's evidence that these things do harm to people and having a professional organization that could help stand up to such things could be part of a solution.
The way I remember it: the product was still overwhelmingly better than everything else. Missing copy&paste was an "oh well" compared to owning an iPhone in 2007.
