Difference between revisions of "New York, New York"
imported>Cogit0 (edited local geohashers to NOT reference user:xkcd) |
(→Issues) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
== Issues == | == Issues == | ||
| − | This seems to be one instance where the incredibly cool XKCD geohashing scheme fails. Most New Yorkers do not have cars | + | This seems to be one instance where the incredibly cool XKCD geohashing scheme fails. Most New Yorkers located in the city do not have cars due to the availability of public transportation. This means that traveling to 90% of the locations in the graticule isn't feasible. There are plenty of people and places to explore within the city though. Would recommend a second version of the algorithm that takes population density into account and uses a few more decimals as a baseline if that is the case. |
[[Category:North America]][[Category:New York]][[Category:New Jersey]][[Category:Connecticut]] | [[Category:North America]][[Category:New York]][[Category:New Jersey]][[Category:Connecticut]] | ||
Revision as of 23:18, 21 May 2008
| - | Albany | Hartford |
| Newark | New York | - |
| Atlantic City | - | - |
Today's Location: [New York, NY]
The New York City graticule is at latitude 40, longitude -73. It includes most of New York City (minus the West Village & Chelsea and downtown Manhattan -- who needs 'em? -- and extreme western Brooklyn) and a whole hell of a lot of Long Island. (If only over half of our graticule wasn't over water)
Activities
Oleo will try to get to the coordinates, but doesn't have a car.
There is a facebook group for New York, NY geohashers. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=19859510038
Notable Events
Local Geohashers
Issues
This seems to be one instance where the incredibly cool XKCD geohashing scheme fails. Most New Yorkers located in the city do not have cars due to the availability of public transportation. This means that traveling to 90% of the locations in the graticule isn't feasible. There are plenty of people and places to explore within the city though. Would recommend a second version of the algorithm that takes population density into account and uses a few more decimals as a baseline if that is the case.
