4 ms·

OMG. The finite and linear nature of public roads is what makes streetview viable. You cannot expect to capture a panorama from every point within 10000m of the

by theoh 10y ago

OMG. The finite and linear nature of public roads is what makes streetview viable. You cannot expect to capture a panorama from every point within 10000m of the surface of the earth. That is simply impossible. So what is it exactly that you mean by mapping the whole world? I mention this because some designers appear to believe that realtime "omniscient" panoramic data is inevitable. e.g. http://www.dezeen.com/2014/09/19/pernilla-ohrstedt-demonstrates-how-our-world-will-be-captured-in-digital-form-dezzen-and-mini-fronitiers-exhibition/ http://www.dezeen.com/2014/09/19/pernilla-ohrstedt-demonstra...

colordrops 10y ago
failure of imagination.
- theoh 10y ago
  Why?
adamnemecek 10y ago
> That is simply impossible. Right. And in that vein, "heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible".
- theoh 10y ago
  Seriously? Every point within 10km of earth's surface? The link I posted maintains that this kind of information will be available in real time--that introduces the key factor of how often you need to revisit this infinite number of vantage points. I'm almost 40, I guess it's time to leave HN and hang out with old folks with some sense.
  - adamnemecek 10y ago
    > available in real time No way people will be cool with this. > with some sense. Considering how 'old' you are, you sure argue somewhat childishly.
  - nitrogen 10y ago
    Many perspectives can be synthesized from a few cameras. Or people expect intelligent dust.
Reason077 10y ago
You cannot expect to capture a panorama from every point within 10000m of the surface of the earth. That is simply impossible. Impossible today? sure. But not necessarily tomorrow. Think Quantum computing, middle-out compression, and billions (trillions?) of microscopic camera drones floating in the air.
- yosyp 10y ago
  Let's assume that a typical floating camera has a field of view of 100 m^2. That means to cover 1 km^2 of land, we would need 100 floating cameras. Now the total surface area of land (not water) on Earth is about 150,000,000 km^2, so we would need 150,000,000,000 (150 billion) such cameras. Next, let's assume that the micro controller powering the camera, transmission, wifi, and drone circuitry requires 200mA and 1.2V [1], or 240mW. Let's also assume this whole assembly is reduced to just a single motor, and draws better-than-ideal current [2], which would require another ~1.1W/377 minutes of flight time, or 175mW/hour, in addition to the 240mW/hour to power the camera and related circuitry. This is absurdly ideal, as current quadcopters require about 250 Watt to fly for 20 minutes with a weight of 600 grams, or 750 Watt/hour, a two orders of magnitude difference. Since we would have 150,000,000,000 such drones, we would need .175 Watt/hour*150,000,000,000 = 26.25 Gigawatt/hour to power this system (but in reality more like 112.5 Terawatt/hour). To put that in perspective, the Three Gorges Dam hydroelectric plant (the largest in the world) produces 22.6 Gigawatt/hour at peak capacity and 98.8 TWh/year. Maybe solar can help? Recently flexible solar cells were fabricated with 12% efficiency and a power-per-weight ratio of 23 Watt/gram. To power our quadcopter, we would need about 32g of these new solar panels, and continuously sunny conditions (since adding power storage to a solar powered quadcopter would add weight). Of course the bigger challenge is logistics. How do you produce 150 billion of anything? If it takes 1 second to produce 1 drone, that's over 4,700 years to get them all. Do you work in parallel? Do you make 3D printers to print other 3D printers to then print these drones? Even at a failure rate of 0.001%, that's 1.5 million drones failing at any given time. What about costs? $1/drone? That's the annual GDP of Belize. tldr; Invest in solar cell research and 3D printing. [1] http://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/8659/measure-total-microcontroller-current http://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/8659/measure-tota... [2] http://multicopter.forestblue.nl/lipo_need_calculator.html http://multicopter.forestblue.nl/lipo_need_calculator.html [3] http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v14/n10/full/nmat4388.html http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v14/n10/full/nmat4388.htm...

by theoh 10y ago

colordrops 10y ago

failure of imagination.

theoh 10y ago
Why?

adamnemecek 10y ago

> That is simply impossible. Right. And in that vein, "heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible".

theoh 10y ago
Seriously? Every point within 10km of earth's surface? The link I posted maintains that this kind of information will be available in real time--that introduces the key factor of how often you need to revisit this infinite number of vantage points. I'm almost 40, I guess it's time to leave HN and hang out with old folks with some sense.
- adamnemecek 10y ago
  > available in real time No way people will be cool with this. > with some sense. Considering how 'old' you are, you sure argue somewhat childishly.
- nitrogen 10y ago
  Many perspectives can be synthesized from a few cameras. Or people expect intelligent dust.

Reason077 10y ago

You cannot expect to capture a panorama from every point within 10000m of the surface of the earth. That is simply impossible. Impossible today? sure. But not necessarily tomorrow. Think Quantum computing, middle-out compression, and billions (trillions?) of microscopic camera drones floating in the air.

yosyp 10y ago
Let's assume that a typical floating camera has a field of view of 100 m^2. That means to cover 1 km^2 of land, we would need 100 floating cameras. Now the total surface area of land (not water) on Earth is about 150,000,000 km^2, so we would need 150,000,000,000 (150 billion) such cameras. Next, let's assume that the micro controller powering the camera, transmission, wifi, and drone circuitry requires 200mA and 1.2V [1], or 240mW. Let's also assume this whole assembly is reduced to just a single motor, and draws better-than-ideal current [2], which would require another ~1.1W/377 minutes of flight time, or 175mW/hour, in addition to the 240mW/hour to power the camera and related circuitry. This is absurdly ideal, as current quadcopters require about 250 Watt to fly for 20 minutes with a weight of 600 grams, or 750 Watt/hour, a two orders of magnitude difference. Since we would have 150,000,000,000 such drones, we would need .175 Watt/hour*150,000,000,000 = 26.25 Gigawatt/hour to power this system (but in reality more like 112.5 Terawatt/hour). To put that in perspective, the Three Gorges Dam hydroelectric plant (the largest in the world) produces 22.6 Gigawatt/hour at peak capacity and 98.8 TWh/year. Maybe solar can help? Recently flexible solar cells were fabricated with 12% efficiency and a power-per-weight ratio of 23 Watt/gram. To power our quadcopter, we would need about 32g of these new solar panels, and continuously sunny conditions (since adding power storage to a solar powered quadcopter would add weight). Of course the bigger challenge is logistics. How do you produce 150 billion of anything? If it takes 1 second to produce 1 drone, that's over 4,700 years to get them all. Do you work in parallel? Do you make 3D printers to print other 3D printers to then print these drones? Even at a failure rate of 0.001%, that's 1.5 million drones failing at any given time. What about costs? $1/drone? That's the annual GDP of Belize. tldr; Invest in solar cell research and 3D printing. [1] http://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/8659/measure-total-microcontroller-current http://arduino.stackexchange.com/questions/8659/measure-tota... [2] http://multicopter.forestblue.nl/lipo_need_calculator.html http://multicopter.forestblue.nl/lipo_need_calculator.html [3] http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v14/n10/full/nmat4388.html http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v14/n10/full/nmat4388.htm...