3 ms·
Neither. It's just such a habit to type miles. I meant 510 trillion square _meters_, which google and wolfram alpha tell me is correct. In any case.. the r
by akira2501 11y ago
Neither. It's just such a habit to type miles. I meant 510 trillion square _meters_, which google and wolfram alpha tell me is correct.
In any case.. the reason I chose that is because that's probably close to a reasonable maximum single pixel resolution for tracking imagery. I wanted the scope of the problem to be obvious by choice of units; unfortunately, I screwed that part up. :(
- david-given 11y agoBeen there, done that, bought the aardvark. I mean T-shirt. (And, of course, it didn't occur to me that 1e6 million square metres is a square kilometre...)