whiteboardr

So yeah. Buckle up.

Was patiently waiting for the mini getting an update - i don’t care as much for the screen, CPU etc. but not moving the front facing camera to the side, hence landscape friendly position is beyond me.

So we went from “Autopilot” to “full” self driving requiring attention every 13 miles.

Honestly, i can’t get my head around how many folks actually think that it is an either or situation.

There’s zero chance we will be able to electrify all personal mobility let alone the elephants in the room being construction equipment, planes of all sorts and above all marine vessels that ship our goods globally.

EVs are well suited for a couple use cases but far from a monolithic solution.

It is beyond me how a group this large actually thinks that ICEs are facing “death”.

Once line is done going up in that field, i sincerely hope the discussion around this will mature and become less histerical.

From experience i haven’t come across any “agile” organization that runs true to the manifesto.

There’s been plenty of discussions why the “what could have been” got buried in certain people jumping in, creating weird layers and interpretations of some process for their own profit and ego.

Chinese whispers then lost in translation.

An experience that isn’t asset- but rule-based.

The environment and everything in it.

“Everything” would mean all objects and the elements they’re made of, their rules on how they interact and decay.

A modularized ecosystem i guess, comprised of “sub-systems” of sorts.

The other model, that provides all interaction (cause for effect) could either be run artificially or be used interactively by a human - opening up the possibility for being a tree : )

This all would need an interfacing agent that in principle would be an engine simulating the second law of thermodynamics and at the same time recording every state that has changed and diverged off the driving actor’s vector in time.

Basically the “effects” model keeping track of everyones history.

In the end a system with an “everything” model (that can grow overtime), a “cause” model messing with it, brought together and documented by the “effect” model.

(Again … non technical person, just fantasizing) : )

But does it need to be frame-based?

What if you combine this with an engine in parallel that provides all geometry including characters and objects with their respective behavior, recording changes made through interactions the other model generates, talking back to it?

A dialogue between two parties with different functionality so to speak.

(Non technical person here - just fantasizing)

I know.

What I’m saying is that this is here to stay and once fuel for keeping them in orbit is depleted they’ll be replaced - hence that whole mesh won’t go away.

It’s an appalling situation IMHO - watching the lack of regulations for “space litter” and ignorance of one man combined ruining earths orbit for generations to come is a disgrace.

I get the point of providing global connectivity and it might be useful, the implications don’t make up for it though.

Scientific research should be the only reason anyone should be allowed to put human made objects into space.

Musk shooting a damn car into space just for the fun of it should have been a warning for everyone - seeing the majority treating it as a “cool” thing to do just shows how much mire education about space should be done.

Oh well.

It was painful to watch and i won’t have a second look.

It would have been as simple as adding a short “Professional CGI Artists. No actual instrument and tools were harmed.” to set a lighter tone and take the pain away.

Given the raging discussion and thus reach, this won’t hurt sales in the slightest - pretty much the opposite and i guess we’re left with giving kudos to marketing well played.

No surprise at all i’d say - as Nilay Patel on the Verge review put it correctly:

> cameras are still cameras, and displays are still displays.

Anyone remotely familiar with the state of development in those areas would be aware that “even Apple” can’t cheat Reality (punintentionally).

Those left still raving about and/or hoping for a game changer will be greatly dissapointed - or only in it for the line go up.

The whole concept will be a niche product for many years to come and will stay an isolating experience.

> The colors screamed "I use a computer but am not a computer person". Back then, culturally, being a computer person was not as accepted as it is now.

Chic. Not geek.

The marketing claim during the introduction couldn’t have been more fitting and for everything that followed after coming out of apple.

So “infinity pools” up there would be in a completely different league?

You nailed all problems with design education in that comment.

Rich Gold’s fabulous book “Plenitude” comes to mind.

While interesting and putting perspectives into place I’m having a really hard time following how there can be a black hole merger area (let alone the black hole era) having the model of redshift engrained in my brain.

Serious question: wouldn’t all mass that had time to gravitate towards and convene into galaxies, stars and black holes been drifting too far apart by then to be even remotely close for their gravities overcome these - then - unimaginable distances?

For those who do not want to scroll, here’s an absolutely brilliant video illustrating the scale:

https://youtu.be/zR3Igc3Rhfg

“up to” is the problem at hands here.

Maybe time to rethink the way fines are determined. I’d be very much in favour of the “swiss model” for traffic fines - based on your income. You did X wrong, here’s the set price from our catalogue vs. you did X wrong and based on your earnings, here’s what you owe.

Maybe time to rethink the way fines are determined.

I’d be very much in favour of the “swiss model” for traffic fines - based on your income.

You did X wrong, here’s the set price from our catalogue vs. you did X wrong and based on your earnings, here’s what you owe.

There’s process and digital tools on the one end and on the other the ugly truth that almost everyone building spaces - be it commercial or residential - will be fed up with the low wages they get for the treciourous work they have to do in most cases since the number of people in “western countries” willing to work in construction is rapidly falling.

Thank you.

And yes - not much to almost nothing has changed.

The latter.

There’s a whole lot more to it then what Autodesk offers…

What i mean is that construction as a whole is a completely overlooked market.

Working in that space since almost 5 years after product development in and for several industries for 20+ years.

It’s highly complex but the user group is an overlooked and diverse set of people that have to put up with less than crappy solutions for getting their jobs done - for the chaos that is construction.

So many opportunities and space for innovation that is not another food delivery service for meteopolitan areas but meaningful tools for people in dire need.

Love it and encourage everyone to have a look.

Construction

How about … shipping vessels? Ships in general.

Plus it was crystal clear to anyone remotely aware of where assisted driving was and is at that time that it’s simply bogus and outright dumb and dangerous calling it “Autopilot”.

Such a sad case of wishful thinking for the domestic economy by regulators blinded by a “shiny” corporation.

People weren’t killed though relying on a catastrophically named “feature”.

I still can’t get my head around that anyone let them call it “Autopilot” from the get go - especially in a country that has manufacturers of microwave ovens put a warning on their product that its not suitable for drying their pet’s fur.

Far less annoying and above all far less dangerous than allowing a car company to call their half-baked solution “Auto Pilot”.