Cool info to see interrelated like this, but the constantly shifting arrangement makes it really hard to make any kind of sense out of it, if there are any higher-level patterns to see.
Having stuff move is fine, but if it must, it should move in relation to input from the user - enlarging objects related to the selected one, or making the relation lines more rigidly spaced, that kind of thing. Different shapes for animals and habitats or objects would be good too.
Things that remember us other things would be a better description probably. This is pretty random sometimes and can lead scholars to mistakes. To say that Haliotis mimick a rock because iridiscence is like to say that people pretend to be beans because they have kidneys. Iridiscence in living Haliotis is always hidden. This is not a correct example of camouflage in nature.
Moth-mimicking fly is also an incorrect example. They are very different animals that can not be confused with moths because they are minute. As a lot of minute insects they have long hairs in their microscopic wings for a physical reason: to be able to fly/float. Not camouflage intended here.
I would have liked to see "source" link to more information rather than a link to the photo. And the snapping-back amorphous blob is pretty annoying, I keep wanting to make the whole thing flat with no crossed lines :)
Judging by the lack of support for this post, I'll have to stand by my comment. The interface poorly displays a great amount of information; the creators need to play more videogames to understand why.
We see the limits of an upvote/downvote system. My comment is correct, but costs me "points" to say so because I didn't type three paragraphs justifying the obvious.
devindotcom|10 years ago
Having stuff move is fine, but if it must, it should move in relation to input from the user - enlarging objects related to the selected one, or making the relation lines more rigidly spaced, that kind of thing. Different shapes for animals and habitats or objects would be good too.
pvaldes|10 years ago
Moth-mimicking fly is also an incorrect example. They are very different animals that can not be confused with moths because they are minute. As a lot of minute insects they have long hairs in their microscopic wings for a physical reason: to be able to fly/float. Not camouflage intended here.
"Send us suggestions":
Gravel mimicking plants: entire gravel: Lithops, fracturated gravel: Pleiospilus
Rock mimicking plants: Ariocarpus
Coarse Sand mimicking plants: Titanopsis
And the cetaceans that mimick white sharks are also very cool. Very impressive if you are next to them. See Kogia.
kleer001|10 years ago
ldpg|10 years ago
http://marvl.infotech.monash.edu/webcola/examples/browsemovi... http://marvl.infotech.monash.edu/webcola/examples/sucrosebre...
interesting to think of what kind of interfaces can be created out of stuff like this.
spb|10 years ago
srtjstjsj|10 years ago
fallinghawks|10 years ago
samwiseg|10 years ago
byron_fast|10 years ago
byron_fast|10 years ago
We see the limits of an upvote/downvote system. My comment is correct, but costs me "points" to say so because I didn't type three paragraphs justifying the obvious.
slxh|10 years ago
rajington|10 years ago