Cool technology, but seems a bit of an extreme effort just to check train position. Why can't they just use markers on the tunnel walls (or under the tracks)?
> Naturally, trains already have track-based location systems, but they are usually based on a train being within a “moving block”, so their accuracy is down to metres rather than centimetres. If you want to monitor track conditions, the more accurate the location of the suspected fault, the less time staff spend repairing it.
Agree in principle though, is this extreme precision really needed?
Track defects tend to be quite small, so yes, for track maintenance monitoring the extra precision is the difference between "somewhere in that rail, and you'll have to use expensive equipment to find out where before you start work" and "that's the bit that needs to be fixed."
> their accuracy is down to metres rather than centimetres. If you want to monitor track conditions, the more accurate the location of the suspected fault, the less time staff spend repairing it.
Considering the tracks are linear, I would estimate the additional time needed to locate a fault within two meters as compared to two centimeters at "negligible".
On the alternative assumption that the faults are too small for humans to detect and we just need to replace the affected track... I would also estimate the additional time needed to replace two meters of track, as compared to two centimeters, at "negligible". It doesn't actually take less time to cut out a specific 1cm strip (containing no visible indications!) from a piece of cloth as to cut out a 1m strip that includes the 1cm strip somewhere.
Do they repair track cracks? I'd expect they replace the entire track section - both rails - as long as they are there. Get within however much they can do in a work shift and good enough.
My general thought as someone who doesn't know how rail maintenance is done is that rails should not crack in normal operation. If there is a crack that implies either the rail is end of life anyway and you replace it, or there is likely a manufacturing problem and you want to replace all the rail from that branch. Either way rail is manufactures in long sections (20 meters is my guess, but that is slightly educated guess that I won't stand by), so you would only need within a few meters to find the track section in question.
However I don't know how track maintenance is done. It is entirely possible that they grind/cut out the crack and then fill in (either cast in place, fill with weld, or just replace a a few cm) and in that case you would need to know within a few mm (though maybe inspection could find it if you are within a few cm).
Again, I am not a rail expert here. This is a place where I want to know and thus would like an expert to say. (though likely no experts are reading this...)
They say the best camera is the one you have with you, and your phone is usually with you. In any case, some professional photographers actually prefer shooting on their phone even for planned, high-profile shoots—perhaps they like its convenience, or that its unassuming nature puts subjects at ease. Or perhaps they find it creatively freeing to be burdened down by only minimal gear.
Yeah, idk. That seems like an awful idea to me. I’m not sure why she would shoot with an iPhone for such a job unless she got paid by Apple. Some practical reasons:
- Such an important moment is something you often wanna blow up in a large/hi-res print.
- An ultrawide lens is suboptimal for portraits and usually makes the face look puffy from the perspective.
- Unless you know the exact color & aesthetic for the cover you want to preserve the raw capture for changes in post to match the vibe.
While I can certainly appreciate the casual and intimate vibe she’s going for, as a pro she could have brought any decent camera with a portrait lens and keeping the shoots equally short without compromising quality and adding risk for the poor layout person who has to work with it later.
Part of the problem is that Monotype has a bit of a monopoly in the upper segment of the market though right? I know they're not the only players, but it feels like they've vacuumed up enough small, successful foundries that they now control enough of the market that they can get away with the kind of aggressive behavior that wouldn't be tenable in a healthier, more competitive marketplace.
From Wikipedia [0]
> Via acquisitions including Linotype GmbH, International Typeface Corporation, Bitstream, FontShop, URW, Hoefler & Co., Fontsmith, Fontworks [ja] and Colophon Foundry, the company has gained the rights to major font families including Helvetica, ITC Franklin Gothic, Optima, ITC Avant Garde, Palatino, FF DIN and Gotham. It also owns MyFonts, used by many independent font design studios.[3] The company is owned by HGGC, a private equity firm.
For those less familiar with them, those are BIG names, and the acquisition of them could perhaps aptly be compared, for instance, to Disney's acquisitions of properties like Lucasfilm and Marvel.
Serious question: who cares? There is no scarcity of high quality fonts (there are more of them available to ordinary people today than at any point in history). So they control Hoefler. If that's a problem for you, don't use Hoefler faces.
Independent foundries want to sell typefaces with reasonable royalty shares. Customers want trusted marketplaces (i.e. ones where scammers aren't reselling fonts they've pirated) where they can purchase high quality fonts with reasonable licensing for reasonable prices. Both customers and foundries are poorly served by Monotype monopolizing the big font marketplaces.
The Monotype monopoly is a legitimate problem that people have legitimate complaints about.
You're saying, exclusively, that Monotype is app-storing the market for fonts by buying up the common tooling designers use to transact in fonts, right? You don't care what Monotype charges for its own fonts?
(That seems like a perfectly reasonable complaint).
- Technologies: React, Redux, Typescript, NodeJS, MongoDB, AWS, Docker, Python, Meteor, a bit rusty in a few others
- Résumé/CV: Please ask if needed
- Email: readbeard@fastmail.com
I worked as the lead UX/UI designer and frontend engineer for a small startup for the last 3 years (I am also very proficient in backend and frequently contribute to backend features). I'm most interested in working for smaller companies that value a healthy work-life balance, offer a 100% remote structure, and provide an environment where I can continue to wear multiple hats and focus on crafting great user experiences.
Prior to my current job I built and ran my own SaaS side hustle for a while which led to more than $50k in revenue and helped me develop my skill interacting with customers and understanding their needs. I also designed video content and packaging that was used at retail stores around the United States.
I think a neural network could do it. You just train it on a bunch of videos with different shutter speeds, and then you ask it to convert a given video from one speed to another.
I'm sure it would quickly learn to add/remove motion blur on moving things as appropriate.
But in addition to determining motion blur, shutter speed also massively affects which areas of the images are above/below the brightness range the sensor is capable of picking up.
No. Erdoğan started advocating for a switch to Türkiye a couple of years ago, and the UN recently adopted the Turkish spelling. The US State Department uses both spellings, while asserting (sensibly) that Türkiye should be used in "formal and diplomatic contexts." [0] English Wikipedia still uses the established English spelling. [1]
Some Turks I know seem to think this whole thing was mostly cooked up as a distraction from other issues that have come up or worsened under Erdoğan's leadership.
It would be similar if "intellectual property" was property in the same sense in which a table or a vast amount of money is property. However, it is not.
Normal property ownership is something we use to manage scarcity that already exists—that there is only one of something, and we have to decide where it will go and who will be able to decide how it is used. Intellectual property, by contrast, creates artificial scarcity by means of a government-enforced monopoly (in the case of copyright, the monopoly is on the right to produce a copy of a work).
It is unfortunate (and perhaps not accidental) that we settled on the term "intellectual property" as opposed to something more descriptive like "intellectual monopoly." "Intellectual property" encourages equivocating such monopolies with normal property, a mistake that tends to muddle debates on the subject.
Some films are just not available for streaming. I used the Netflix disc mailer service relatively recently for this reason. It was a pretty good "catch all" for hard-to-find titles not on one of the major streaming subscription services and not available for streaming rental.
