Semi-automated offside technology (SAOT) will debut in English football during the FA Cup semi-finals. The system, already used in the Champions League and World Cup, utilizes specialized cameras and limb-tracking data to quickly and accurately determine offside calls, providing match officials with 3D visualizations. This implementation aims to enhance the speed and accuracy of offside decisions, reducing delays and controversies surrounding close calls.
This blog post from the British Library showcases a 15th-century manuscript (Harley MS 1760) containing a fascinating early example of medical licensing. The document grants "Master Nicholao" permission to practice medicine in the diocese of Norwich, specifically allowing him to treat internal ailments. Issued by the Bishop of Norwich, it highlights the Church's historical role in regulating medical practice and reveals contemporary understanding of medical specializations, differentiating between treating internal diseases and surgical procedures. The manuscript exemplifies the intersection of religious authority and healthcare in medieval England.
HN users discuss the historical context of medical licensing, highlighting how it served to protect established physicians and potentially stifle innovation. Some point out the inherent difficulty in assessing medical competence in earlier eras, lacking the standardized testing and scientific understanding we have today. Others draw parallels to modern regulatory hurdles faced by startups and new technologies, suggesting that licensing, while intended to protect the public, can also create barriers to entry and limit progress. The elitism and gatekeeping aspects of early licensing are also mentioned, with some arguing that similar dynamics still exist in modern healthcare systems. A few users express skepticism about the overall efficacy of medical licensing throughout history, questioning whether it has truly improved patient outcomes.
Diamond Geezer investigates the claim that the most central sheep in London resides at the Honourable Artillery Company (HAC) grounds. He determines the geographic center of London using mean, median, and geometric center calculations based on the city's boundary. While the HAC sheep are remarkably central, lying very close to several calculated centers, they aren't definitively the most central. Further analysis using what he deems the "fairest" method—a center-of-mass calculation considering population density—places the likely "most central sheep" slightly east, near the Barbican. However, without precise sheep locations within the Barbican area and considering the inherent complexities of defining "London," the HAC sheep remain strong contenders for the title.
HN users generally enjoyed the lighthearted puzzle presented in the linked blog post. Several commenters discussed different interpretations of "central," leading to suggestions of alternative locations and methods for calculating centrality. Some proposed using the centroid of London's shape, while others considered population density or accessibility via public transport. A few users pointed out the ambiguity of "London" itself, questioning whether it referred to the City of London, Greater London, or another definition. At least one commenter expressed appreciation for the blog author's clear writing style and engaging presentation of the problem. The overall tone is one of amusement and intellectual curiosity, with users enjoying the thought experiment.
Summary of Comments ( 1 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43038033
Hacker News users discussed the semi-automated offside technology being used in the FA Cup. Several expressed skepticism about its effectiveness and impact on the game, worrying it would lead to more stoppages and sterile, less exciting matches. Some questioned the accuracy and consistency of the technology, referencing potential issues with camera angles and player positioning. Others brought up concerns about the cost of implementation and whether it would trickle down to lower leagues, potentially creating a technology gap. A few commenters were more optimistic, suggesting it could eliminate blatant offside errors and improve the overall fairness of the game. There was also a discussion comparing it to similar technologies used in other sports, like goal-line technology and VAR, with some arguing it's a natural progression in officiating.
The Hacker News post "FA Cup to use semi-automated offsides for first time" has a moderate number of comments discussing the implementation of the semi-automated offside technology. Several users express skepticism and concern about the impact on the flow and "feel" of the game.
A recurring theme is the perceived over-reliance on technology in football, with some arguing that it removes the human element and the possibility of debatable calls, which are part of the game's charm. Some users also express nostalgia for the pre-VAR era and worry about the increasing complexity and potential for delays.
One commenter questions the claimed accuracy of the system, pointing out that the technology still relies on human calibration and interpretation of the data, thus not completely eliminating subjectivity. Another raises the issue of potential glitches and malfunctions, recalling instances where goal-line technology or VAR itself had issues.
There's discussion about the practicality of the limb-tracking technology, with some users questioning its precision and reliability, especially in situations of complex player movements and close calls. The reliance on calibrated cameras and the potential for marginal errors is a point of contention.
Some users suggest alternative solutions, like a challenge system similar to cricket or tennis, to limit interruptions and maintain the pace of the game. Others argue for more transparency in the decision-making process, suggesting that the virtual offside lines and the data used by the system should be made visible to the audience in the stadium and at home.
A few comments express more positive views, acknowledging the potential benefits of the technology in reducing clear and obvious errors. They argue that it could ultimately lead to fairer outcomes and reduce controversial decisions. However, even these more optimistic comments often come with caveats and concerns about the practical implementation and potential impact on the game's dynamics.
Finally, some comments offer witty observations or anecdotes related to offside calls and the history of technological interventions in football, adding a touch of humor to the discussion.