diff --git a/content/log/2024/web-compression.md b/content/log/2024/web-compression.md
index 07120d4..f8ffaf8 100644
--- a/content/log/2024/web-compression.md
+++ b/content/log/2024/web-compression.md
@@ -14,8 +14,7 @@ FUDing it. If I were the PR submitter, I would certainly not appreciate this
 comment. So I decided to conduct a non-scientific experiment: take a big piece
 of Javascript and compare brotli with zstd.
 
-Executive Summary
------------------
+# Executive Summary
 
 * brotli compresses my chosen piece of Javascript better than zstd by 4-22%.
 * zstd is faster than brotli by 50-80% (depending on platform) and uses less
@@ -44,8 +43,7 @@ Software:
 - brotli 1.1.0 from the distribution.
 - zstd v1.5.6 from the distribution.
 
-Test Harness
-------------
+# Test Harness
 
 I picked Youtube's `desktop_polymer.js`, because:
 
@@ -87,12 +85,11 @@ esac
 Then symlink to it for each compression level:
 
 ```
-$ for l in 3 6 19 22; do ln -s wrap zstd-${l}; done
+$ for l in 3 6 9 19 22; do ln -s wrap zstd-${l}; done
 $ ln -s wrap brotli
 ```
 
-Compression Ratio
------------------
+# Compression Ratio
 
 ```
 Filename     Bytes    % larger that br
@@ -114,8 +111,7 @@ itself somewhat of an advantage over other compressors for this corpus.
 Since `zstd -19` and `zstd -22` yield the same compression ratio, there is no
 point going ultra, I will exclude `zstd -22` from the tests.
 
-Decompression Speed
--------------------
+# Decompression Speed
 
 ```
 hyperfine --export-markdown $(hostname) -w 1 -N ./zstd-{3,6,9,19} ./brotli
@@ -145,8 +141,7 @@ hyperfine --export-markdown $(hostname) -w 1 -N ./zstd-{3,6,9,19} ./brotli
 
 Summary: `zstd -6` is fastest, brotli is slower by 50-80%.
 
-Memory Usage
-------------
+# Resource Usage
 
 ```
 poop ./zstd-{6,3,9,19} ./brotli