> But before we do that, we should think for a moment about what streetnames are for. They are for helping people navigate the city.
People name streets (and other things) for other reasons too, often for internal or local reference. This perspective reduces the meaning of naming to a single focus, like saying we name dogs only to allow our guests to refer to them as needed when visiting our homes. We name things for many reasons, and those reasons are more about endearment and culture building at the local level. I recommend Seeing Like a State by James Scott for more discussion, including about street names, exploring this perspective.
> We all need pointless hobbies, but I care about YouTube stars like I care about distant stars dying. It’s interesting to someone somewhere but those people don’t talk to me. I mostly use social media as a place to waste time, not a platform to form para-social relationships to narcissists. I prefer my narcissism farm to table. I’d rather dig a grave with a rusty spoon than watch a Twitch “star”.
I don’t really care about the substance of this article, but the style is entertaining. Curious for anyone who writes in a similar style - do people actually compose like this breathlessly, or are these kinds of lines wrought over several revisions? I know everyone’s different, but I can’t imagine writing like this on a first pass.
If you grew up writing (and reading) a lot, it's quite natural to have a "voice." It makes sense too: it's akin to having spent a lot of time with a certain person.
Although, I do not know if this is really that shining of an example of anything, although a fine blog post!
If you are surprised, I wholeheartedly recommend just reading more. Something clicks after 1000 pages of Swann's Way, or Infinite Jest, or even the Gnus manual where you simply must reckon with a certain kind natural voice that can be cultivated and exhibited without exertion, without even a "thought."
And I know the implication here is maybe underhanded, and that you feel its "entertaining" as a party trick is; where one compensates for content with flowery prose. That might be fair, but I see this charge more and more, and I just worry one day everyone is just going to deem reading and writing itself as a waste, as a compensation for some unnamed other thing we should all be doing (optimizing productivity). Which is why I must defend every labored, silly metaphor I read now to my death from all yall editors that popped up three years ago.
AI? I just read it and remembered how I got busted for writing papers for friends. Style and voice are tangible and I'm getting an uncanny valley creepy crawlies from the opening of this article. edit, maybe some AI segments, I would guess the author is young and will write differently in a few years.
I don’t know the answer to your questions off the top of my head, unfortunately, but they are most certainly answered in The Ants by E.O. Wilson. It’s a fascinating and artfully written book. I unfortunately gave my copy to a student, or I’d have found the relevant passage for you. (The biomass fact mentioned in a parent comment is mentioned in the book as well.)
This is a simple explanation of an interesting and useful mathematical application my 12-15 yo students can conceptually grab onto. Good to have, they’ll enjoy it.
I was wondering the same. I’m not in this industry, but perhaps rockets are not typically given human names, so it’s a joke? Also, it’s spelled Venessa rather than Vanessa, so maybe it’s humorous because of the misspelling.
> Gravity is always present. What you feel as “weightlessness” is actually freefall.
Article makes this seem true, regardless of whether or not you are in orbit. But doesn’t this matter of perspective become ridiculous if you are floating freely in space? As in, yes, you’re “falling” but only because Earth is moving away from you or toward you? Honest question here…
How to define "floating freely" is not easy to define. The potential energy surface of gravitation extends in 1/r wgich makes it a long range interaction. So if the earth attraction is small enough that you want to neglect it, you may still be trapped in the sun potential well. And if you can escape the sun attraction you are still prisoner of the galaxy. There is no 0 gravity, but there is various levels of neglectable gravity of course. But neglectable is always defined relative to whatever you want to measure.
You are never really floating freely, all gravitational wells extend to infinity. The curvature just becomes really small so the resulting acceleration is infinitesimally small too.
The statement is technically true, but slightly confusing because the article talked about orbit being free fall, and about microgravity being in the range of one millionth to one thousandth of earths gravity.
It is certainly possible to get far enough away from anything that gravity is far less than one millionth of earth’s gravity, so it’s no longer microgravity by the article’s criteria. Floating freely would be free fall, but that doesn’t exactly mean what it sounds like when gravity is negligible.
The article also didn’t clarify that at our typical orbital distances for ISS and satellites, gravity is not in the microgravity range, it’s still very strong.
I’m a teacher, so different than most folks posting here. I have a little coding experience, but it’s definitely not my thing professionally. I just made several utility apps with this that I’ll be using in the classroom.
> It turns out I don’t want a phone at all, but a camera that texts — and ideally one smaller than anything on the market now. I know I’m not alone, and yet this product will not be made.
Thanks for the tip, I went to investigate. I like everything about it except for the lack of third party messaging. I need to meet my friends where they are and that is on Signal or WhatsApp.
Maps is also non negotiable, having maps in your pocket is one of the true wins of a smartphone imo, giving you freedom to explore.
No problem. 3rd party messaging does seem like the biggest need being voiced by potential users right now. It does have a navigation app, by the way, but don’t know details yet.
People name streets (and other things) for other reasons too, often for internal or local reference. This perspective reduces the meaning of naming to a single focus, like saying we name dogs only to allow our guests to refer to them as needed when visiting our homes. We name things for many reasons, and those reasons are more about endearment and culture building at the local level. I recommend Seeing Like a State by James Scott for more discussion, including about street names, exploring this perspective.
reply