I was going to reply that zooming in on pictures is a path that leads only to madness, but you’re right; that is messed up.

GP said they own a M4/3 camera, which is mirrorless.

I have one myself, so I'm aware -- just didn't see that part of the post properly. Fixed my comment accordingly.

Anyway, the simple answer is that a full-frame mirrorless is for people who want the features you can't get in a DSLR, and also for the size and weight advantage. If you don't already have a bunch of lenses invested in some previous system, then it's pretty obvious why you'd choose a mirrorless when starting from scratch.

For a simple example, any music that “grooves” (makes you want to tap your feet) tends to not be perfectly sub-divided into 4 beats. Different players in the same band may be intentionally (and/or subconsciously) hitting their notes on different parts of the beat to increase this effect. In this type of scenario there really isn’t any substitution for practice and “feel”, a metronome would never get you there.

In terms of piano, GP may have been referring to rubato, or holding notes for longer/shorter than notated for artistic effect.

I see. I guess it was just me misinterpreting "perfect". To me it's obviously not perfect to play like a robot.

Agree, "perfect accuracy" was a bad choice of words. When learning a new song it's best to "never play a wrong note" – to make sure you play each note with 100% accuracy, no matter how long it takes you. This trains your muscle memory much more efficiently than playing less than perfect and undoing the muscle-memory-learned mistakes as you go along.

Pop and jazz have "the pocket", which is where the groove clicks into maximum effectiveness.

Classical has phrasing.

IMO it's the same phenomenon. It's one of the most effective ways to add expression, and it's mostly taught aurally. There's very little in books for beginners about it.

If you're taught to play metronomically, you may never understand why it matters. Someone who is naturally musical will feel it without being told about it, but may still struggle to bring it out of their playing.

Roger Linn on groove: https://www.attackmagazine.com/features/interview/roger-linn...

It’s called “swing”, right?

In some contexts, yes.

But then who would deliver the ads?? /s

I completely agree, but with the arts as my object of fixation. I could never live the swanky life I lead without my current job, but damn I would have been a good potter. Luckily, there is still time...

I actually like LinkedIn because hey know they are the internet’s Rolodex and (more importantly) people on the site mostly use it that way. If I were pressured by society/peers to be “active” on LinkedIn in the same way we are pressured in an abstract sense to be on Facebook, it would lose all utility for me.

To be fair they became the internet's rolodex by outright stealing your address book and sending fake invites to people on your behalf.

And now they have put a join-wall that is hard to circumvent (erasing cookies does not seem to suffice). It is one of the reasons why I hope to never join Linkedin.

After deleting my account, I've had to look up a couple people recently and encountered that. My only thought is: "thanks LinkedIn for making yourself increasingly irrelevant"

What bugs me is getting asked by people I know in a personal context to recommend them professionally. I can vouch that they are reasonably nice, but I don't know anything about their work.

If I worked directly with someone and know they're good, I'm happy to endorse that.

For better or worse I index the opposite way. My CV is a markdown doc wrapped in the absolute minimum html/js to render it as a web page. If viewed as text it is perfectly readable sans a single line of css gobldeygook, if viewed as a web page it’s also perfectly readable.

Amazon gives loans to sellers; they have more info on their suppliers’ businesses than a bank could ever dream of.

Ageeed. Also seeing as LED bulbs are ~10x more efficient per lumen than incandescent, people are not installing 10x as much brightness in their homes

Perception of brightness is not linear. The human eye response is not linear. So x10 the luminous flux (power output) will be perceived as brighter but far from x10.

k.

People are still not installing 10x as much light.

not in their home, but I can see many more historical and institutionnal buildings being illuminated, commercial use also. It may still not amount to 10x though.

Streets, offices and shops are now better lit.

Offices and shops used neon lights. It lits as well as LED or better, but consumes a lot of power.

Do you mean fluorescent bulbs? They do not use neon, but rather use mercury vapor. The UV light from the mercury excites a fluorescent layer on the inside of the tube, causing broadband emission of visible light.

To bolster your other response: in college chemistry classes are split into two kinds: “organic chemistry”, and “everything else”. But he term “organic” in this context means “compounds with carbon atoms”. There are so many ways that carbon bonds to other atoms, and in such complex configurations that there are classes reserved for this single element. And as undergrads will tell you, these are the hard classes!

With apple mucic 100% of the money goes to the label. The label then has a contract with the artist for how much online sales get sent their way. This contract may be very complicated so it isn’t necessarily “I pay $1, artist gets $.20”. Artists and labels will have different agreements with each streaming service for how many plays equal one “download”, from ~10 to ~1000.

It's the same problem on all the streaming services. The deals are done with the labels, so even if the payment for each playback is reasonable, the label takes a huge cut.