3 ms·

True, maybe you can find a test which asks, instead of a single button click, to click one of 4 possibilities for a reaction? EDIT: see appendix A.3 Perception

Jensson 2y ago
You mean like typing? Typing we click buttons accurately in sequence, people can type way faster than 10 bits per second. Then consider something more complex like drawing, you draw way way way more than 10 bits a second.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  not like typing, which is largely automatic; conscious decisions per second. EDIT: not the expanded bit rate, the optimally compressed bit rate, if that makes sense? EDIT2: typing at 90 wpm is 1,5 wps, or <10 bps according to Shannon (~1 bit per letter, 5 letters per word)
  - LPisGood 2y ago
    > not like typing, which is largely automatic; conscious decisions per second. That’s kind of a cop out - at what point do very quick conscious decisions become “automatic.”
  - Jensson 2y ago
    > EDIT2: typing at 90 wpm is 1,5 wps, or <10 bps according to Shannon (~1 bit per letter, 5 letters per word) People can type way faster than 90 WPM, we talk about bitrate of the hardware here its the same even if you haven't practiced typing. And typing is still not what our consciousness is made to do, we have way higher bitrate than that when doing more native tasks such as running in the woods. You can't run in the woods without consciously thinking about each step and deciding where to put your foot next to not hurt your ankle and not collide with trees, that has a massive bitrate.
    - 73kl4453dz 2y ago
      Running in the woods supports TFA: 180 steps per minute * 16 possible locations per step = 12 bits per second; maybe there are fewer or more possible footfall spots but no matter what it's more than 1 bit per second and less than 100. (and way less than 1e9)
whatever0124 2y ago
Any FPS is this but with about a million possibilities (depends on the screen resolution). People can become crazy good at it. Before you say it does not require decisions - you can have friendly fire on. IO is the problem not processing power.

Jensson 2y ago

You mean like typing? Typing we click buttons accurately in sequence, people can type way faster than 10 bits per second. Then consider something more complex like drawing, you draw way way way more than 10 bits a second.

082349872349872 2y ago
not like typing, which is largely automatic; conscious decisions per second. EDIT: not the expanded bit rate, the optimally compressed bit rate, if that makes sense? EDIT2: typing at 90 wpm is 1,5 wps, or <10 bps according to Shannon (~1 bit per letter, 5 letters per word)
- LPisGood 2y ago
  > not like typing, which is largely automatic; conscious decisions per second. That’s kind of a cop out - at what point do very quick conscious decisions become “automatic.”
- Jensson 2y ago
  > EDIT2: typing at 90 wpm is 1,5 wps, or <10 bps according to Shannon (~1 bit per letter, 5 letters per word) People can type way faster than 90 WPM, we talk about bitrate of the hardware here its the same even if you haven't practiced typing. And typing is still not what our consciousness is made to do, we have way higher bitrate than that when doing more native tasks such as running in the woods. You can't run in the woods without consciously thinking about each step and deciding where to put your foot next to not hurt your ankle and not collide with trees, that has a massive bitrate.
  - 73kl4453dz 2y ago
    Running in the woods supports TFA: 180 steps per minute * 16 possible locations per step = 12 bits per second; maybe there are fewer or more possible footfall spots but no matter what it's more than 1 bit per second and less than 100. (and way less than 1e9)

whatever0124 2y ago

Any FPS is this but with about a million possibilities (depends on the screen resolution). People can become crazy good at it. Before you say it does not require decisions - you can have friendly fire on. IO is the problem not processing power.