That is a great improvement, but best would be a combination of both designs, the former adding the "finder shelf that can also serve for labeling, and the slopped bottom that allows scooping out individual pieces.
Another improvement may be to make the top and bottom pieces stackable along with the snapping grid system compatibility.
I think the lock-in is the biggest issue. If you have a hanging rail system, you can't just transition off the hanging rail to bottom rail when no longer needed like you could with elevated bottom rail.
This one has the advantage of always being over the river, but you could (at much increased weight) put wheels on both the top and bottom of the carriage and have a transition point.
Expensive and impractical, but could be fun at a theme park.
I’m glad you said that, because I was also surprised by the fact that the bwv-1011 only made it to honorable mention even though its technical focus was on visualizing the rarity of books, which ostensibly was the primary objective of the whole effort.
I really like that your page talks about _why_ a Hilbert curve is good. I don't remember ever learning about those before, and now hopefully if I'm ever trying to visualize 1D data, I might remember that :)
To answer your question, it already has changed us in many ways. You are not the only one who does not realize this though. It is in fact the prevailing position.
We have diseases and genetic defects, among other impacts through modern behaviors and environments/toxins, which are also retained in the genetic mutational load. We even have a whole lot of energy and human activity working to counter evolutionary pressures and assure those accumulated mutational loads remain in the genetic code.
Fitness depends on the specific environment the creature is in. Environmental fitness for the ancestral environment when all humans were hunter-gatherers is not necessarily the same as fitness for living in an industrial society. Evolutionary pressure still works just fine.
Not really. I wasn't a pilot, just a lowly ABF in the Navy. But when we deployed, on an LHD, most of our flights were what you could probably "classify" as training. We ran flight ops every day because pilots have to maintain hours. We flew every day for 7 months and only 2-3 of those months were we in the gulf. And even in the gulf, not all flights were missions, I would say less than half were. That also isn't counting 4-6 months prior to deployment of work ups where we would go out to sea for a week and come back, everyday pilots flew training missions off our deck. All in all, all in the military probably spend most of their air time training then actually flying missions.
I also recall, even experienced pilots, would rotate out to training units as their "shore" (break from a deploy able unit) duty.
This wasn't a Navy aircraft, but I imagine a lot of that is the same regardless of branch.
This comment was written by a US Coast Guard helicopter pilot. It gives a lot of information on how the two aircraft should have been able to share the space and some speculation on what went wrong:
A helicopter instructor suggests that possibly the helicopter pilots, who were told to go behind an aircraft that was landing, were looking at the previous aircraft that was landing.[1] That's just speculation at this point.
Humans are generally not very good at properly evaluating things in general. They are exceptionally good at believing themselves to be very good at properly evaluating things though.
It is why empires collapse from miscalculations about war by their experts, it is the foundational mental model underlying communism that simply cannot work but keeps being attempted, and it is how countries can be destroyed in every which way while the experts maintain that everything is just fine.
Never underestimate the powers of the ego, the destroyer of worlds. I mean they don’t know what they are doing, but we have advanced technical knowledge and experience, so we should clearly be in charge of all things, including those beyond our narrow scope of advanced technical knowledge and experience.
To be fair, capitalism doesn't really work either, you get a very unstable systems with cycles (which people try to stabilize in ad hoc ways), you optimize for the wrong things long term (right now producing much more goods than we need, without factoring in devastating costs that climate change will bring in a few decades, and destruction of nature and eradication of species) and when things crash many people are hurt. And it practically needs wars and destruction to reset wealth distribution every 50 to 100 years.
No communism doesn't work either. I wish there was more alternatives.
And some of the usual examples of "socialism doesn't work" might have worked if US hadn't interfered. E.g. in Chile, no system would have survived US actively supporting Pinochet. We will never know how socialism would have played out there if US (and Soviet too) left it alone.
Anyone who wants freedom and to control the excesses and abuses of the people in power would support the ideals of the Constitution. Just because white people created it does not mean that non-white people may not want to also be free and protected from abuses of the powerful.
Considering how non-white people keep streaming into white countries that have benefited from these white created Constitutional limitations on power, it seems they too desire freedom and liberty even if they are being used and manipulated by the powerful in the white world to essentially break those shackles on the powerful by a kind of civilization fracking, pumping so many people into a system until it collapses and those shackles on the powerful can be removed and the powerful can once again act just like the powerful act in all the non-white countries that have not implemented the white created constitutional limitations on power.
People may not realize they are a tool of the rich and powerful to destroy the very freedoms you currently enjoy, but this has never been a white vs non-white issue even though the jealousy has been used to further the aims of the rich and powerful. It has always been a rich and powerful vs the middle class and poor, with the rich and powerful manipulating the middle and lower classes to act against their own interests and in the interests of the rich and powerful. The saddest thing is that people on the “left” and often the poor, are just useful idiots for the rich and powerful, no different than some gang leader uses and abuses people to commit more abuse and crimes to get richer and more powerful.
I’m not sure what people imagine will happen when white people, who essentially created everything we all enjoy, including freedoms from tyrannical violence and oppression, have been eradicated, but there is no indication that it will end well.
And no, I’m not white since that seems very important to you.
I'm pretty sure they're referring to "the ideals that formed the United States". They're not nearly as admirable as we like to believe.
Some of the worst atrocities are no longer in practice -- though it took the bloodiest war in US history to achieve some of them. But that's not the same as fixing the ideals, and many of those problems are still woven through the fabric of the law and the society.
Imagine what those "ideals" might have been if women, blacks, native Americans, poor people, and others had been in the room. Giving them the right to vote after the basic framework is laid down does not accomplish that.
> I’m not sure what people imagine will happen when white people, who essentially created everything we all enjoy,
Just... No. Not only non-whites created a lot of things we all enjoy (money, algebra), that are also foundational for our civilization. Also, white people also invented a lot of things we all should vehemently reject (such as fascism).
> including freedoms from tyrannical violence and oppression, have been eradicated, but there is no indication that it will end well.
Very hard NO on this one as well. Nobody is eradicating white people and nobody is even considering it.
interesting you said that, because I was totally unimpressed and bored with it and thought, "Ok, so this it? So it's just the Switch, scaled up by 10%?"
It's not that I expected something groundbreaking, but if I had been the creative director I would have said that they need to focus on whatever was updated, e.g., graphics or performance since effectively nothing major has changed.
At the end of the video they announced a direct for the start of April. This video is just a teaser. I’m sure they will cover everything you mention in the direct.
Another improvement may be to make the top and bottom pieces stackable along with the snapping grid system compatibility.