Hilary Hahn did the same thing a few years ago. In one case, played a movement from a sonata that wasn't in the program, and in another replayed a movement from earlier. Both very interesting, and fantastic performances!
I don't know if they were the first but I think of 37signals and Basecamp as the ones that first nailed the multi-column/highlighted plan form of design that has become so dominant.
Also interesting: they list their plans, from left to right, from most expensive to least expensive (and their current plan pages do the same). I feel like that's rare? I can't remember the last pricing page I've seen that lists it that way, aside from these. All the ones I can (dimly) recall start with the cheapest (or free) option on the left.
huh, to me they look really, really similar, just a little more emphasis/direction on the basecamp page and a simpler set of offerings with more details each for hey.com.
I played around with some similar ideas, it's a really interesting corner of generative art, with lots of prior work.
For mine, I make fields by superimposing a bunch of harmonic functions. By playing with different periods, phases, etc. you can get some cool patterns that look irregular and interesting, though I think they have a different feel from some of these noise-based examples.
I also make some fields by using sources and sinks: a collection of points that push out or in. You don't need that many to make an interesting field.
For collision detection I use the trick @danbruc mentioned in another comment: I draw to an offscreen canvas, and just check pixel color to see if a trace is already there. It's probably very costly in terms of memory as a data structure, but it's very convenient :) https://www.instagram.com/p/CMi4QcXn6_y/?img_index=1
For me the interest has come in coloring the lines — by deferring rendering until after the path has been plotted, you can color different traces according to how long they are, how much they curve or change, etc. which can reveal interesting bits about the flow structure. https://www.instagram.com/p/CMvqZjkHYpV/?img_index=1
Thanks for this great writeup @tehrash, the explanations and examples are great!
> Super Resolution is used in many fields like surveillance, medical industry, forensic and satellite imaging applications.
Computer, generate a list of applications where technology like this should absolutely not be used.
This seems terrifying — wouldn't this, for example, synthesize identifying details about motor vehicles not present in the sample, drawn from training data? About people? Etc etc
This sounds awesome for making a consumer mapping product feel higher quality. Hell, it could even serve an anonymizing function that is pro-privacy ("a roof" not "your roof"). But it feels incredibly reckless to direct this toward those listed industries.
People in surveillance and forensics etc. should be confronted with the limits of the quality of the data they are using, we should not try to synthesize extra confidence in their analysis by making the images seem higher quality than they are.
IMO the other really big deal here is that ~/Library is a hidden folder by default. For most users Dropbox will only be exposed under the "Locations" section in finder sidebars. That feels like a huge regression to me — the whole idea of Dropbox was "a folder, that syncs." An invisible folder that syncs is much worse!
OK nice. A symlink will go a long way for the average user. The way I read the article it seemed like they would rely solely on the Locations list in finder sidebars.
If a user can't open or target a folder by typing in the location, it's useless for any meaningful file management. This feels like macOS is becoming more like iOS instead of the other way around. There is a setting to re-enable it, but it shouldn't need a setting.
That's a very low bar to set for "power user". By that standard even users wanting to install Dropbox and managing files themselves would be enough to count as a "power user". Recommending the use of a terminal is even more of a regression. It's not a far better choice, it's not even a good choice for file management. Basically everything is slower through a terminal interface.
I feel like if you're a power user you're generally going to reach for the terminal.
Although I do like the "Go To Server" thing in the menu bar when you're in Finder. Easier than remembering the ftp command to do whatever. Plus I can look at FTP directories as if they were just files on my local drive. But other than that... I can't think of 1 single other thing that I would rather do in Finder vs. a terminal of whatever flavor I'm feeling that moment (Alacritty, iTerm, VS Code builtin terminal*)
Mixed files and situations where I have to order by date or more complex filtering makes me hate dealing with terminals. If I want to pick and choose, let's say, the first, third, and sixth files orderd by size descending, it's unnecessarily annoying with just a terminal. I don't think that's a "power user" situation.
I admit that I am a power user, I use QTtabbar which gives me tabs in windows explorer, the same functionality is built in macOS finder. I also have keyboard shortcuts for, delete folder and move all contained files to parent folder, delete empty folders, and edit specific metadata, among other things. The single most useful "power user" shortcut that QTtabbar gives me is double click empty space to move view up to parent directory, macOS finder has a keyboard shortcut for that. Android is great for this kind of stuff too, but I have rooted my phone so no folders are hidden. I have termux set up too, the android terminal emulator, so I have grep and sed if I wanted to. I will absolutely everything I can to avoid having to do file management on iOS.
I don't know sure when the accepted definition of "power user" changed from the keyboard shortcut functions I'm describing to navigating view based on path. Knowing and navigating by path feels too basic, to me, to be a qualification for "power user".
What type of tasks do you usually do with a GUI file manager? Long time ago I've fully converted to a command line, and I don't even have any GUI file browser now (like explorer or nautilus). I find `cd`ing (with a good tab completion) faster than clicking folders, and if I navigate somewhere I probably want to execute a shell command anyway.
If I want a shell, I right click a folder location and open a terminal at location. I added the shortcut to the services menu on my macOS machine.
I move files based on size and extension and date ranges. One example would be moving 10 of the the largest video files of various formats, bigger than 150mb, created at least 2 weeks ago, that don't have digits in the name to my secondary hard drive. I am so much faster Ctrl/Command + click/drag instead of command line, especially when I don't know the exact names. In this case imagine the name format is YYYYMMDD[project][camera][resolution][description].[codec], which feels like a nightmare to manage with a terminal.
Windows explorer is set up with custom shortcuts for things like move all files to parent directory and delete folder, delete empty folders in directory, modify created date/other metadata to name some frequent operations. I use QTtabbar on windows for those. It also gives me the double click to move to parent directory shortcut, macOS has a keyboard shortcut for that built-in. Another valuable thing to me is the open with context menu that shows up. I know I can set up ailiases, but I have so many programs that I feel like it would be too many to remember. Tab completion doesn't work efficiently when tens to hundreds of files have the same prefix, for example dates when I'm working on a specific project.
I know I am a power user, but that's also why I feel comfortable asserting gui is better. I even have some nice macros setup using autohotkey for repetitive rename + sorting. Path strings are so useful for file redirecting and management with regex.
I was talking about dealing in path strings which most ordinary people are not normally exposed to. And in that situation Apple provides an easy and obvious method to navigate to it.
And would be very much disagree that everything is slower with a Terminal. In fact most things I do can't even done in the Finder UI.
In the context of Dropbox users, I expect the large majority to deal with things like path strings. The entire point of Dropbox was to create a user managed cloud service. Apple has a frustrating habit of shifting the goal post on what a "power user" is. Path strings are literally the same as urls. There's "path" strings on the Dropbox webpage as part of the header when looking at the location of folders, especially nested. I am not sure why you think most ordinary people aren't exposed to it.
I agree with you that the Terminal is faster for some things. But let's take an example of moving the last 10 largest files that I downloaded a week ago, but excluding any .mov files or files larger than 2gb. That's not a "power user" operation. With finder, that's 10 mouse clicks in detailed view. Regardless of how skilled you are with a terminal, it will be slower and more inefficient to do the same thing. For the most frequent file management operations, gui will always be better and faster than terminal.
I'm not trying to talk you out of any criticisms of the OS, but just FYI: you can drag files onto app icons in cmd-tab, too. Start dragging, hit cmd-tab, and then hold cmd. The app icons hang around until you release cmd, and you can drop files on them.
I use this all the time to handle things like text, images, pdf etc to open them in non-default apps. I find this a lot easier than dealing with the dock. Hope this helps!
I agree, it feels like a missed opportunity to not explore this. I'd love to see an analysis of the swirl design (or other commonly used manufacturer patterns), with the edges rounded or beveled on the intake face, exhaust face, or both.
Like, even on cut or stamped grills, how much could performance be improved by e.g. sandblasting the finished piece from one or both sides and taking down the edges a bit?
The wire is only just laminar flow... I found a random PC fan and assumed a 1mm wire diameter, 2.3m/s airflow, and the reynolds number comes out at 36.
That tells me if you were to get a 1000x really powerful fan, then the grille would start giving turbulent flow, and might no longer perform the best.
This is a very interesting story, and it's great to see Okuda acknowledged for her work and hear more details about that. Casio is a great example of a company that I just took completely for granted growing up and seemed completely opaque and impersonal to me. It's so cool to see the individuals that are behind all of those things. My brothers and I had an MT-40 when we were kids, I loved playing with it, and had no idea it had an impact like this.
It will be around for a while, as noted in the comments on the article: IEEE 1394B was used in the F-22 and F-35, so unless those are retrofitted the standard will be propped up in some form for decades.
I don't understand the suggestion that cooperation and complex social systems are the province of primates. Haven't they heard of dogs, cats, pigs, deer, or the countless other animals that hunt or defend themselves cooperatively, and which have complex hierarchies in group behavior?
