Is this article confusing correlation with causation? What about a tall/blunt hood, but not lengthy... has that been tested? Is there anything about where and how these vehicles are used that factors in? Has driver training maintained quality over the years? In theory, I understand the incremental loss of visibility, with longer, taller hoods, but this article just seems lazy. I hope the underlying research is actually better.
Even factoring in probable range increases and advances in charging tech, it will still be necessary to incrementally, if not fully, charge EVs in public. One thing that doesn’t seem to occur to our elected officials… there is nowhere near enough real estate to charge that many vehicles around town.
The average amount driven per day by Americans is 39 miles, meaning that a heck of a lot of people will be able to do just fine with only charging at home.
How hard would it be to put plugs onto street lights? Most cities have wiring and the switch to LED bulbs means those circuits have a lot more spare capacity than they used to.
Some portion of the vision and spray tech was invented long ago by Patchen Selective Spray Systems. At some point, I believe John Deere bought the company.
Also worth noting that almost no effort has been made by the folks making note taking apps to help people make better use of their entries. Sure, they've implemented things like gallery views, filters, and tagging, but these are all passive and require the user to seek out the information. Why not active features like an API that makes code snippets available in my IDE, a feature that surfaces recipe recommendations from my collection, or how about automatically organizing my receipts by month and offering an expense summary report? There are a ton of features that could be made to help people better access and use the notes they make.
There have been attempts at this (e.g. the hResume microformat) and you can use schema.org schemas to build one up, but beyond picking up basic data like name, address, telephone number, etc... parsing resumes is challenging. People's experience doesn't always fit nice and neatly into the fields the schemas imagine and the incentive to game such systems also leads to irregular data.
This isn't even redeemable from a technical perspective as Disney has been doing this same thing on their cruise ships -in the Animator's Palate dining hall- for at least a decade.
> This isn't even redeemable from a technical perspective as Disney has been doing this same thing on their cruise ships -in the Animator's Palate dining hall- for at least a decade.
The main interesting part about Facebook's approach is inferring bones from a humanoid drawing (even if other unrelated objects are on the page). From what I can tell off of some Youtube videos, the Disney version has guests draw the bones already separated on a template like this: https://i.imgur.com/AGxvsFq.png
A couple more things Facebook's method appears to handle better, but wouldn't be strictly out-of-reach for traditional methods, are morphing the limbs rather than having them as separate detached parts and identifying which parts of the background are inside of the figure so should be kept opaque. Comparison: https://i.imgur.com/KlJbtqy.png
Yes, true. I should have chosen my words more carefully. While the technology is better in a number of ways and the result is incrementally better in this specific application, the incrementally better result is arguably not worth the technical lengths and costs it took to get it. And what is not redeemable is the enticement, see here: https://imgur.com/vCyJgRE
The technically interesting thing is the automatic generation of the "bones", something the Disney solution does not do - they make you draw your character within a predefined grid.
But it's too bad that every new piece of technology nowadays has a huge asterisk attached: please sign away your family's privacy and security, We Promise You Can Trust Us. I guess I'll just have to pass.
