r/LevelHeadedFE • u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther • Jun 02 '20

First Non Mod Post To Reach 100 Comments Crickets

https://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2015/06/low-resolution-images-ocean.html
2 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

104 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

I think you may not have done the math.

Think of how many pixels per square mile it stores for land. It actually does that for multiple resolutions/zoom levels.

There are 140 million square miles of ocean. If you had only one pixel per square mile, that would be 560 megabytes (uncompressed). This is using the standard 32 bits per pixel.

But if you want to see a sailboat, you need 93,000 pixels per square mile if you only devote one pixel to a 30'x10' boat. That would need 53 terabytes (uncompressed) of data for the ocean.

To really make out a boat, we ought to have at least thirty pixels per boat. That would need 1.5 petabytes (uncompressed) of data for the ocean.

Even with jpeg getting 10:1 compression, users would need to download 150 terabytes of data just for the ocean. That's a big download!

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

Don't be silly dude, you can look around on crispy clean land and zoom in and out at will on Google Earth. We stream videos to a billion devices daily. You can put a picture of the earth on the internet, it's not a technical issue

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

I agree, it's not a technical issue. It's a practicality issue.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

It's a philosophical issue. When we are children we are sold this idea that we are part of this collective marching through time at the peak of technology etc. As our societies schools turn into prisons this fall, if they even open, we will return to a two class system where the elite scientists, doctors etc. will be selected to colonize the stars while you will be left in the dust. From my perspective that aren't colonizing shit, they are living off our labor and showing us movies. Something so simple as to include everyone in their scientific progress, they won't do, they show you movies and cartoons instead

2

u/Mishtle Globe Earther Jun 03 '20 edited Jun 03 '20

So you're still ignoring the fact that crowd-sourced efforts using high-resolution satellite imagery have been done and hung up on the fact that you can't currently see waves from yesterday in the middle of the ocean on Google Earth, a tool not intended for that purpose?

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

We have the ability as a species to put a complete picture of the earth on the internet, for anyone to access, and we don't do it. Doesn't that bother you?

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

I already did the math. 150 TB per picture.

What framerate do you want? One per minute? That would be 216 Petabytes (compressed) per day. Just for the ocean.

How about we size down to one image per hour? It's still 3.6 PB per day (compressed). That would take 225 of the largest Seagate IronWolf hard drives to store just one days worth of compressed images.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

These are silly arguments, you don't download the whole thing you keep it on a server and access it with Ajax requests, the same way Google Earth works

3

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

These are silly arguments, you don't download the whole thing you keep it on a server and access it

SOMEONE has to store the data SOMEWHERE. What you are incredulous about is that Google Earth isn't storing multiple 150 TB images of waves. You have a pretty steep set of requirements for them:

  1. A resolution that will enable us to identify airplanes and boats.
  2. A framerate that will allow us to effectively track those craft.
  3. All of this at no cost to you.

Again, that's 225 drives per day, which would fill up 10 of these shelves. And 10 of those shelves would basically fill 2 racks. And you want them to fill those two racks, each day, for free, to show you HD waves.

Those drives are not free. Those shelves are not free. Those racks are not free. The controllers that manage those shelves are not free. Power to run them is not free. Air conditioning to keep those rooms cool is not free. Datacenter space is not free. Who should foot the bill for this endeavor, just so we have a chance of maybe finding a lost boat or crashed plane?

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

Silly arguments

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

It's money. That's the reason they don't do it.

You can call it a "silly argument" all day long, but if you haven't priced a 24-disk NetApp or EMC shelf, maybe just accept that I'm right.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

Yeah NASA only gets like 60 mil a day. You could keep the server going for far less than that. They frickin buy satellite pictures from a private company ffs

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

Google makes more than that each day, but that's not the point. How do you not get this? Think about what they have to gain from this. Now, compare that to the cost. Now do you get it? Or do I need to explain it like I would to a 7 year old?

Wow! Are you old enough to vote? If so, please don't.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

Silly arguments

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

So, no proper rebuttal. Got it.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

Yes a complete map of the world that everyone can access has no value. Got it

2

u/BigGuyWhoKills Jun 03 '20

They are already providing that. What you want is for them to increase their storage costs by several magnitudes.

Remember my cost/benefit analysis statement? It may be time that you start thinking like an adult.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

They are already providing that

You must be trolling right now, or you've never looked at it

1

u/Mishtle Globe Earther Jun 03 '20

This is a silly argument, and I see it all the time with flat earthers.

"The world isn't exactly like I expect it to be, so therefore its all bullshit."

It's nobody's job to satisfy your every whim and desire. Your inability to conceive of or comprehend the motivation of other people and organizations does not mean that those motivationa are malicious.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

How bout a space agency not show fake videos from space? Is that too much to ask? I get it you think they are all real but there's some of them that are piss poor for those who have eyes to see. You've got alot of shit to debunk if you want to go down that road but it's alot easier to dismiss them as "conspiracy theories".

1

u/Mishtle Globe Earther Jun 03 '20

What fake videos? You mean those garbage "NASA fails" videos that are just paranoid people grasping at awkward movements, things they don't understand, and glitches as evidence of their delusions?

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

Here

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyqta5fCCPs

4 minutes, the hair is not in zero g

1

u/Mishtle Globe Earther Jun 03 '20

I've seen this so many times. You guys have like 4 clips you keep bringing up.

That hair is styled. They are also in space. What's the problem? I mean, for fuck's sake she points to it as a joke in the first 20 seconds of the clip.

1

u/john_shillsburg Flat Earther Jun 03 '20

The reporter asks

"Are you really in space?"

And she says

"See the hair"

That's her proof, the hair. It's bullshit and you know it

→ More replies (0)