I see that as the point that all this is proving - most people, most of the time, are essentially reinventing the wheel at some scope and scale or another, so we’d all benefit from being able to find and copy each others’ homework more efficiently.
It’s not COVID, it’s the rise of technology-enabled orderliness and reward for planning ahead, like ordering food and drinks ahead for pickup, or booking the specific seats you want at the theater, and growing expectations that such orderliness is present.
>You know how you suck and you know how everything sucks and when you see something that sucks, you know exactly how to fix it, because you're an asshole. So that is my advice about getting unblocked. Switch from team "I will one day write something good" to team "I have no choice but to write a piece of shit" and then take off your "bad writer" hat and replace it with a "petty critic" hat and go to town on that poor hack's draft and that's your second draft.
>Your taste is why your work disappoints you... it is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions.*
'“One day, I’m gonna write that novel.” Pal? You better start tomorrow morning because the right time never happens. It’s when you boldly determine it. It’s like running on a rainy day. You’re fine once you get out there. The only difficulty is getting off the couch when you lace your shoes up.'
Somewhat related, I've learned that when you're the one who ends up doing the thing, it's important to take advantage of that. Make decisions that benefit you where you have the flexibility.
>During the college football playoffs, ESPN’s family of networks will sometimes show the same game on multiple channels, with one channel broadcasting the whole affair from the Skycam camera. This is a remote camera hovering above and behind the line of scrimmage, replicating the perspective one sees in a video game. Coaches call this the “All‑22” view, because all 22 players on the field are simultaneously observable.
Unfortunately, the author confuses the broadcast Skycam with the All-22 views. They aren't the same thing and the All-22 cameras aren't even controlled by the television production (although they are available to it).
Per NFL league rules it is the responsibility of the home team to supply the All-22 camera feeds to the league. They are usually operated by the home team's stadium video crew. The All-22 viewpoints are from directly overhead and from each end zone and their purpose is purely documentary not creative - so they are the most complete, yet boring views. These cameras are also the source of the still frames sent wirelessly to the sideline tablets you see players and coaches referring to during games (by rule, there is no motion video or real-time imagery sent to these tablets, just two time-delayed stills for each play, showing the moment the ball is snapped and the moment the whistle is blown ending the play).
The Skycam(s) are sophisticated 'flying' remote cameras operated by the broadcast production and suspended on four wires. They are usually moving around, panning and zooming - which the All-22 cameras never do. Skycams can drop to within 10 feet of the field (although low use during games is strictly limited to behind the line of scrimmage before the ball is snapped). They can also accelerate to over 20mph and in the hands of a skilled two-person pilot team, can track with a fast player running the length of the field. Here's arguably the greatest Skycam shot of all time (https://www.nfl.com/videos/skycam-pilot-alex-milton-narrates...). There are sometimes two Skycams in major playoff games and the Super Bowl (high and low).
In the last year the NFL has added 32 4K and 8K fixed-view cameras to each league stadium to support enhanced replay review by referees. They provide fixed views down each sideline from either end and across the goal-line from each side. Their replay feeds are viewable by the replay referee who sits in a sky box above the field, as well as sent to the league's NYC broadcast center in real-time. They are also made available to the broadcast production team and used for the new virtual measurement system and for skeletal tracking data which you may see in CGI replays during a game (https://www.sportsvideo.org/2025/11/20/nfl-deep-dive-how-32-...).
> There can be two Skycams in major playoff games or the Super Bowl (high and low).
There can be more depending on how you block out the cables, I have seen 5. The two Skycam limit is based on two independent systems that do not do cable avoidance in software, you just block out the allowed altitudes on each system.
There also other cable suspended systems in use to move on a line strung between two points and sometimes a track suspended under the stadium roof.
Fun fact: The Skycam was invented by Steadicam inventor Garret Brown and uses some of the same principals for stabilization.
Interesting, I've never seen more than two 4-wire Skycams used in an NFL broadcast (at least that I knew of). Given the need for flexible endzone to endzone coverage of NFL games, I'd imagine sectioned arrangements might be better suited for concerts, etc. The gratuitous two Skycams tracking each other shot is always fun. Just saw another one in recent weeks as they were discussing the retirement of a long-time Skycam operator.
I was going to mention the linear point-to-point 'Sidecams' but I haven't seen them used much the last season and was wondering if they've fallen out of favor. I'd guessed they might get in the sight lines of the primary cameras in many stadiums.
I actually got to briefly meet Garret at a long-ago NAB show. As not only the inventor but the operator on so many incredible film shots, the dude's a legend. IIRC correctly he did the Rocky on the steps and The Shining maze shots himself.
We watched some games last year on the all-22 (because it was the only way we could watch it on ESPN+).
You definitely lose a lot by not having the close-ups, the slow motion replay, etc. That said, you actually get to see many more of the little things that are kind of cool - what teams do to set up for a play, what coaches are doing between plays, how players and officials interact, etc.
I stumbled across an all-22 broadcast during this recent CFP and really liked it, however they didn't have any commentary at all. I do like to hear the color commentary from people who know how to analyze the game (usually former players).
I've never heard this called all-22, and I've been around a lot of football. I played from middle to high school, and my dad has filmed all but 1 high school game for the same school for 37 years. I've exclusively heard this referred to as "wide angle" by filmographers and coaches alike.
Let me get this straight. If the article is correct, the new capabilities are related to better detection of large liquid containers, not determination of whether or not the liquid is dangerous.
So - you couldn’t take large amounts of liquids previously because some liquids in large amounts might be able to be weaponized. If you were caught with too much liquid (in sum total, or in containers that are too large) they’d throw it out and send you on your way.
But now that they have the ability to detect larger containers, they… do what? Declare that it’s safe and send you on your way with it still in your possession?
Dublin has been relaxing their restrictions for a while now, and when I travelled two weeks ago, had also completely dropped the rules. You no longer need to remove liquids or electronics from bags, and the liquids per bottle limits are much higher (don’t remember exactly, maybe 2 litres) with no restriction on total number of bottles.
I watched a YouTube video about it a few months back and apparently the new devices, at least those used in Dublin, are much more accurate in detecting the difference between materials that previously looked similar to the machines, they can also rotate the images in 3d to get a look from different angles. Both of these make it easier to tell whether a substance is dangerous, apparently.
Berlin had a mix of modern scanners and old scanners last time I flew. I had one flight where they were using the modern scanners. And then a few weeks later I used a different security gate and I still had to remove everything from the bag. If you fly from there, the security at the far end of the terminal has the new machines and is usually also the fastest because people generally use the first security gate they see. Good tip if you are in a hurry. The last few times I was through in a few minutes.
At some airports, you can now check your own bag using a machine that weighs it and prints a sticker. Then you drop it on a belt yourself and you walk through security scanners; all without having to talk to anyone. And finally you board using your phone. Lots of automated checks. I've boarded a few times now without anyone bothering to look at an id now. It seems that with self check in the id check at the gate disappeared. And inside the Schengen zone, nobody checks ids at security either.
Edinburgh dropped all liquids and electronics ceremony for a few months now. It's great. I have found that adds of your bag being put aside for further insepction seems to have increased though.
When you don't know much about a topic, probability is higher that your are missing some piece than some entity doing things that make no sense.
I know it's easy to get the impression that's not the case. But when your stop making fun of / belittle such events / persons / decision and be curious instead you start to realize that more often than not you are just missing a piece of information.
The truth oftentimes is just not interesting enough and not clickbait worthy.
You’re right. I am genuinely curious though, so I shouldn’t have been so snarky about it. I’ll try again:
I’ve always been under the impression that large containers of liquids were forbidden because they were potentially dangerous. If that hasn’t changed, and if the new technology is only about being able to better detect the presence of liquids in packed luggage, why have the limits on container size changed?
EDIT: So I see that the article says that it’s about being able to keep the liquids in your bag when going through security. But I thought liquids in large containers were forbidden from going through security entirely unless you had some kind of medical justification for them?
I believe the article mentioned density as well. I suspect that is extremely key in determining what it is, or at least determining if it is something really odd that should get additional screening.
It's not just large amounts of liquids: it was my understanding that this is both a restriction on large amounts of liquid, but particularly on large containers needed for an explosive of sufficient destructive power.
You could always easily work around the liquid amount restriction (multiple containers over multiple people), but if you still need a large container, it becomes harder.
I don't know if this is true or if a resealable plastic bag also works, for instance (that would be funny, wouldn't it?).
I am not sure any of it makes real sense, it's just a variation of the "why" I picked up somewhere (that it's both).
But yes, that's easily worked around in the manner people brought up already (I did think of duty free bottles, but not camera cases, that is a good one).
Alcohol is flammable around 40%. French cooks aren’t using overproof brandy to do flambé.
Gunpowder doused in alcohol is, very famously for people interested in the history of rum, flammable if the alcohol is around 57.1% or higher, but straight alcohol/water without gunpowder is flammable at a lower strength than that.
Have you never been screened where they swab your items and stick it in a machine? That is to detect explosives. They can use the first machine to target people for follow up screening.
I have, but what’s relevant is that I’m always commanded to dump out any liquids in containers bigger than the 3.4 oz limit before going through security unless they’re like a prescription medication. What I’m unclear on why that’s changed if the improvement that’s been made is in detection of liquids in packed bags.
Thanks for flagging this, this was an epiphany for me today, so for anyone else struck by it I'm linking directly to the article it's from (same author, and linked from the article in the context the parent mentions, just not linked directly in their post above):
https://learn.microsoft.com/training/support/mcp
https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/mcp
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/microsoft-learn-mcp-se...
reply