> Additionally, during attention demanding tasks, sufficient deactivation of the default mode network at the time of memory encoding has been shown to result in more successful long-term memory consolidation.[33]
> Studies have shown that when people watch a movie,[34] listen to a story,[35][36] or read a story,[37] their DMNs are highly correlated with each other. DMNs are not correlated if the stories are scrambled or are in a language the person does not understand, suggesting that the network is highly involved in the comprehension and the subsequent memory formation of that story.[36] The DMN is shown to even be correlated if the same story is presented to different people in different languages,[38] further suggesting the DMN is truly involved in the comprehension aspect of the story and not the auditory or language aspect.
> The default mode network is deactivated during some external goal-oriented tasks such as visual attention or cognitive working memory tasks.[7] However, with internal goal-oriented tasks, such as social working memory or autobiographical tasks, the DMN is positively activated with the task and correlates with other networks such as the network involved in executive function.[8] Regions of the DMN are also activated during cognitively demanding tasks that require higher-order conceptual representations.[10] The DMN shows higher activation when behavioral responses are stable, and this activation is independent of self-reported mind wandering.[39] Meditation, which involves focusing the mind on breathing and relaxation, is associated with reduced activity of the DMN.[40]
I will not download them on a train, I will not download them on a plane, I will not download them in a box, I will not download them with Firefox. I will not download them Sam I am.
For me, trying film after growing up in the post-digital world was more about exploring the experience of the medium and why we ended up where we are. It's given me an appreciation for why slowing down with your subject can increase "keepers".
I've come to the same realization after shooting digital, film, and back to digital again.
I've found that if I apply "recipes" or "presets" to my camera and shoot jpg I get roughly what I want straight out of camera. In fact, I find that shooting jpg exclusively with a preset _almost_ scratches that film itch: there is a kind of permanency to the rendered output, and that forces me to slow down and think about what I want to render with this subject like one does with film.
Once I'm done shooting I simply import to Apple photos and make very light edits from there if any before sharing.
It's liberating to embrace constraints and reduce tooling. You might even have fun.
I'm still doing iOS dev on my 2020 M1 MPB, and it's fine! I expect that if I change out its battery and apply new thermal paste it would run for another 6 years.
This machine has me asking why much older hardware can't run newer versions of macOS. The answer of course is Apple needs to sell new machines, but the Neo may be proof that decade old Macs could run Tahoe as well as or better than the Neo.
> but the Neo may be proof that decades old macs could run Tahoe, and maybe as well or better than the Neo
The A18 Pro is going to out perform many "decades old" processors, which would you be referring to?
I wouldn't conflate "affordable" with "low-end" in terms of processing speed. Apple is able to get the price to this point because of decisions that the rest of the market did not make.
I think an old Mac Pro quad Xeon with 32gb of ram and an ssd of that era could do it. I agree that most cpus from 20 years ago could not. I understand that doing it and doing it well aren’t the same.
I'm not sure this really makes sense. The single core performance for the iphone chip is leagues ahead of anything even a couple years old. They can likely increase clock speed of the iphone chip in a larger chassis so the performance isn't exactly 1:1 with the 16 pro, which was hardly a slacker. 8gb on apple silicon goes much further than 8gb would have on an intel chip, due to faster and on chip RAM and much faster storage to enable smoother use of swap.
I'd agree that an m1 chip can probably continue to run modern macOS for a very long time, and they will likely drop support for it much earlier than they would need to.
I totally agree on the M1 bit. I just think there are so many capable machines that are unnecessarily scraped when they could be working with up to date software. Sure, they can run modern Linux or windows, but doesn’t that mean they could probably run modern Mac OS in theory as well?
I understand that running for power users and running for my uncle aren’t the same.
Eager to see the Xcode benchmark on this. Would expect it to be similar to the M1, but we shall see! I still use my M1 MBP for light mobile development work. Sure it's slow, but it certainly works. It's wild to think you can buy a new laptop that costs less than an iPhone and write apps for an iPhone.
What's fun about this machine is its constraints, and it sort of reminds me of one of my processors orchestrating our school's server cluster via nothing but an 11" MacBook Air back in the day.
Since we're already dealing in absurds here, what if one were to Doordash 50 servings of wings as a emergency/backup catering option for a banquet or wedding? That could easily top $500-800. I sure some consumers—including financially secure ones—would appreciate an interest free loan option on that.
Obviously there is also the opposite dark and pessimistic take here, but there are potentially good things as well?
As a financially secure person, why would I want to spend $800 today when I can spend $800 over four months with no penalty? It doesn't make any sense in the slightest, that is unless you're not savvy enough to keep track of your money?
I was mistaken in thinking it was longer than that. If it is only about two months then it's of little value over a conventional CC (depending on when you buy it in your statement cycle).
My example with the wings is an extreme/incidental use-case, and I realize that it'd be atypical to unheard of in practice.
The sort of person who would order wings as their backup catering for a wedding doesn't shouldn't be borrowing for this, one would think. If they did need the loan they were already stretching themselves far too thin for a wedding event.
Well, what if you were in budget, your caterer failed to meet their obligation but aren't paying you back for several business days, and that extra $800 put you just over budget?
This is an extreme/incidental example, and very likely isn't how this feature is going to be used in practice: I realize that.
>The sort of person who would order wings as their backup catering for a wedding doesn't shouldn't be borrowing for this, one would think.
We're splitting hairs over personal opinions on personal finance here.
>Well, what if you were in budget, your caterer failed to meet their obligation but aren't
Ok. This is for someone who is thinking that they need another $500-800 for the backup catering. For them, an extra $800 with no warning is an expense they can't just eat with the change in their pocket either, one presumes. But they're budgeting for a wedding that likely costs upwards of $7500 (all other costs considered), and they're spending that much without being able to set aside another $1000 for last minute incidentals? I think that this cost might just be the sort of bad decision making that we're all talking about rather than a legitimate use case. And that's even allowing for the recovery of the funds from the original caterer.
The net effect is 0 if you're being paid back and paying back on time. How is this any different from putting it on a CC and paying it back on time? What's the big deal here that warrants this level of discussion? Why not let others do them and you do you? Maybe the real bad decision we're all participating in here—myself included—is feeling the need to split hairs over a hypothetical situation about personal opinions on personal finance?
Debt affects everyone, not just the borrower and the lender. When lenders make one bad loan, society can bear that burden and especially so if many of the loans are good loans that serve mutual interest. When most of the loans are bad, taxpayers pay to enforce loan terms (not the lender), then they pay again when the economy melts down (the lender just reincorporates under some other business name). So it is a big deal when someone is proposing an entirely new class of lending, and it does warrant this level of discussion. If anything, it warrants a much more intense level of discussion than what we've seen so far or what we are likely to see.
Your inability to grasp this is disturbing and should come across as some sort of profound warning to everyone.
You've stepped way out of the discussion we were having and are now engaging in sanctimonious grandstanding.
> Your inability to grasp this is disturbing and should come across as some sort of profound warning to everyone.
Way out of line, dude. Now you're insulting my ability to understand things? You think I don't know about all that? Obviously there are plenty of people who don't deserve credit, but there are also plenty who do. I take pride in having an exceptional credit score.
I'd get those wings. And I'd have a 'profound' time sharing them with friends and family making memories.
13 year ago I had a professor who had one of these 11" Airs for this exact reason. He was always tunneled into some other system and the Air primarily served as his terminal. He loved it for that.
