91–100 of 114 posts
Google can't wait to usher in a future where people stay in their rooms and eat Soylent while being entertained and exercised by their VR-enabled computers.
You should check out a book called The Light Of Other Days, in which remote-viewing wormhole-cameras are invented and a situation similar to what you are describing plays out.
Google can't wait to usher in a future where people stay in their rooms and eat Soylent while being entertained and exercised by their VR-enabled computers.
Check your bipedal privilege cis scum. No but seriously, every time you feel the urge to make a luddite point remember that there are disabled people who are getting a whole new lease on life via enabling technologies.
I can't believe I'm typing this, but after the new Google map changes, it runs so slow on my home and office computer that I was forced to switch to bing. It still works on my mobile, but its just unbearable on the other systems. I hope they create a more streamlined version soon.
New maps are completely unusable. It's shocking. My computer is faster than most computers. Maps shouldn't fail on it.
I switched back to classic maps. The option is on the right hand side. You may have to clear your cache to make it permanent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use goog maps to plan hikes, to answer questions like "is this section of the trail kid / cub scout compatible"? Some trail sections are not. I can do a halfway good job with the satellite images and some topo knowledge but this new GOOG "streetview" trail UI is so close, yet so far from what I need. What I need is something like a youtube of a high speed (maybe 30 mph equiv?) run down the trail. I'm looking for st…
Not to be snarky or anything, but have you tried calling the park office? US national park rangers, particularly in the parks with large backcountry area, are both very knowledgeable and very helpful.
I had to decide between taking a shorter trip and missing out because of being overly cautious, or taking the longer trip I planned on.
I ended up putting in downstream and paddled upstream to see them, and they turned out to be pretty big - lots of whitewater and 3 foot drop, something I would not have done alone and without a helmet.
Being able to actually see a picture would allowed me to make a much more informed decision. Pictures really are worth a thousand words.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its like they are saying "You are going there anyway, why not take a few pictures for us". I think they will post your copyright text somewhere in some corner, giving you some pixels of fame.
So essentially asking for idiots to give them stuff they will profit from for free...
What a blatant PR attempt to put lipstick on a pig. Do not forget who we're dealing with, Google gave the NSA unrestricted access to every system without any legal challenge. No amount of pretty photos will make up for that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine if we had these kind of views of, say, the streets of London in 1900? This is worth doing for history's sake alone. For one, yeah, "what if" we had these kind of views for the streets of London in 1900? I doubt many would care, same as not many care for 1900 music, 1900 books, 1900 photographs and such. Some scholars maybe. Second, what the parent said goes beyond that. Essentially he says, the people of 22…
Are you serious with your first paragraph? I don't even know how to respond.
The same way most people don't care about archeological museums, old music and old books. How many copies do history books sell in your B&N, compared to cooking, self-help, crime novels and such?
At best, people watch some documentary on TV or visit a museum and quickly move on with their lives none the wiser.
(I, for one, do. I revel in old stuff, from Plato to the Retronaut website. And I'm doing a project with reconstructed ancient greek music. But people who care about such stuff are mostly outliers).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine if we had these kind of views of, say, the streets of London in 1900? This is worth doing for history's sake alone. For one, yeah, "what if" we had these kind of views for the streets of London in 1900? I doubt many would care, same as not many care for 1900 music, 1900 books, 1900 photographs and such. Some scholars maybe. Second, what the parent said goes beyond that. Essentially he says, the people of 22…
You think the only people interested in classical music and literature are "some scholars maybe"?
Judging from sales numbers, 90% of the population could not care less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Imagine if we had these kind of views of, say, the streets of London in 1900? This is worth doing for history's sake alone. For one, yeah, "what if" we had these kind of views for the streets of London in 1900? I doubt many would care, same as not many care for 1900 music, 1900 books, 1900 photographs and such. Some scholars maybe. Second, what the parent said goes beyond that. Essentially he says, the people of 22…
> For one, yeah, "what if" we had these kind of views for the streets of London in 1900? I doubt many would care, same as not many care for 1900 music, 1900 books, 1900 photographs and such. Some scholars maybe. You haven't seen the many-thousands upvoted threads of mashups of various locations in WWII and modern day? Or the sourcebooks that designers use for all the costume drama on TV and in movies? EDIT: Here's an…
I mean, if the best you can come up as "value most people get from historical data" is photo montages of WWII/now and better designed costumes for period movies..