@AeroMechanical:
I watched it a few times, because at first I thought part of the 'trick' was that they vibrated the panels. That would have been cooler, but I think it's simply visual along with a loud noise of the bang of the shark.

I think apart from simply the surprise element one way that makes it work well is that it is a huge screen, and you have to be really close to it to touch it, so it is all you see.

(and of course 1000's of peoples were surprised by it, a hundred of those people were video'd while doing so, and we get to see the best one of those recorded reactions, God bless the Internet)

All you have to do is smoke DMT to see a hypercube, 4 dimensional visuals where any where you look, every side, is perfectly 3D. That's an oversimplification of that experience but if the brain is able to "see" it through experience, there's probably something to it, scientifically speaking and beyond just the brain, lol

It's annoying and I 100% agree. I get a headache trying to read something I'd rather watch. I get so much more from the visual details. Then again, I used text on the videos I used to make [as I taught myself how to edit] because I didn't know how to do voiceovers ... so ...

Fortunately they were already doing a go-around by the time ATC noticed, a few seconds later would have been a disaster. Their minimum altitude was reported as 18m, which is a bit under a metre above the tail height of a Boeing 787-9.

They do have those alarms, but it was initially reported this plane was too far off course from R28R to trigger them and part of the investigation will be whether they were even operating at the time.

A major contributing factor for this incident was that the second runway, 28L, was closed and lights off at the time of the incident. As a result, the FAA has changed San Francisco landing procedures no longer permitting visual approach when an adjacent parallel runway is closed - https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/faa-changes-san-francisco-landing-procedures-after-a-440380/

I've seen most of the GitS material incl. the comics & anime. I actually found the Hollywood adaptation watchable.... because I placed it in its own little isolated corner and the lowest of expectations -- Hollywood, blockbuster, skin-deep sci-fi... and I came out much relieved it wasn't as bad as the critics said. At least I had a nostalgia blast from the visuals. My blockbuster movies watching has evolved into a state of "don't care to be angry/don't pay to watch at the theatre/ just wait them out to be on Netflix/clearance DVD BluRay)

Seriously... how can anyone expect anything of above average depth from a Hollywood blockbuster anymore? Don't be silly and set yourself up for disappointment.

I can totally understand their reasons for risk-aversion. From their perspective, they got burned too many times financially (not saying it's not their own doing) to make films that demand thoughtfulness from the audience. I just don't believe in Hollywood will give us anything deep anymore for these big budget films...

Cool LaserDisc game visually and techwise, but boring to me. I played other arcade games like Gauntlet, Pac-Man, TMNT, RoboCop, etc.

Curious how Air Canada didn't have a visual that let him know he was lined up wrong. Amazing that a mistake like this could happen.

In a closed environment you should use what you agree on and stick to it. Whether it's tabs or spaces doesn't really matter, depending on what language/editors are in play. VIM vs Emacs is a waste of time, as professionals have to use something like Visual Studio anyway.

We use tabs.

(**EDIT** hmm, code HTML tag doesn't seem to allow whitespace to show at the beginning of lines, so I'm replacing spaces with _underscores_ in the pseudocode below)

Code uses spaces or tabs to visually distinguish the flow of the program, what code belongs to what functions / loops / whatever.

Here's some C-style "pseudocode" that should get the idea across:

void function fizzbuzz {
__for (i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
____set print_number to true;
____If i is divisible by 3
______print "Fizz";
______set print_number to false;
____If i is divisible by 5
______print "Buzz";
______set print_number to false;
____If print_number, print i;
____print a newline;
__}
}

The braces { } show the beginning and ending of a "function" (essentially one of potentially many self-contained algorithms in a program) and the beginning and ending of a "for loop" (that will repeat the code inside it some number of times). And the "if" statements will only perform the stuff after them IF the test they perform evaluates to true.

So in that pseudocode, there's sort of 4 tiers or things going on. First is the function (named "fizzbuzz"). Since functions are kind of the most basic structural unit of the code, they are on the far left -- not indented at all. Sorta like Roman Numerals in an outline.

Then, the actual content of that function (the code that makes up its algorithm) is set a consistent amount of space to the right to make it clear that it is contained inside the function. That can be done with *1* tab, or some consistent amount of spaces so that it lines up. The only thing in that tier is the "for loop" and the braces that show its beginning and end.

Then the content of the for loop is set a bit further to the right (with another space or another set number of spaces). All of the "if" statements are at that 3rd tier level, along with a bit more code at the beginning and end. Then, the actual content of the if statements is set one more tier to the right to help distinguish that it will only run IF the conditions are met.

That pseudocode uses spaces for all of the tiering -- 2 spaces per tier. I'm a tab person like the guy Richard in the video, because it seems easier to press tab once per tier than hitting the spacebar 2/3/4 times per tier. But it really is just a personal preference issue, because as he said in the video, by the time the code is compiled (turned into an executable file that the computer can run) the final result will be the same whether the programmer used spaces or tabs.

But like with many things, Silicon Valley really hits the nail on the head here. Programmers tend to be very set in their ways and anal about their style preferences for code. If we have to go through someone else's code that doesn't follow our style conventions exactly, it kinda tends to throw us out of whack. To make an analogy with something less nerdy, consider how annoying it can be when someone borrows your car and you have to adjust the seat / mirrors / radio stations etc. when you get back in.

I've built about 15+ generative visuals videos over the last year, using Max MSP & my own music. Is that what you used? It almost has the appearance of something like Resolume since it's very symmetrical, which is cool.

I agree, there are definitely sites like the one you linked to that can get an idea across with visuals / media / flash / whatever that would be impossible or drastically less efficient with pure text.

To me, uBlock Origin or Adblock with Element Hiding Helper is capable of finding a happy medium around 90% of the time.

I like Dilbert. Up until about a year or so ago, there was a URL to go to a page that had the latest comic with simple links to back/forward navigation. No comments or other extraneous stuff. Then Scott Adams did a site redesign and added a fuckload of ads, a "blog" about Adams' political opinions that I don't give 2 shits about, social media links, tags, comments, a star rating, and a "BUY" button. If I'm not running my browser maximized, all that crap pushes the single bit of content that I actually DO want (the comic image) so far out of frame that I have to scroll down to see it. F that.

uBlock itself takes care of the ads. Everything else that annoys me is gone by using the "element picker", which filters out sections or bits of HTML that I can choose. So now, when I visit dilbert.com I get the 3 most recent comic images with a title/date line and *nothing* else.

Videosift isn't immune on my PC either. The "social panel" for each video? Gone. Facebook "likebox"? Gone.

I've run into a few pages that detect custom filtering in a way similar to ad blocking detection. Sometimes, I can just select those "warning" elements and hide them -- especially if they are in a floating frame that simply loads on top of the actual page content. Sometimes those warnings actually prevent the page content from loading. Something from wired did that recently. I haven't clicked through to a wired article since.

So to address the actual video/concept....

First up, brutalist architecture is fucking awful. There was a bunch of it in Christchurch and if the earthquake did one good thing, it was to get rid of most of those god-awful buildings.

Second, the web isn't about words; it's about information.
How that information is conveyed depends on the target audience and the information being presented.

Sometimes the information is simple and the target audience is actually a machine, in which case we have things like REST and SOAP.

Other times the information is complex, and best represented visually. Can anyone honestly tell me that a site like this (http://thetruesize.com) would be better brutalised?

That's not to say there aren't problems with web bloat. Of course there are. But let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Looks visually stunning - so why do I think I will be yawning half-way through the movie? When will Hollywood learn that story and character has to come first - then the beautiful vision.

I hope I'm wrong. 5th Element was good - but what was good and memorable were the characters.

Having said that - I would like to play this as a VR game.

Very strange phrasing, given that the visuals all seem to be from the film "Joe's Apartment". I don't think the song is, though.

Seriously, he's taking a shit on "purist liberals"?

Remind me again, who was speaking up loud and clear about the danger of running another corporatist against a right-wing populist? Who was that again? Was it the strategists and consultants of the DNC? Was it all the celebrities who were „with her“?

Or was it maybe those liberal idiots whose candidate is, I don't know, the most popular politician in the country? Sanders gets cheers from Trump voters at townhalls in red states, and you're putting the blame for Trump's election at the feet of purist liberals?

Honestly, mate. You want to know what a neoliberal disaster looks like? Look at at the White House. Neoliberal policies are the breeding ground of right-wing populists. You think someone like Trump gets elected because of his convincing policy proposals? Right-wing populists are the answers to „centrist“ policies that enrich the few at the cost of the many. Everyone knows the effects, from widescale poverty, historic inequality, the opioid epidemic, all the way to the two-tiered justice system with fraudsters and torturers running free while not being able to pay a parking tickets gets you jailed.

Too abstract for you, Bill? Then look at Detroit. Look at Cleveland. Is that enough of a visual representation of what a neoliberal disaster looks like?

In this situation, they decided to run a corporatist, with the message „America is already great“. How was that supposed to resonate with the working stiff, Bill? The people whose despair is the main driver behind the opioid epidemic, as Case-Deaton has shows us in such detail. Who had the glorious idea to run exclusively on identity politics and ignore the economic plight of the lower class?

Was that the purist liberals, Bill?

Did the purist liberals run a campaign whose own people, if „Shattered“ contains any truth at all, described it as nothing short of a disaster? Even Clinton's own people didn't seem to know why she was running, and were toying with the idea of just going with „it's her turn“. Seriously, the way they describe Clinton's paranoia and refusal to interact with her own staff makes it sound like her campaign was not much less of a clusterfuck than Trump's presidency, from an organizing point of view.

But yeah, go ahead and blame the purist liberals. And Comey, while you're at it. And Russia. And Jill Stein. And fake news. And WikiLeaks. And sexism. Anything but the DNC and their corporate candidate.

Let me know when you're done, maybe then we can have a proper post-mortem of how the Democrats managed to lose the White House, Congress, most state legislatures and Governorships. And we'll start from the top, because we have a saying in German: „der Fisch stinkt vom Kopf her“. Maybe you can get an option to vote against Wall Street, against the war on drugs, against big pharma, against the MIC, and against the destruction of our biosphere. Because you sure as hell didn't have one this time.