I think the most likely case for sedimentary deposition over ice would be something like volcanic eruption or an impact event redepositing material onto pre-existing ice.
author here, good digging! I added the MIT license.
Getting 5-fold symmetry to work was tricky, but the repo you found has the processing sketch where I figured it out. I basically took the point generation process I described and rotated it upon itself 5 times. I tested this with different radial symmetry numbers actually, and 5 also happened to look the best and also was convenient for manufacturing the PCBs.
Then I had AI add the ability to rotate a bounding rectangle for one 'quintant' around the shape, and found the division of cells which minimized the area, since PCB cost scales with that.
Friend, if you can find one, get yourself a Fadecandy board. Maybe not that easy since it's technically discontinued. The dithering gives the smoothest / sexiest fading possible.
I'll bet there's some creative board layout so that the relevant controller IC and supporting passives can be soldered onto the back of one of the 5, then have solder jumpers or some such to actually connect it into the circuit. That way, you're not adding miles of unused trace to an active bus.
Of course, having a 5x PCB fab, but 4x+1 assembly would probably double the cost for a single turn of the device.
I would love to hear more about the process of making 5-fold symmetry work for board layout. That sounds maddening to get right.
As long as you can design the outline as a vector file somewhere else, it's easy enough to import as a board outline and then lay out on top of it. I also get the lure of assembly these days, but I would hand-solder a board like this for a one-off art project. Call me old fashioned, but I'm confident enough with soldering that I'd estimate a couple of hours to assemble and I like buying domestic which is less economical than the JLPCB special. If people started to ask for kits though...
I think your idea is pretty sound if you connect all but one of the boards in a ring and use a jumper for the control section.
I could go either way on hand-soldering a single assembly. But doing this more than once would be torturous.
I can only go so many days carefully monitoring diet and minimizing stimulant intake to minimize associated tremors. And I don't have rework microscope, so my eyes would definitely suffer.
>It's much more difficult to buy the ESP32 as an MCU than it is to buy it as a SBC, with ports for power and I/O already on a PCB (often with through pins, to land on another PCB, like the arduino hats). And I don't mean "it's difficult because you have to solder" - I mean "it's difficult to find many places that sell it".
1. Go to mouser.com
2. Type ESP32 into the search bar
3. There's your part.
Its difficult to buy a very specific nut or bolt from Amazon (their nut/bolt search interface doing precisely nothing it appears to be intended to do). That doesn't mean McMaster-Carr doesn't exist. You're just going to the wrong store.
If you're in particular referring to how hard it is to find a PDIP package (that is, a through-hole package) for an ATMEGA MCU, that's because they don't make them anymore. Insofar as I'm aware, Espressif has never made a through-hole ESP32 module, but maybe they made one with castellated edges?
But an ESP32 module is as easy to come by as a surface-mount ATMEGA328P. Which is to say, very easy.
Next thing you're gonna tell me that English speakers overwhelmingly prefer novels written in English.
Cultures have visual languages just the same as they have written and spoken (and signed) languages. The crucifix symbol has an understood meaning in most European cultures, because of how foundational Christianity is to their cultures. Is it really so surprising that people prefer buildings in a visual language they already understand?
There's also this paragraph at the very end:
>If this is true, a greater puzzle comes into view. Almost every architectural school in the world exclusively teaches broadly modernist styles, and probably more than 99 percent of architects practice exclusively in them. In Britain, there has been hardly a single public commission in a traditional style since the 1950s, and only a trickle of commercial and institutional ones. Except in the market for private housing, traditional styles have been virtually extinct for seven decades. Although in some cases this can be explained by anti-traditional planning rules, the broad trend is still evident in jurisdictions whose development control systems are stylistically neutral.
In a world where we've seen nothing but modernist designs for 70 years, is it really that surprising that people might prefer novel designs? Especially novel designs in a style they are repeatedly told is better, or references a more refined time?
Seems to me that your positions are in opposition to each other.
1. There’s a traditional visual language that people instinctively prefer.
2. Modern architectural sensibilities have superseded traditional visual language through repetition.
I’m reading this to mean something like “people like their own traditional foods but since they've been drowning in pizza for the last 70 years, they’ve forgotten about their traditional foods.”
How can a basal, instinctive preference just disappear? Can the sex drive disappear with enough brainwashing?
I'm not claiming that people instinctively prefer anything. I'm saying that they've been socialized to believe that "traditional" architecture is some indicator of societal excellence. I don't think its weird that people report a bias they've been taught to have.
The article even seems aware of this possibility when it mentions that architecture students prefer modernism (with the semi-covert implication that their education is poisoning their aesthetic sensibilities). I claim its at most partially because they've been taught to prefer modern designs, but mainly because they've been taught to think about visual languages consciously, so they are able to recognize what a given architect is trying to do, in a way that a layperson might not. That's certainly why Thomas Kinkade gets as much hate as he does (that and the dodgy business practices...).
I'm also not claiming that people have been starved of traditional architecture entirely, just that nobody is building things in the traditional style now. They're not tearing them down either, the White House East Wing not withstanding. This is a novelty bias, nothing more. If you only ever see neoclassical architecture in buildings that are designated as "fancy" or "special" or "august", and all these modern, ordinary buildings do not, you're going to assume that the style itself, and not simply the age and intent at construction are what contributes to that.
I mean, 39 out of 50 US state capitol buildings have domes, as does the nation's capitol building. I think anybody in the US can be forgiven for thinking that dome = legitimate seat of authority. Certainly, that was the hypothesis behind the design decision.
Speaking only for myself, I found Washington DC, which is all neo-classical all the time, just really boring. All the buildings look the same, and I couldn't escape the sense that I was in museum that hadn't been updated in a long time. Chicago's Fields Museum has the same quality.
Put another way, while their positions are one set of 3 points, their momenta are another set of 3 points, and there is no requirement that 6 points will always lay on the same plane.
I wonder what phantom forces would appear when the reference frame changes in some complicated fashion. We get centrifugal "force" when we reconstruct F=dP/dt in a rotating reference frame, what would the 3-body "force" look like?
I used to work with several Apple MEs, and one EE, when they moved to the startup I was at.
They were all very skilled and pragmatic engineers. While there is some tribal knowledge benefits to getting really fluent with a given CAD suite, foundationally they are just tools, so when our startup migrated from one CAD suite to another, there was pretty minimal churn. You only have to go through one project management software changeover to realize that good operators, engineers or PMs or whatever, aren't permanently affected by the particular choice of software (but they are affected by constant change in that choice). The fundamentals don't change, even if the selector switch moves from one side to the other.
At the same startup, in the early days, I had a System76 laptop running their flavor of Ubuntu, and I used KiCad (but that was prior to their big UX overhaul so it was pretty painful) so I could design the few PCBs we needed. When we adopted Altium, I dual-booted the laptop. Later, I used a MacBook Pro and I ran Altium in a VM, and I've never had a more mind-bending computing experience than when I had Windows (running Altium) on one screen, OSX (with all of my firmware dev tools) on the other screen, and my keyboard shortcuts (down to cmd vs ctrl as the modifier) would change based on which screen my mouse cursor was on.
I've no idea if they still do it, or if this was an option open to the general public or if it was a special thing for our group, but once upon a time, in my early teens, I got to tour NIST's test reactor in Boulder, Colorado.
At one point in the tour, they turned on the reactor, while we stood along the edges of the pool it was immersed in. Literally all that separated us from the magic of fission was about 5-6 meters of water. I still remember the electric blue glow of the Cherenkov radiation. Even with decades of life and experience and education between now and then, its hard to describe the psychic impact of observing with my own eyes something that I had heretofore understood to be impossible. Something akin to seeing Narnia through the wardrobe for the first time.
I was already into physics at that time (I had shadowed a sibling for a day at the University of Washington, and got to attend a lecture about nuclear fission a few years before in the physics-for-liberal-arts-majors course she was taking at that time), but this was quite something else. All of that to say, I already understood that dragons exist, in a manner of speech, but there's a difference between understanding it and feeling one's breath on your face.
Are you this actively shitty towards all hobbies you don't also enjoy?
People have been foraging for mushrooms for literally thousands of years, but mushroom cultivation is pretty recent, and the overwhelming majority of edible species have not yet been reliably cultivated.
Are you ignorant of where those interesting flavors come from (indeed, are discovered)?
This has strong "why should we care about farms? People get everything they need from the store" vibes.
> Are you this actively shitty towards all hobbies you don't also enjoy
No, really just this one. There’s not that many hobbies that have death as an outcome of a minor mistake. For something like free solo climbing, we all understand those guys are nuts and wired different for an incredible high. For mushroom foraging on the other hand, it seems to me like… your reward is a slightly different mushroom flavor?
Are you thinking that mushroom foraging is just like going to the store, and there are no experiential benefits from actually going out to look?
Would you characterize beekeeping as nuts? Too many bee stings in a short(ish, weeks or months typically) period of time render one deathly allergic to further bee stings. Ooh, what about the risk of growing tomatoes, potatoes, or other members of the belladonna family? I mean, their greens are all toxic. Likewise for home grown rhubarb!
There are plenty of things people engage in for fun, on a regular basis, that are incredibly punishing of mistakes. Car and home repair come to mind. Downhill skiing, bicycling, motorcycling are all in there.
But the thing of it is, for every single one that I've mentioned, there are reasonable steps to be taken to mitigate a lot of those risks. Like, every mushroom foraging guide I've consumed goes to some lengths to point out how to correctly differentiate between dangerous and not dangerous mushrooms.
Your take on why people free solo is also misinformed. To be honest, I've never experienced an adrenaline rush from it, and if I did, I'd expect that to be in the 2-3 seconds before I met a violent and bloody end. It's not an "I survived that!" sort of experience, so much as it is a "I only had to focus on the climbing, not faffing with ropes and things" experience. A core goal of my climbing is already not to fall, and I can already get seriously hurt or killed, even whilst using the gear correctly. Neither the risk nor the sense of defying it are factors in why I do it.
>Women just need to deal with it. Assume that whenever you're in a public place, ALL your actions are PUBLIC. A women (and men) should dress and talk in a way conducive to the public arena.
People have been the subject of stalking, harassment, rape irrespective of how they dress for ages. If you consider "being polite to a customer at a coffee shop" as an invitation to any of the above, then I guess you can claim that its solely the victim's responsibility to prevent this sort of thing. But I ask, what is the victim's recourse if they legit do not want to be filmed and broadcast? Just stay home? Are we seriously going to give third-tier facebook-live streamers that much power?
I feel like "if asked, don't monetize content containing others, if the content only occurred because of the recorder's actions". Like, yes, if you're in public, you can be filmed, sure. But if I ask you not to film me, and then you make money off a recording of just me saying "don't film me", that feels less like free speech, and more like monetizing actionable harassment.
> People have been the subject of stalking, harassment, rape irrespective of how they dress for ages.
Flatly untrue. Can you get harassed regardless of anything in particular? Sure. Is the probability of harassment tied to various factors, like the way you dress? Absolutely yes.
More than one art installation has been a simple depiction of the clothes worn by victims during their rapes. You should look it up.
My daughters have dealt with sexual harassment. Should I tell them to dress less sluttily? I mean, they wear what I buy for them, and I don’t think I buy anything wildly inviting of anything. But what do I know?! I’m just the father of a 7 and 6 year old.
Depends on how many times you get rape and/or death threats from unhinged audience members who went to surprising and horrifying lengths to figure out your identity.
Obviously, we cannot wholly bar these jack wagons from going out and finding the exact edge of “harassment worth pursuing legal action over”. But we can lower the cost of pursuing legal action, and raise the cost of defending against such action. That’s all I’m proposing.
