Charlie Loyd @vruba@everything.happens.horse

Sentinel-1 radar of Helene last night – 23:37 UTC, 19:45 EDT. The swath is about 250 km (150 mi) wide.

Valē, you stripy fuck. https://www.usgs.gov/news/national-news-release/end-era-historic-landsat-7-mission-takes-final-images

Sar autoencoder fun (central east coast of Madagascar).

I have to finish my damn project so I can try to get interviewed on one of the big pansharpening podcasts.

Friends fear he’s messing with reaction–diffusion systems again. https://xoc.s3.amazonaws.com/also/rd.mp4

A little unexpected good news: I spent 90 seconds looking into the thing in the news and it turns out it’s actually really good evidence of the veracity of an opinion I already had.

If I want to learn the basics of EE, maybe getting a ham license, what text should I use to get a solid grasp of the principles?

– I am generally familiar with software and specifically some signal processing. It’s the EM stuff I need to learn.

– Naturally a lot of this is best learned by doing. I’m asking about the parts best learned by reading.

– I can borderline pass a practice test for the lowest ham license today by bluffing and light memorization. But I want the actual knowledge.

The voice in my head that yells at me for being way off in the weeds on some detail v. the voice in my head that yells at me for not putting any explanations in the explanations.

Trying to write narrative documentation and being alternately mortified by the ideas of under- and over-explaining.

“Tacit Blue ‘Too Bouba’ Said Insiders; New Kiki Version Wows” https://www.twz.com/air/northrops-stealthy-model-437-loyal-wingman-drone-with-a-cockpit-has-flown

What British people think Americans can’t understand: Rowan Atkinson saying “Your stupidity simply stuns, Baldrick, you sordid simpleton!” and then glancing at the camera as the audience laughs hysterically.

What Americans actually can’t understand: Roundabouts.

I would just like to assure everyone with a strong opinion about a huge, complex, social topic that you’re really close to winning everyone over if you can just post three or four more specific incidents that really demonstrate your argument. Those compelling examples of single things will finally prove the general case. Just point out a few more instances of someone wearing sandals winning a charity raffle or a bingo game and we’ll all believe sandals are lucky. Keep going! Almost there!