4 ms·
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
by 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 agoRunning 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)