3 ms·
speaking of exploration, has anyone ever thought about non-cartesian displays? say, pixels that are arranged in a hexagonal pattern. or pixels arranged in a rad
by webdevver 1y ago
speaking of exploration, has anyone ever thought about non-cartesian displays? say, pixels that are arranged in a hexagonal pattern. or pixels arranged in a radial pattern and addressed via polar coordinates.
what pattern are human color/light sensors arranged in? maybe we should replicate that pattern? an organic arrangement discovered via simulated annealing?
all this bitmap x/y display stuff is very pre-AI-ish. old tech. victorian era clockwork mechanism. built to make it easy to reason about for humans, before the advent of neuron-soup. maybe we can do better?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- AlotOfReading 1y agoYes, it's been well-explored and there's a number of clever ways to convert them back to Cartesian coordinates because those are much nicer to work with for humans. The very earliest color CRTs used triangular arrangements of subpixels for each color, for example.
- card_zero 1y agoThis pattern? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ConeMosaics.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ConeMosaics.jpg Maybe we should put the electronics in a layer in front of the display, make them transparent, and use them to filter the light. The vertebrate retina does something like that, putting nerves in front of light sensors. Imitating evolved solutions isn't always a good idea. Nature's design process is like: start with the wrong parts for the job. Lay them out back to front. Wire them together the long way round. Adapt this design slightly and latch on to any convenient side effects. Iterate ten billion times. Now it works pretty good! Or it doesn't, but the species survives anyway, which is also fine since there is no goal.