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

391–400 of 436 posts

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

#391

Post by FredPret »

ganafagol wrote: post #384
FredPret wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think there’s anything more important than being an outward-looking, striving species. Once we get depressed and nihilistic and give up, the universe will be forever deprived of the colour and drama human civilization can add to all those bare rocks up there. I never considered that the implication is we could live here sustainably, but you’re right.

Striving for what though? These discussions tend to be heavy on Asimov-inspired scifi-think and weak on just taking a walk in a forest on a nice sunny day in late spring. All this talk about having to colonize space is just rubbish, compared to the wonders of nature that would be worth preserving. But the audience here is strongly biased. If most of your day is spent in front of a computer and reading scifi novels in…

I’m talking about expanding the scope of human civilization, not abandoning this planet.

Also, are you saying that forests are nature and space isn’t? Or are you saying that there aren’t any wonders of nature to experience out there?

Setting up nice sunny walk-ready forests in space is something that’ll take centuries, but if we don’t do it we’re doomed. Incidentally, so are the forests.

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

#392

Post by caseysoftware »

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.

> In a word, sustainable. An advanced civilization should be able to develop..

> The near universal consensus of people who study natural systems is that we’re way, way, way behind.

What other advanced civilization is our benchmark for making such an assessment?

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

#394

Post by tppiotrowski »

folli wrote: post #383
tppiotrowski wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visualising the Earth at planet scale is incredible. I was blown away when the first wind map [1] made it's way onto HN almost a decade ago. I always thought of wind being localised but to see all the currents flow across the USA was soooo cool. It's inspired me to work on my own map of live mountain shadows across the Earth (link in my user profile if you're interested) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37678…

Shade map is cool, which data source are you using for the height map? I've been working on something similar (link also in user profile).

Mapbox free-tier for Digital Elevation Model (DEM) map tiles. suncalc NPM library to calculate the position of the sun. OSM buildings (hopefully) for buildings in urban areas.

Your app looks great. I like the way you visualise twilight/golden hour on your map. There is another project called shadowmap.org you might like.

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

#395

Post by dfilppi »

rlpb wrote: post #380
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.

> But we're moving towards sustainability. I don't think we are. As long as we accept unbounded population growth, nothing is sustainable.

The solar system isnt sustainable.

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

#396

Post by gbrown »

caseysoftware wrote: post #392
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.

> In a word, sustainable. An advanced civilization should be able to develop.. > The near universal consensus of people who study natural systems is that we’re way, way, way behind. What other advanced civilization is our benchmark for making such an assessment?

In terms of the definition of "advanced", the question I was answering was a subjective one. I think it's appropriate to use the term "advanced" for societies that can plan for their long term futures and continue to exist in stable equilibria in a given environment.

The second point isn't dependent on an external comparison.

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

#397

Post by caseysoftware »

gbrown wrote: post #396
caseysoftware wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In a word, sustainable. An advanced civilization should be able to develop.. > The near universal consensus of people who study natural systems is that we’re way, way, way behind. What other advanced civilization is our benchmark for making such an assessment?

In terms of the definition of "advanced", the question I was answering was a subjective one. I think it's appropriate to use the term "advanced" for societies that can plan for their long term futures and continue to exist in stable equilibria in a given environment. The second point isn't dependent on an external comparison.

Ok, then what is the baseline for comparison aka where we are vs where we should be?

If the goal/definition is concrete, then we can plan better and understand what is "enough" once we're caught up.

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

#398

Post by eric_cc »

gbrown wrote: post #288
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.

Pick an area of science which intersects with human development and I'll find you something - the underlying truth is that we can't hope to disrupt such a huge percentage of our biosphere without nasty consequences, and we can't hope to have remediation efforts compete with the global engine of human development. We've essentially organized an entire global society around the injection of carbon into the atmosphere,…

OP asked for you to provide research and yet you've entirely evaded doing so.

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

#399

Post by Agentlien »

zmmmmm wrote: post #361
Agentlien wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oculus isn't your only alternative. I've been very happy with Vive, especially the Cosmos, and I've heard great things about Valve's Index. If you're on more of a budget the PSVR is quite good if you happen to have a PS4.

Yes - its just so unfortunate all the good alternatives don't offer (easy, cheap) wireless / stand alone support. After using Virtual Desktop, I actually think there's a huge opportunity for a super "thin client" device that is just a companion for your laptop/tablet and offloads everything there.

I think the problem is that you really need quite high resolution and frame rate for it to be a good enough experience to be worth the hassle. Which then means you need a lot of GPU power, more than your typical laptop or tablet can offer.

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

#400

Post by gbrown »

caseysoftware wrote: post #397
gbrown wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In terms of the definition of "advanced", the question I was answering was a subjective one. I think it's appropriate to use the term "advanced" for societies that can plan for their long term futures and continue to exist in stable equilibria in a given environment. The second point isn't dependent on an external comparison.

Ok, then what is the baseline for comparison aka where we are vs where we should be? If the goal/definition is concrete, then we can plan better and understand what is "enough" once we're caught up.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make or if you're objecting to anything in particular, but being global carbon negative seems like a good start.
Post reply on HN