Fun with maps
-
@remi it won't at any rate because HS2 goes in a different direction.
Yeah yeah, I know, I saw it.
-
@remi said in Fun with maps:
@dkf said in Fun with maps:
It's a stretch where the long-distance trains will be going very quickly.
At the rate it is going, HS2 won't ever reach that point
whenif it is built.It's definitely being built, at least in the southern London-to-Birmingham section. Construction industry news is full of information (I only read the headlines; I'm not paying to subscribe...)
But that particular route is different. The one on the map is the ECML, and that's not as fast a track (but still totally HSR by US standards because it goes faster than a donkey).
-
@dkf said in Fun with maps:
totally HSR by US standards because it goes faster than a donkey
Or even because there’s a railway line at all.
-
@dkf said in Fun with maps:
The one on the map is the ECML, and that's not as fast a track
It doesn't even have tilting trains!
-
@loopback0 said in Fun with maps:
@dkf said in Fun with maps:
The one on the map is the ECML, and that's not as fast a track
It doesn't even have tilting trains!
Well no, of course not. It was sufficient to tilt the track.
Until they built HS1, the ECML was the fastest track in the country, but that was particularly in a stretch much further north. The WCML needed fancy trains to compete, and nobody seemed to want to upgrade the route to Bristol/Cardiff that much.
-
@Gurth said in Fun with maps:
Americans don’t Understand Passenger Trains – 05:47
Oh, but we do. Our understanding is that they suck.
-
@boomzilla I’m not surprised about that, given the standards you’re used to (or not even used to, I guess) where railways are concerned.
-
@Gurth yes. Railroads in America are for our stuff, not us. We have better ways to get places.
-
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
@Gurth yes. Railroads in America are for our stuff, not us. We have better ways to get places.
Just one more lane bro come on it's the last one please I promise bro one more lane and it's fine!
-
@LaoC yeah, that's a real testament to how awful train transport is.
-
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
@LaoC yeah, that's a real testament to how awful our train transport is.
-
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
@Gurth yes. Railroads in America are for our stuff, not us.
That is (one of) the crux(es) of the American railway problem: freight trains in practice (and, apparently, illegally) get right of way over passenger trains, meaning passengers usually face delays that could easily be avoided but freight that isn’t time-critical at all gets to its destination on time.
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
that's a real testament to how awful train transport is.
Oddly, it isn’t in many other countries … so who is doing something wrong, then?
-
@Gurth said in Fun with maps:
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
that's a real testament to how awful train transport is.
Oddly, it isn’t in many other countries … so who is doing something wrong, then?
If train people have convinced themselves to live a lower quality of life, who am I to judge them for how they get by?
-
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
@Gurth said in Fun with maps:
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
that's a real testament to how awful train transport is.
Oddly, it isn’t in many other countries … so who is doing something wrong, then?
If train people have convinced themselves to live a lower quality of life, who am I to judge them for how they get by?
train people are apparently fine, 85% of US railroad jobs are unionized.
-
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in Fun with maps:
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
@Gurth said in Fun with maps:
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
that's a real testament to how awful train transport is.
Oddly, it isn’t in many other countries … so who is doing something wrong, then?
If train people have convinced themselves to live a lower quality of life, who am I to judge them for how they get by?
train people are apparently fine, 85% of US railroad jobs are unionized.
Um...I suspect they would disagree with you given that the government shut them down from striking just last year over a bunch of issues that fossilized union contracts have created.
Anyways, back on topic:
-
-
@boomzilla I think someone made a mistake. There are 2 or 3 cities on that map that are either big cities or tourist destinations that people might actually want to travel to.
-
@HardwareGeek and the direct railroad from AZ over water to “nearby” AK didn’t give it away? Or the rail route down to HI from TX?
-
@Arantor said in Fun with maps:
@HardwareGeek and the direct railroad from AZ over water to “nearby” AK didn’t give it away? Or the rail route down to HI from TX?
So many missed opportunities... Think of the picture they could have drawn with the correct routing of the rails...
-
I mean, the rail network could instead look like this…
-
@Arantor Is fun game.
-
-
@homoBalkanus under the right circumstances I can be a whole lot of fun.
-
No lies detected.
-
And the award for the most obscure thing to map on OSM goes to …
-
@LaoC Well, there should be another little tag added:
voltage
.
-
@BernieTheBernie said in Fun with maps:
@LaoC Well, there should be another little tag added: voltage.
Eevul ideas thread is
-
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
No lies detected.
I have two question, just to make sure that my information is correct and up-to-date:
- Pentagon is the place to get gay bjs?
- North Virginia is not a state yet?
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in Fun with maps:
@boomzilla said in Fun with maps:
No lies detected.
I have two question, just to make sure that my information is correct and up-to-date:
- Pentagon is the place to get gay bjs?
Especially during pride month.
-
@LaoC said in Fun with maps:
the award for the most obscure thing to map on OSM goes to …
Seems to be from somebody who really likes mapping obscure things:
OpenStreetMap doesn't have a "notability" requirement like say Wikipedia does; they're fine with their database filling up with any random thing that anybody wants to put in there, as long as it represents some sort of real-world something.
-
@pcooper TBH, this kind of information is bound to be useful to someone, sometime. A fairly large number of someones, I suspect. The only real question I have about the point of this is whether any of them at all will bother to check OSM before choosing a good place to empty his bladder?
-
@Gurth said in Fun with maps:
@pcooper TBH, this kind of information is bound to be useful to someone, sometime. A fairly large number of someones, I suspect. The only real question I have about the point of this is whether any of them at all will bother to check OSM before choosing a good place to empty his bladder?
Eventually someone will come up with a "PPS" navigation app.
Edit: shoulda known
(there are at least two more Google based ones on the Play Store)
-
-
-
Anything to avoid the metric system...
-
@loopback0 Better USAs than ISOs.
-
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
@loopback0 Better USAs than ISOs.
Disk images would be a weird way to measure population.
-
@loopback0 On a tangent, my Combinatorics prof believed that since the information in a person's DNA could be fit on a DVD, this could not be sufficient information. He believed that DNA was merely a barcode. https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0111093
-
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
since the information in a person's DNA could be fit on a DVD, this could not be sufficient information.
You mean to say that three bases do not actually describe the entire chemical structure of an amino acid, nor its chemical potentials and the resulting secondary and tertiary structure of the relevant protein, not even a description of its binding and catalytic sites and their metabolic function? Well then.
-
@kazitor said in Fun with maps:
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
since the information in a person's DNA could be fit on a DVD, this could not be sufficient information.
You mean to say that three bases do not actually describe the entire chemical structure of an amino acid, nor its chemical potentials and the resulting secondary and tertiary structure of the relevant protein, not even a description of its binding and catalytic sites and their metabolic function? Well then.
I am neither a chemist nor a biologist (nor was he), so I can't tell you the details of his thoughts on the matter, though I did read his book. It was more that people (and other species) were too complex for DNA to be enough. This was 2007, so I also don't know if your questions reflect more recent developments.
I was not the only one who regarded him as something of a crackpot. When I mentioned that I disagreed with him on his central premise, he assigned that to me as my term paper.
-
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
@kazitor said in Fun with maps:
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
since the information in a person's DNA could be fit on a DVD, this could not be sufficient information.
You mean to say that three bases do not actually describe the entire chemical structure of an amino acid, nor its chemical potentials and the resulting secondary and tertiary structure of the relevant protein, not even a description of its binding and catalytic sites and their metabolic function? Well then.
I am neither a chemist nor a biologist (nor was he), so I can't tell you the details of his thoughts on the matter, though I did read his book. It was more that people (and other species) were too complex for DNA to be enough.
That’s a weird statement from a combinatorics professor, who certainly knows about, well, combinatorial explosion.
ETA: dang, that’s a word salad abstract.
-
@topspin said in Fun with maps:
ETA: dang, that’s a word salad abstract.
The paper, or at least as much as I managed to skim before giving up, makes the abstract look like it is well written...
Plus, the key basis of the whole "theory" is "DNA cannot store enough information" but this is just stated as an obvious truth without any justification, which makes the whole thing completely pointless.
-
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
On a tangent, my Combinatorics prof believed that since the information in a person's DNA could be fit on a DVD, this could not be sufficient information.
Kolmogorov would like to disagree.
He believed that DNA was merely a barcode. https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0111093
There are two key things missing: a lot of what is going on with genetics is done with effectively self-modifying code, and a lot of what happens in the body has very little to do with genetics (genes say that the potential for a cell to react is there, not that it will react in a specific way to a specific stimulus, or what the relationship of one cell to another strictly is). The genetic code is remarkably small, but genetics aren't the whole story.
-
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
people (and other species) were too complex for DNA to be enough.
Maybe because DNA, despite the way it used to be portrayed in hard science like ST:TNG episodes, isn’t the whole story? The where is just as important as the what — I don’t know for sure, but I would hazard a guess that the part of the DNA that causes a human foetus to develop arms is the same (or as good as) as the corresponding DNA in, say, a cat that causes its foetus to develop forelimbs. Yet human arms and cat forelimbs are quite different in their details, which could be explained fairly easily by one growing in a human womb and the other, in a cat womb.
-
A quick internet search for how much data is stored in DNA first brings up a lot of hype bullshit (including ostensibly credible sources) mostly about using artificial DNA for storage, due to its supposedly high storage density, and bullshit figures counting the DNA information content in a human body by multiplying with the number of individual cells.
The wikipedia paragraph seems to contain the relevant information, though: The human genome contains about 750 MB of information store in DNA, with an entropy rate of about 1.5 to 1.9 bits per base pair. Not relevant but tangentially interesting, the diff between two human genomes can be compressed to about 4MB.You can build quite a lot with 750MB of data.
-
@topspin said in Fun with maps:
You can build quite a lot with 750MB of data.
Including, but not limited to, half a node project.
(for generous interpretations of ‘build’)
-
@Gurth Maybe not the womb itself, but certainly the cellular machinery in the initial egg cell.
-
@Gurth said in Fun with maps:
@jinpa said in Fun with maps:
people (and other species) were too complex for DNA to be enough.
Yet human arms and cat forelimbs are quite different in their details, which could be explained fairly easily by one growing in a human womb and the other, in a cat womb.
The relationship of cells to each other matters a lot. Cells respond to what chemicals are in their immediate environment, including many chemical concentration gradients between different sides.
Most cells can't detect what happens at a distance, especially in foetuses. It's all hyper-local.
-