Or one can view it as the increasing intellectual vacuousness of ideas on the "right". (In quotes because the dividing line between left and right itself has shifted rightward over the years.)
16,252 karma · joined October 13, 2008
Nor did Rasha Alawieh: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_Rasha_Alawieh
In the context of synthesizers, "buzzing" quality is associated with unfiltered basic waveforms: sawtooth, square, triangle (to a lesser extent), pulse (notably so). A sawtooth wave is used, for example, as the bass sound in Gorillaz' "DARE".
More generally, in my personal experiments, "buzzing" is associated with the presence of discontinuities in the waveform (i.e., the Dirac delta and its antiderivatives). Any discontinuity is associated with sonic energy at all frequencies, at a highly localised point in time. (See the Fourier transform of Dirac delta (anti)derivatives here [1].) Higher antiderivatives of the Dirac delta have progressively less energy at higher frequencies; beyond the 2nd antiderivative buzzing is not really audible.
Aside – a pulse wave is a series of Dirac deltas; a sawtooth is the 1st-order antiderivative thereof; a square wave is a series of sign-alternating 1st-order Dirac delta antiderivatives; and a triangle wave is alternating 2nd-order Dirac delta antiderivatives. Hence – buzziness in these waveforms.
The human ear has a Q of about 15 (very approximate) – meaning its response at any frequency lasts for about 15 cycles of that frequency. So, when presented with a periodic discontinuity (e.g. sawtooth wave), the sonic content below about 15 times the base frequency will tend to cohere together into a tone, while the sonic content above 10 times the base frequency will tend to be perceived independently of frequency – as a buzzing. (See Bell, "A Resonance Approach to Cochlear Mechanics".)
So, if you want to increase the amount of buzzing in a waveform, you can add localized "packets" of high-frequency sonic energy up to a rate 1/15 that of the lowest frequency content of said packets. You can experiment with this in Audacity by generating sawtooth waves of various frequencies (between 25-250 Hz, where buzzing is easily audible) and low- and high-passing them appropriately to separate the "tonal" (low-frequency) content from the "buzz" (high-frequency) content. Then mix and match the two from different frequency waveforms two create a waveform at your desired base frequency with your desired rate of buzzing.
Finally, a more pedestrian – and very common – way that the above is achieved is the synthesis technique known as "supersaw", by which a handful of slightly-detuned sawtooth waves are mixed together. Beside giving a "shimmering" effect which one gets from mixing any slightly-detuned sounds together, this also results in increased "buzziness". This effect is very common in pop electronic music. E.g. the bass sound in Lady Gaga's "Just Dance" is a good example.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform#Distribution...
If you "mess with" the phase information of the harmonics relative to the base harmonic, this is the same thing as changing where the sonic energy of those harmonics falls in the wavecycle. So notably, in the cases listed above where the sonic energy falls into small "packets", if you randomize that phase information relative to a much lower tone (as Paulstretch does), you now have spread that energy throughout the full wavecycle. This eliminates any sensation of "buzzing" or "clicking" and makes transients "mushy".
The effect is most noticeable on raw synthesized tones: sawtooth, square wave, etc. These tones contain sonic energy concentrated at discontinuities in the waveforms. The ear can hear this, as a "buzzing sound".
Run these tones through Paulstretch (even with 0 stretch), and the sonic energy is distributed throughout the wavecycle. These tones retain their spectral character, but noticeably lose the buzzing character.
I've uploaded a demo here: https://chris.pacejo.net/temp/phase.wav It is a 55 Hz sawtooth tone, alternating every 2.5 s between the raw tone, and the tone fed through Paulstretch with no stretching.
There was even a paper written on this. Laitinen, Disch & Pulkki, "Sensitivity of Human Hearing to Changes in Phase Spectrum". [1]
Paulstretch muddies up percussive transients (like hi hat strikes) as well.
Anyway it's the reason things like gammatone filters exist for analyzing audio. They reveal phase correlations in the same way the ear is able to. Windowed Fourier transforms (used by e.g. Paulstretch and Audacity for various purposes) obfuscate these relationships.
Aside: please try to avoid snarky armchair dismissals on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "you are trying to sound intelligent" does not advance discourse.
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ville-Pulkki/publicatio...
This is unfortunately true of Unixes as well.
(The tracing handler getting registered twice is just a canary.)
You can't batch sequential transactions without violating the semantics of `COMMIT`. (Data is after all not durable if it's not flushed to disk!) Hence such behavior is not the default in quality databases.
If you are issuing many sequential writes and you don't care about them being individually committed, you can and should group them.
Linux has two main disk I/O paths, buffered and direct I/O.
Direct I/O indicates "channel end" by the completion of the write operation. By that point, data has been transferred to disk from the buffer and the buffer can be reused. (Notably, direct I/O may be performed asynchronously via the Linux AIO API.) Contrary to popular belief, this does not indicate that the data is safely committed to disk. [1]
Buffered I/O does not require the concept of "channel end", since write calls complete immediately after the buffer contents have been copied into kernel space. (This mode is what PostgreSQL uses by default. I don't know MySQL.)
In either case, `fsync(2)` (or `fdatasync(2)`) is used to indicate "device end". The disk has indicated that data is safely stored. (This can likewise be monitored asynchronously, either via the AIO API for direct I/O, or `sync_file_range(2)` for buffered I/O. The latter is used by PostgreSQL [2].)
Aside – Linux has also recently grown support for this concept in its networking API, via zerocopy `send(2)` functionality in io_uring.
This suggestion has gotten brought up often over the past few decades.
Remember that every IP packet has a destination and source address. There is no physical way for a v4-only host to directly communicate with another host which has an address from a larger address space. Doing so requires NAT. Which can be and is used today for v4-v6 connectivity.
Not to armchair this, but I am intrigued by what logic someone concluded that, an image captioned as "two creatures", which appears to show two identical creatures standing next to each other, is actually one conjoined creature.
For those similarly confused by the title as I.
"Untrained musician directing an unrehearsed piece" is not even how orchestras work.
I would personally not use Discord for activist coordination. All your communications are stored on their servers.
The memory loss was worse than they were led to believe: near-dementia levels of short-term memory loss during treatment, and still now a year of missing memories from around the time of treatment.
The treatment itself left them without time or energy to do anything whatsoever on the days of treatment, and still weakened on the days off treatment.
And, it did seemingly nothing to address their depression.
So, YMMV.
Care to use your own words to carry on the conversation rather than just stirring the pot with a seemingly unrelated and controversial opinion stated via someone else's words?