I can also do this, don't have perfect pitch, was also a cello player, and have a guess.
Instruments have fairly unique timbres at different pitches, and our brain can pattern match that more effectively than pitch itself. So, you can actually "burn in" the correct timbre, which makes it easier to find. Since I was so used to an A reference note for tuning, I got to where I could get pretty close.
Years later, I saw this video, with someone who seems to have brute forced it to approximate perfect pitch using a similar method: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oT22zqg0jvE
FWIW: I'm an investor in all of Calm's funds (I think I was one of the earliest investors in Fund 1), and have been quite happy with the funds themselves. They've done great — outperforming my own expectations.
As indie.vc also found, it's just hard to make these styles of funds work on the business side.
I'm an LP in both Calm and the fund, SureSwift, that's suing them, so I suspect I know as much as anyone external. Weirdly, the only information I've been able to glean is from Calm, but I did participate in the events personally that are part of the litigation.
The other fund, SureSwift, had some drama (founding GP left, replaced with a hired CEO who seems entirely competent), and SureSwift shortly after sued Calm and the former GP. I never got a good picture what happened internally, but there certainly was a falling out.
Speaking personally, the lawsuit seems like a giant waste of time and I haven't heard anything that makes me think Calm actually did anything wrong. I've asked, and got very confusing empty responses from SureSwift. I wish I knew more, since I love this space (calm companies, micro PE, etc) and am personally invested on both sides.
I do pottery as a serious hobby (though, people buy my stuff), and was recently talking with a friend about how—for me—it's not really about producing art, but the personal experience of making pieces.
I'm glad people like what I make, but I do it not to say something, and rather to experience something.
I recently had a conversation with a friend about that, it's a pet peeve of mine. My angle is that looking at a picture, a painting, I can have a rough idea of what it felt like to produce it (because at some point or another I draw a doodle or tried drawing). Ditto for dancing or singing. But sculpture seems different. I am separated from sculptures in two ways: first I don't have the experience of sculpting so I am not connected to the experience of creating a sculpture (what the artist experienced, granted I never can but I don't even have a rough idea) ; secondly I can't touch the piece of art, it's really rare when you are allowed to touch the sculpture or the installation and I think it's something that doesn't happen with paintings or dancing. The art of painting and dancing are more accessible to me just by watching but sculpting escapes me.
I think my feeling is that I believe I'd appreciate sculptures more if I could touch them. I don't need to touch a painting or a dancer to appreciate them. It's visual for me (and kinetic for the dancer). Sculptures are visual but I think I am missing out by not being able to touch them.
so, quickly, most pots are made of two materials, a glaze and a clay body; the sound a pot makes when you strike it is a good proxy for the fit of these two materials... if you looked into this in detail you would discover that the larger North American audience has little understanding of good vs bad ceramics which makes it difficult to sell high quality ceramics here. The asian market is much better attuned to what make a pot good vs bad
I'll add that, as someone who likes seeing the brush strokes in a painting up close, I'd enjoy being able to touch the texture of the painting (if it was allowed and this didn't damage the painting, which sadly it does).
I moved to a new town a few years ago, and was worried about forming a new social group. What did it for me: be the instigator. Most people want to improve their social connections, and many have the same sort of "starting problem". Being the one to organize events is a surprisingly easy way to immediately have many people around, and importantly lets you set the terms of the engagement.
The best short, easy resource on what I mean is this book: https://party.pro/book/. The Art of Gathering is another good one if you want to go deeper.
You may be concerned that you don't know many people, so can't easily organize an event where people would come. This is actually solvable (see the book above). The nice thing is that this also lets you risk and experiment with social failure ("what if people don't show?", etc), which in my experience is the cause of a lot of social anxiety.
Been using Reader as my primary reading + save for later app for a few months. It's truly a joy — it's fast, simple, and works really well. There's obviously a cold-start problem where you need to use it for a bit to get most of the value, so I'd encourage anyone here that's interested in a similar app to give it a couple weeks.
- easy to send articles to it (with or without highlights) from any platform I use (Android, iOS, Chrome), or by forwarding emails, or by subscribing to mailing lists using the reader email address
- nice way to read Twitter threads
- nice workflow for creating flashcards from highlights
- keyboard shortcuts on web
- reading feels immersive, and choose a next article is easy
I am usually reluctant to add yet another monthly subscription, but this is so nice that I paid for an annual subscription a couple of hours after I started using it.
Exact same experience for me. They’ve done a great job of combining all the disparate parts of the digital reading experience and it’s only been getting better over the months since the devs are extremely responsive to feedback and they implement changes quickly.
I miss chatting with that! It was so interactive. I wonder if it could be translated to communication between more than two parties. It sure would be interesting to see a prototype of something like that.
I seem to recall seeing people use that around the undergraduate CS lab.
I should have mentioned that what was new (to me) when I was introduced to talk/ntalk was the concurrency of the split screen: both parties just clacking away at the same time
As a user of dial-up BBSes, I had often chatted 1:1 with sysops, nor as a sysop with users. The BBS sysop chat implementations were different/simpler; both parties were typing into the same space. This required manners: taking turns, letting the other people finish their sentence. That's the same like a Windows user being remotely assisted today: you and the remote admin can both move the mouse cursor or type into the same edit boxes.
Seems more like incomplete data. Spot checked a few of the "programming" ones that did not have "paid vacation" listed, and sure enough, they do (example: https://convertkit.com/careers/).
Instruments have fairly unique timbres at different pitches, and our brain can pattern match that more effectively than pitch itself. So, you can actually "burn in" the correct timbre, which makes it easier to find. Since I was so used to an A reference note for tuning, I got to where I could get pretty close.
Years later, I saw this video, with someone who seems to have brute forced it to approximate perfect pitch using a similar method: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oT22zqg0jvE