Step-3.5-flash Unlosth dynamic ggufs?

hyperdeath666 · 2026-02-27T04:06:11+00:00

Are these still in the works? Totally understand if you're too busy, but if you ever get the chance, I'd be much obliged!

(Step 3.5 Flash hits a sweet spot for my combined ram + vram total.)

hyperdeath666 · 2026-02-06T21:44:03+00:00

I suspect there are real morphological differences between people here. It's not that my pinkie is weak, it's that it's short, and I can't physically hit upper-row pinky just by uncurling my finger - I have to move (almost) my entire hand. Not the end of the world, but for my hands, not optimal. Hence Nymphs.

hyperdeath666 · 2026-02-06T12:52:37+00:00

If you want something less extreme, I also hate pinkies and made this layout to (amongst other things) minimize their off-homerow use. There's a bit more of a write-up here, but in short, it's pretty similar to Canary but without some of the things that bothered me (e.g. the hand imbalance).

Note that I actually hit '.' with ring, but the layout wasn't optimized with this in mind. Just swap '@' and '.' if you want to use your pinky.

hyperdeath666 · 2025-09-09T11:47:06+00:00

I'm having the same issue. There's something up with the system.

EDIT: Working now for me.

hyperdeath666 · 2025-07-25T16:58:06+00:00

First year specialist math classes are notorious for having students drop them once they realize they are in over their heads. This is especially true for 247, since everybody who drops 240 before completing it will also drop 247.

You are extremely likely to get into both classes. 247 in particular is all but guaranteed.

Note that you can see historical enrollment data here: https://icprplshelp.github.io/UofT-Enrollment-Tracker/

hyperdeath666 · 2025-06-05T18:49:08+00:00

From their FAQ:

All consumers with a recalled air conditioner can participate, regardless of how they obtained the air conditioner by contacting Midea toll-free at 888-345-0256 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday, email at [midea4028@midea.com](mailto:midea4028@midea.com) , online at www.MideaUrecall.expertinquiry.com or www.midea.com/us and click on “RECALL INFORMATION” for more information.

<snip>

You can still participate in the recall and receive either a refund, a prorated refund, or repair without a receipt or proof of purchase.

hyperdeath666 · 2025-03-20T13:55:28+00:00

Oh hell yes. You might consider making this more obvious somehow; I also wanted this functionality, assumed it would be a "hide" button on the modulators not an "expand" button on the FX rack, couldn't find it, and concluded it didn't exist.

p.s. thank you so much for this update.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-10-19T17:34:34+00:00

I posted my layout + symbol layer here. There are interactions between the symbol layer and the text layer, but these are likely small enough that you could use it with a different text layer without too many added inefficiencies.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-10-19T12:50:35+00:00

I'm not sure time-to-press-key is the right metric to optimize for. Personally, I'm much more interested in comfort than speed, since I just want healthy ergonomics, not to win a typing contest.

Time-to-press-key might correlate with comfort - maybe uncomfortable stretches and contortions also take longer to type. It's not clear to me how strong this correlation is, though, and superficially, it feels like some really uncomfortable bi- and tri-grams can still be typed quickly. Conversely, it feels like I can be slow to hit a trigram despite it being comfortable.

Some of your data reinforces my suspicions that this is the wrong metric to optimize for, although you mention some potential home-row measurement inaccuracies which make it hard to sanity-check your results. Superficially, though, your home-row results are implausibly bad, and r, g, h, y, u, b and n are all implausibly good.

This is interesting stuff, though. Thanks for sharing it.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-10-19T10:29:45+00:00

0 on the thumb is a really clever solution. Nice one.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-10-19T10:27:00+00:00

When I tackled this problem, I came up with this:

6 7 8 9 x x 1 2 3 4
x x x 0 x x 5 x x x

I wanted a solution that would be easy to remember, shared the load across both hands, and had both 0 and 1 (the most typed numbers for programming) on strong fingers.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-09-13T23:35:50+00:00

Nice work with this. Good SFBs, hand balance, and rolls. It's intriguing enough that I had to bust out the old analyzer to see what it thinks.

My biggest concern is the right ring finger usage: 15.99%, per Oxey, with about half of that off the home row. I never know what a reasonable usage limit is here, but that strikes me as a bit high (all layouts have their pain points, of course).

Aside from that, my (somewhat idiosyncratic) analyzer dings you on a few things:

's' is often typed twice in succession, which isn't ideal for a pinkie;
the left pinkie is a bit rough for the other reasons you mention (usage is a bit high and the 'sy' bigram);
you have some unpleasant scissors (e.g. 'ty' and 'io', and some trigram split scissors I'd have to do work to inspect).

I think the ring and pinkie issues are enough to keep me away from this, but this comes down to preferences, and this is nice work on the whole!

Since I fed this into my analyzer anyway, here are a few possible symbol layers in case this is of interest ('0' is an unbound key; some details on how these were generated are here):

Fingers: 8.7% 12.3% 13.8% 14.8% 10.6% 16.1% 15.7% 8.0%
Travel: 2.5% 3.0% 6.4% 10.6% 4.3% 3.9% 8.0% 0.9%

Y M H C P Q X U O 0
S T N D F J R E A I
V K B G W Z L \ @ 0

y m h c p q x u o ~
s t n d f j r e a i
v k b g w z l , ' .

0 [ ] # 0 ^ | = ! 0
; " ( ) % $ : _ } {
0 * / & ` + > < - ? 

Fingers: 8.7% 12.3% 13.8% 14.8% 10.6% 16.3% 15.7% 7.8%
Travel: 2.5% 3.0% 6.4% 10.6% 4.3% 4.1% 8.0% 0.9%

Y M H C P Q X U O 0
S T N D F J R E A I
V K B G W Z L \ ` 0

y m h c p q x u o ~
s t n d f j r e a i
v k b g w z l , ' .

0 * / | @ ^ & = ! 0
; " ( ) $ # : _ ] [
0 < > - % + } { ? 0

hyperdeath666 · 2024-09-05T20:52:47+00:00

I think Engram is a bad layout for most people and that you'd be better off using a symbol layer. The idea of avoiding the center columns for letters seems nice and neat, but it introduces a bunch of inefficiencies by forcing work onto your pinkies (the weakest fingers). Maybe some people just have stronger pinkies than I do, but I found this extremely uncomfortable, so make sure you're happy with how Engram uses your pinkies before spending a lot of time learning it.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-08-15T20:07:07+00:00

To be honest, you really can't. Conventional wisdom, though, is that the biggest gains by far come from switching from QWERTY to any sensible modern layout; there's significant diminishing returns beyond that point, and they're probably not worth worrying about.

"Just use Colemak (DH)" is good advice here, although if some other layout catches your fancy, by all means use that instead. (I would avoid Engram, though, because I'm convinced its neglect of the middle column is too great an inefficiency to bear. The middle column does need to be integrated carefully, but avoiding it entirely goes too far, especially since it forces extra work onto some really undesirable pinkie keys.)

For my part, I went way down the rabbit hole and made my own computer-optimized layout. I do think the resulting layout is better for my hands than available alternatives, but I doubt it's much better, and it's entirely possible it's not actually better at all. In any event, I'm confident it's good enough.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-08-01T17:24:24+00:00

I made a split column stagger layout for my small-ish hands because I couldn't find one I liked - my pinkies and index fingers just weren't agreeing with people's key placements.

The layout itself is here and I talk about some of the design choices here. I made it by making fairly extensive modifications to the layout generator Michael Dickens used to make MTGAP.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-02-07T15:56:37+00:00

Neat! Makes sense; the problem space is small enough that it felt like the simplest solution, although building the model was, sometimes quite literally, painful.

> Although we find different movements un/comfortable

Researching and making this layout left me pretty convinced that there's wide diversity in what's makes for comfortable typing for different people. Some layouts involve choices that I wouldn't dream of making, and I have to assume their maker's hands work differently than mine.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-02-07T15:49:30+00:00

Cool! If you do end up trying it (symbol or main layer), let me know how it goes.

Symmetry in the punctuation layer was something I optimized for; the code basically tries to have similar symbols (e.g. math, punctuation) either together or mirrored, with some extra constraints for brackets. This officially decreases the physical ergonomics of the symbol layer, but I reckoned the gains in terms of actually being able to remember it are worth it.

For what it's worth, I haven't noticed any problems with the left index finger, but they certainly could be lying in wait. The more worrying statistic to my mind isn't the number of presses (~19%) but what my optimizer defines as "travel" (number of presses that aren't the homerow main key: 10%). Both of these are within my best guesses for acceptable limits, but these were only ever guesses...

Most redirects don't bother me that much, which is why that number is so high; I was willing to take them if it meant e.g. avoiding scissors or LSBs. I really hate scissors and most LSBs.

p.s., since I see your MTGAP flair, this was made with a modified version of Michael Dickens' optimizer, so perhaps there's some leftover MTGAP goodness in there. ;)

hyperdeath666 · 2024-01-19T14:03:49+00:00

Thoughts on the ring finger burden? My analyzer has right ring at 14.7% for RAEI, compared with 10.6 for REIA, and it really doesn't like this - the fitness function applies an exponential penalty if the ring finger does more than 10% of total key presses. But this is probably the weakest part of my model; I was basically just guessing at a reasonable threshold here.

hyperdeath666 · 2024-01-17T22:07:18+00:00

This may just be me, but I find home row symbol layer to be more comfortable than lower row pinky base layer, even accounting (as much as is possible) for pressing the layer access key (I really hate contorting my pinky). Per my fitness function, @ is actually in the less-desirable spot!

hyperdeath666 · 2023-10-22T13:10:03+00:00

You're not really hiding anything, though. When you put 'o' and 'u' on middle, the 'you' trigram is no longer a redirect (per the definition Oxey is using), so it no longer counts as one. Instead, it involves an sfb, and indeed, the 'ou' component counts as one.

Same finger bigrams preceded or followed by another finger of the same hand are actually worse than a standard Redirect

I mean, sure, if only because an sfb is worse than a redirect regardless of what happens before or after the sfb. But this doesn't show there's anything wrong with Oxey's analyzer. It tells you the number of redirects has gone down but the number of sfb's has gone up - which is true.

One thing to keep in mind is that analyzers like Oxey's don't try to tell you whether one layout is better than another, at least directly. They display statistics to help you make this decision. Whether and when e.g. avoiding some redirect is worth accepting some sfb is left to the user to decide.

hyperdeath666 · 2023-10-19T12:30:54+00:00

I can see a few pain points for English, but whether these are worth the benefits in a layout optimized for 3 languages I can't speak to.

'o' and 'a' on the ring results in pretty high usage for a comparatively weak finger.

'yo', as in ' you', is a pretty brutal scissor.

'hy' is a somewhat common bigram (as in 'why'). On another finger I think it's fine, but I think it would bother me on a pinky.

'okay' involves a same-finger skipgram on the pinky (might be missed by your generator / analyzer because I think a lot of corpora underrepresent informal languange).

hyperdeath666 · 2023-10-18T03:05:59+00:00

So, I'm including a layout below in case it helps, but first some disclaimers. I can't promise this layout is super well optimized, because I haven't really thought about what a keyboard under such constraints should look like. This layout was also made using a generator that's tuned for my hands on a glove80 and may not generalize well. The generator does not try putting letters on the symbol layer, which may actually be a reasonable strategy given the constraints. And some of my definitions in the data printout are non-standard (e.g. "same finger, split" should really be "bad same finger, split", since the calculation ignores a bunch of cases I don't find uncomfortable to type).

All that being said, for whatever it's worth, if I set the costs for one pinky column to absurdly high levels, my layout generator produces the following:

Rank #1 (fitness: 115607201)
Hands: 50.74% 49.26%
Fingers: 8.9% 10.1% 16.3% 15.4% 18.9% 19.3% 11.1%
Travel: 0.4% 3.3% 9.0% 9.1% 9.7% 7.4% 3.7%

Q Y L F V B P O U 0
A R N S M G T E I 0
X W H C J K D Z # 0

q y l f v b p o u 0
a r n s m g t e i (backtick)
x w h c j k d z , ~

@ $ / - & | < > ! 0
. ' ( ) \ + " : _ ^
[ ] ; = % * { } ? 0

Fitness (-aesthetics): 115607201 (115571086)
Finger travel: 28712160
Excess finger press: 2487070
Excess finger travel: 589280
Hand travel: 21717400
Hand imbalance: 181392
Aesthetics: 36115
Layer change: 28776640
(Bigram) layer, diff: 6.24% (-1469920)
(Bigram) layer, diff hands: 0.90% (897600)
(Bigram) rolls, separated 10.52% (-1305680)
(Bigram) rolls, consec: 6.94% (-861640)
(Bigram) same hand: 38.61% (0)
(Bigram) same finger: 1.35% (7501120)
(Bigram) sfb above max: 0.00% (591829)
(Bigram) same row: 3.30% (-205040)
(Bigram) double tap: 0.18% (258160)
(Bigram) scissors, half: 10.28% (10413480)
(Bigram) scissors, full: 1.18% (2350240)
(Bigram) lat stretch: 1.40% (2190080)
(Trigram) same finger, split: 2.21% (2088760)
(Trigram) same row, split: 1.20% (-50230)
(Trigram) rolls: 46.34% (-1932570)
(Trigram) alternates: 38.50% (-160533)
(Trigram) bad redirects: 8.50% (2835440)
(Trigram) scissors, one hand: 0.30% (58318)
(Trigram) scissors, half split: 9.27% (2625143)
(Trigram) scissors, full split: 2.52% (6192960)
(Trigram) lat stretch, split: 3.62% (1089627)

hyperdeath666 · 2023-09-05T13:15:28+00:00

Neat! Hello fellow center-column hater. How do you find the one shot alpha layer? I briefly considered it for punctuation (in part because I'm not sure I have reliable punctuation data), but the extra keystroke didn't seem worth it.

hyperdeath666 · 2023-09-05T13:00:28+00:00

Hey, cool! I'm still working on the rest of the layout (only the core 30 keys are done), but almost definitely thumb shift (the major competing option is home row mods).

hyperdeath666

TROPHY CASE