diff --git a/NOTES.md b/NOTES.md
index 39045c7..ecf1692 100644
--- a/NOTES.md
+++ b/NOTES.md
@@ -1,19 +1,24 @@
 # NOTES
 
-RAM8
-: trick is to figure out how to mux twice based on address, once for setting the load bit and once for picking the correct output bus.
+## RAM8
 
-RAM64
-: Interesting part here is that the MSB|LSB decision is arbitary. You could use the LSB to pick the RAM8 module, and use the MSB as the address within the RAM8, and it _would still work_. The caller for RAM64 doesn't care how you use the "complete address". It just cares that you return the same thing for that address.
+trick is to figure out how to mux twice based on address, once for setting the load bit and once for picking the correct output bus.
 
-RAM512
-: I used the premise of the previous note and decided to index the RAM64 moduls by the LSB instead of the customary MSB. It still works :metal:
+## RAM64
 
-PC
-: The Program Counter was tricky. I ended up using a Or8Way (instead of a `Or3Way`, which we don't have) along with `Mux8Way16` to pick the input for the register. Since the Mux has duplicate inputs at this point (supports 8, but we only have 3 special, and 1 neutral case) - this can be optimized by switching to a `Mux4Way16`, along with some other changes.
+Interesting part here is that the `MSB|LSB` decision is arbitary. You could use the LSB to pick the RAM8 module, and use the MSB as the address within the RAM8, and it _would still work_. The caller for RAM64 doesn't care how you use the "complete address". It just cares that you return the same thing for that address.
 
-Fill.asm
-: Figured out that my RAM16K implementation was wrong while working on this. The rough pseudocode would be:
+## RAM512
+
+I used the premise of the previous note and decided to index the RAM64 moduls by the LSB instead of the customary MSB. It still works :metal:
+
+## PC
+
+The Program Counter was tricky. I ended up using a Or8Way (instead of a `Or3Way`, which we don't have) along with `Mux8Way16` to pick the input for the register. Since the Mux has duplicate inputs at this point (supports 8, but we only have 3 special, and 1 neutral case) - this can be optimized by switching to a `Mux4Way16`, along with some other changes.
+
+## Fill.asm
+
+Figured out that my RAM16K implementation was wrong while working on this. The rough pseudocode would be:
 ```c
 int r0=*screen;
 while(true) {
@@ -42,13 +47,16 @@ while(true) {
 
 So every "cycle" of the loop, we are coloring an entire row. The row is decided by R0, which is set to @SCREEN at the start. So if you press a key while we are on the middle of the loop (say 120th row), everything from that row onwards would get painted in black, and then the loop resets r0=\*screen once we cross the limits. The next iteration of the loop then starts filling the white pixels we'd left in the previous iteration. I kept the smallest paint unit as the row, but it doesn't really matter that much. The only difference is that I'm reading kbd a total of 256 times to paint the screen. Reading once per register also would work, and reading once per "screenfill" would also work. But that changes the 'delay' b/w your keyboard press and the screen fill start. I thought per row was a good compromise.
 
-Memory
-: Started by using a Mux4Way16, but then decided against making the same mistake I did in PC. Switched to 2 Mux16s instead.
+## Memory
 
-CPU
-: No tricks, fairly straight forward implementation of a few Mux atop the ALU. Things I missed on the first pass:
+Started by using a Mux4Way16, but then decided against making the same mistake I did in PC. Switched to 2 Mux16s instead.
+
+## CPU
+
+No tricks, fairly straight forward implementation of a few Mux atop the ALU. Things I missed on the first pass:
  - Ensuring that control bits for writeM or jumps are _only_ set when instruction is C. This is just ANDing the relevant control bit with instruction[15]
  - `!ng != positive`. Zero being the exception. So `positive = !(ng | zr)`. I think the whole jumpToAddress bit calculation can be improved though.
 
-Computer
-: The hardest part about this was deciding what name to give to all the pins
+## Computer
+
+The hardest part about this was deciding what name to give to all the pins