Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 55: |
Line 55: |
| | | |
| This comic is referring to doing a GIS lookup which is a glorified sql Query which has nothing to do with GPS and the the USGS spatial data a GIS database is commonly populated with is not derived from GPS information anyway. A GIS Lookup IS easy. Gathering the spatial data is difficult, though as previously mentioned its already widely and freely available for use. --[[User:PlatterMonkous|PlatterMonkous]] | | This comic is referring to doing a GIS lookup which is a glorified sql Query which has nothing to do with GPS and the the USGS spatial data a GIS database is commonly populated with is not derived from GPS information anyway. A GIS Lookup IS easy. Gathering the spatial data is difficult, though as previously mentioned its already widely and freely available for use. --[[User:PlatterMonkous|PlatterMonkous]] |
− | :The GIS data is being looked at to determine if GPS-derived metadata lies within one of its boundaries, surely? Without GPS, the query has no sensible question to ask.
| |
− | :(Then again, none of my own pictures have that sort of EXIF information. Either they're taken on a 'dumb' digital camera, that doesn't have inbuilt GPS, or even ''if'' they're done via my GPS+Camera-equipped tablet (rare) I've likely not allowed the one to be fed data that the other one knows. If it's even turned on. But the comic scenario clearly assumes otherwise.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.62|172.70.86.62]] 20:21, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I think that, like in a number of other comic explanations, the explanation of the humour has given way to the technical exposition of the situation. What made me chuckle about this comic is the old adage in the software industry that: ''It takes 5% of the time to implement the first 95%, but 95% of time to complete the last 5%''. Even when experienced programmers correctly identify the difficult element of a problem and attempt to compensate for that difficulty in their implementation schedules, they can still be ''wildly'' off the mark. In this case, 60 years and counting... [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.28|172.71.94.28]] 10:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | The year is 2024, and there is an ArsTechnica article about the problem in this comic now being solved. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/01/famous-xkcd-comic-comes-full-circle-with-ai-bird-identifying-binoculars/ [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.41|172.70.210.41]] 22:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
| |
− | :Updated to add credit where credit is due, the research team in our reality that created the technology is the Cornell Lab of Ornithology in the Center for Avian Population Studies and Macaulay Library: https://ebird.org/about/staff -- No doubt if Ponytail was the lead the staff could've done it in half the time! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.90.24|162.158.90.24]] 22:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | The rewrite of the explanation is really long overdue! If it's hard to start from scratch, someone could request GPT-4 to make a plan on how to update the article, and then use the ideas for inspiration {{unsigned ip|162.158.151.152|20:44, 13 March 2024}}
| |
− | :If you think it could do with a rewrite, rewrite it yourself. (Stay away from GPT, though, still likely to give an unsatisfactory explanation. If not downright hallucinating.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.179|172.70.86.179]] 21:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
| |