Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 436 posts

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#311

Post by SamBam »

jamespwilliams wrote: post #103
izolate wrote: post #9

Most striking to me is that Google registered a custom TLD (.gle) just to use as a URL shortener. Impressive use of funds.

In theory Google could serve their URL shortening service on the root of their .google TLD (links like https://google/xyz123 ). Would probably break some apps which don’t correctly handle TLD-only domain names though, I suppose.

I would assume most fairly-tech-savvy people wouldn't trust such a link. It doesn't obey the rules for what we've been taught a real URL should look like.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#312

Post by colineartheta »

Nicholas_C wrote: post #306
splonk wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The two biggest "wow" reactions I ever heard at Google's company wide meetings were from the Keyhole/Google Earth demo right after they were acquired, and the first Google Maps demo with scrollable maps. IIRC the Keyhole demo started with the full planet view from space and then did a smooth continuous scroll into the Grand Canyon. Pretty mindblowing back in 2005 or thereabouts.

Interesting to think: What demos are happening now that elicit a similar response?

Looking at the last ~8 years of “technology” releases but I’d deign to say no demos are eliciting that response.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#313

Post by exporectomy »

gbrown wrote: post #185
Grimm1 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say the same thing about ant colonies. I think it's probably just what anything that groups and branches around resource deposits looks like. If I recall slime molds are optimal planners regarding surrounding resources so it just sounds like a natural optimality to me. I'd be more interested in what you think it "should" look like for an "advanced" species besides optimal? Looking at it is disparagingly is we…

> I'd be more interested in what you think it "should" look like for an "advanced" species besides optimal? In a word, sustainable. An advanced civilization should be able to develop in a coordinated and self sustaining way, rather than as a grand experiment in tragedy of the commons. Microbes don’t coordinate their growth, and therefore fall into boom-bust cycles that dominate and exhaust their local environment. Hu…

It may be sustainable on a longer time scale than you're thinking of. For instance, perhaps we use fossil fuels to provide the value needed to find new sustainable sources of energy. Could we really make nuclear fusion reactors without ever having first burnt a lot of coal and oil?

Lots of things are unsustainable in the short term but sustainable in the long term. Hunter-gathering for instance. If you pick the berries off a bush, they're gone. You can't keep doing that all day every day or the plant will never reproduce and eventually stop producing berries. But if you look at the hunter-gatherer's berry picking habits over a whole year, it may well be sustainable because he's not doing it at the same rate all the time. Similarly, our unsustainable behaviors may be limited to a few centuries of rapid change taking us into a new and different sustainable future that wouldn't have been possible otherwise.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#314

Post by exporectomy »

gbrown wrote: post #278
Grimm1 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we're moving towards sustainability. Whether it's fast enough is up to interpretation but the push for green tech, sustainable farming etc etc it's not like this is an unknown, it's just always been the case that it must be sufficiently cheap and easy for the average person to latch onto it. Unfortunately in a lot of areas we're getting there but not there yet.

The near universal consensus of people who study natural systems is that we’re way, way, way behind. Unfortunately the science is pretty bleak.

"way way behind" and "pretty bleak" are completely subjective and thus meaningless for trying to understand nature. If you can't quantify it, you're only able to think using feelings and feelings can't tell you important answers like what we should do. They can make you believe you know what we should do, but you'll be wrong because your feelings won't be accurately tuned to the reality.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#315

Post by fctorial »

GcVmvNhBsU wrote: post #55
varispeed wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is one of those do as I say, not as I do type of toxic people (e.g. tells everyone to cut emissions while himself enjoying private jet flights). I don't feel that he is genuine, but for entertainment value could be worth a try.

He also does a lot to offset his private jets. > I have a higher-than-average carbon footprint, so I’m taking extra steps to do my part. In the book I briefly mention how I’m offsetting my own emissions. I spend about $5 million every year to offset my family’s carbon footprint. As of now, the standard calculation for carbon footprints is based on an estimate of $400 per ton of emissions. But since the way we calcula…

> I spend about $5 million every year to offset my family’s carbon footprint.

And how much carbon does he emit to earn that 5 million. That emission isn't part of his family's emission because it comes from microsoft. It's like tax evasion but for carbon emission.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#316

Post by overboard2 »

rizzom5000 wrote: post #287
Grimm1 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mind providing me some of that research? I've heard this a few times but when I go looking for it nothing really pops up, it's mostly things saying we need to act now but can avoid the biggest issues.

Maybe this isn't a big issue? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction

While it's not good, it's not that bad. A lack of biodiversity may, if taken to extremes, limit the variety of things humans have access to. However, even in that case, we should be able to rely on our wind pollinated crops (possibly with more genetic modification, if required) to feed us while we research synthetic alternatives to anything we start to loose access to.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#317

Post by jamiek88 »

batch12 wrote: post #258
tediousdemise wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I think reproduction is unethical. We have the capacity to understand the implications of birthing new sentient lifeforms, knowing the harm it will cause to the planet and the other species we share it with. Yet people breed anyway, for a multitude of selfish reasons. Everyone else is having babies so why shouldn't I , it's my right as a human to reproduce , I want to pass on my genes , I want my life to…

I teach my kids that reproduction is a good thing. I hope they pass it on.

Well I’m a celibate monk like my father, and grandfather before me.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#318

Post by justatdotin »

Grimm1 wrote: post #283
gbrown wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The near universal consensus of people who study natural systems is that we’re way, way, way behind. Unfortunately the science is pretty bleak.

Mind providing me some of that research? I've heard this a few times but when I go looking for it nothing really pops up, it's mostly things saying we need to act now but can avoid the biggest issues.

some highly advanced extinction experiments include large-scale rainforest fragmentation, and the collapse of coral reefs, with accompanied dieback of mangroves and seagrass. These are highly significant because of their advanced progress and the anticipated downstream planetary impact.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#319

Post by gbrown »

exporectomy wrote: post #313
gbrown wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd be more interested in what you think it "should" look like for an "advanced" species besides optimal? In a word, sustainable. An advanced civilization should be able to develop in a coordinated and self sustaining way, rather than as a grand experiment in tragedy of the commons. Microbes don’t coordinate their growth, and therefore fall into boom-bust cycles that dominate and exhaust their local environment. Hu…

It may be sustainable on a longer time scale than you're thinking of. For instance, perhaps we use fossil fuels to provide the value needed to find new sustainable sources of energy. Could we really make nuclear fusion reactors without ever having first burnt a lot of coal and oil? Lots of things are unsustainable in the short term but sustainable in the long term. Hunter-gathering for instance. If you pick the berri…

That's some excellent wishful thinking, and I hope you're right. Meanwhile, I've read plenty of articles suggesting that we're likely in for unavoidable and hugely disruptive warming, at the very least, and I don't currently see us globally acting quickly enough.

I've also taken an amateur interest in ecology and the natural sciences, and once you actually learn a bit about the species around you, the loss of habitat and biodiversity we're undergoing becomes a staggeringly obvious fact that most people are just completely oblivious to.

Re: Time flies in Google Earth’s biggest update in years

#320

Post by justatdotin »

FredPret wrote: post #213
7e wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A substantial amount of Earth's resources would need to be eviscerated to accomplish that goal, the the space colonies are extremely likely to fail anyway, in the end.

You’re right, fuck it, let’s just all die without trying instead

I remain unable to comprehend the kind of brain damage that leads some to dismiss the challenge of living sustainably on a fit-for-purpose planet but embrace the challenge of abandoning it.
Post reply on HN