The Y Sports Experience: Fill & Download for Free

I think it's actually rather fantastic.I used to develop at SI (during the Turner Sports era), and from what I can tell, it's basically embraced everything I thought was great about the property. The magazine-ness of the writing. It's never going to compete with ESPN at ESPN's game, they just don't have the resources, and it's not going to compete with Y! Sports either at their game. What they do have though is outstanding journalists who tell great stories. And in that, knowing that, what they've designed fits into that scheme very effectively.There's a fair amount to the technical aspects that I could talk about, but, from a purely UX experience, I think it really satisfies the goals and needs of what SI is. There's some kinks in how it's built, but that's to be expected with such a large scale redesign of a major property.

A2A Peter Jesse—Thanks!^ 2019 Model S — Car and Driver^ 2020 Model S — Car and Driver^ Model 3 — Wired~~~~Q. Would you buy a Tesla Model 3 or Model S? What are the greatest differences between the two?A. I have driven them both, but own the Model 3. I prefer the Model 3 for my lifestyle, but the Model S has some big advantages.I agree with Jim Murphy—and his answer is more concise. I go into a little more detail because of my experience using both cars for work.Here is how I see them:Overall StyleModel S — a BIG car—a cruiser. Drives very smooth and is quieter inside than the Model 3—especially at highway speeds. A huge amount of room inside for taking stuff with you. Takes significantly more room in the garage. Think: luxury car. More of a traditional feel, and more traditional controls and gauges. More luxurious. The controls are “mushier” IMO—you are insulated and protected from the environment more in the S.Model 3 — a MEDIUM sized car, sporty. Easier to park, takes up less room in the garage. Much more maneuverable. Noisier on the highway. Think: sports car. More minimalist feel with very few knobs and dials. Feels much more modern with a Scandinavian furniture design feel (IMO)—understated elegance. You “feel the road” more in the 3—which I like. The suspension and steering feel “stiffer.”ComfortModel S — very comfortable, but not as easy for me to use the passenger seat for work—the passenger seat is further away and the big screen and center console in the S are sort of in the way. You feel very partitioned off and distant from the passenger side—the Model 3 feels much more open and compact. Steering wheel heat available—you cannot get it in the Model 3 yet, and that is a shame for those of us who are in cold weather 6 months of the year. Seat heater is better than Model 3. Has a higher quality air filter. Great for long-distance road trips.Model 3 — front seats are the most comfortable I have experienced. I like the environmental controls and venting better. It is easy to work in the car while parked. I keep my computer in the passenger seat and, to work, I set it on a hard cushion that sits where the center console cup holder and storage bin is. The white interior, glass roof and some window tinting make the light inside ideal—even light, very little glare. It is pleasant to sit in, unlike most cars, IMO. You are seated very low—the Model Y is more upright, which I think most people would prefer—the 3 has a sports car feel, and that is great for racing around, but it is more effort to get in and out because the seats are so low. However, you can have the seats and steering wheel automatically move when you stop to make getting in and out easier. Best stereo and phone connection ever. Great for long-distance road trips. Best view out the front windshield of any car I know.RoominessModel S — the trunk is huge. Lots of room for a large family and lots of gear.Model 3 — the back seats fold down, but it is hard to fit something tall in the back. A bike fits (you have to take a wheel off). But a kitchen table chair is hard to fit except in the back seat due to trunk height. You can put a mattress in it and sleep in the back with the seats folded down, but it is not as roomy as it looks, and it is hard to get in and out because of where the rear doors are. The Model Y solves the trunk height and access issues, and gives MUCH more room. If I were buying today, I would probably get a Y.PerformanceAMAZING. Both of them. More acceleration and top speed than most of us will ever need. The S goes further range-wise—over 400 miles. They both charge very fast—but for S, this is highly dependent on year made. I like the ability to raise the suspension on the S—which is not available on Model 3 today.CostIMO, they are both a great buy for what they give you. The Model 3 costs much less and is a much smaller car. Still fine for a family—but the soccer and ski gear for several kids is not going to fit easily in a 3. A Model S or X would be best for that.Many Model Ss come with free Supercharging.DesignPaul Nemethy pointed out that I didn’t say anything about the look of the cars. I have always thought that the S is one of the finest looking cars on the road, maybe the most beautiful, IMO. I also like the look of the Model 3, but some people do not. There are certain angles from which the Model 3 does have the appearance of a turtle—as Paul points out. The dead on front or dead on back views, are not as beautiful as the side views, 45 degree and top views. But I would still pick a 3 over an S for all the points above.Why is this question not comparing the S and the Y?The Y has IMO benefitted from Tesla’s experience manufacturing all the cars before it. If I had to turn in my 3 and buy new today, it would be a Y.Please see the excellent comment below from Tim Welch that compares the Y and the S—he has had both as his daily driver.The 3 and S—They are both great cars—IMO, the best in their respective classes. The Model S is a big luxury car, the Model 3 is a medium-sized sporty car. So the differences track with those different styles.o

Strictly speaking the only thing that limits the numbers of ways to tie a tie is the total length of a 'standard tie'. Each turn of a knot uses up some amount of the length of tie, limiting the total turns that can be made. Based upon this 'standard length' and aesthetic conditions (you definitely won't like a tie with a very big knot and just a couple of inch of free end hanging out, would you :P), in their paper (and the book mentioned by Trace Evans), Fink and Mao use an upper limit of 9 steps (or turns) to come up with the number 85. They have modeled the problem as a problem of random walk on a triangular array as shown below:So from our experience of tying ties we know that essentially we have a thinner and smaller end that we keep fixed and a broader bigger end that we manipulate to form the knot. To start the know the broader end is passed under or over the smaller one. This forms a Y shape. Now any further steps are carried around this Y shape. Now the Y shape essentially divide the region into three sub-regions: left, right and center (center being the region at the top between the two prongs of the Y). Moreover, in a particular step of tying the knot, we either take the broad end into the Y or out of the Y (as shown in the figures below:)⊗ represents the into the plane while ⊙ represents out of the plane. So that L⊙ means out of the plane on left side (say, wrt to the viewer in front) and R⊗ represents into the plane on right side.Coming back to modeling the problem as random walk, in the above lattice you are allowed to walk only along the axes l, r, c (NOT opposite). Moreover due to the symmetry of the tie (we can make the same tie starting from either left or right region, i.e. when the broad part is manipulated for the first time it can either be taken into (or out of) left or right region and we can get the same knot if we just change all the right hand steps to left hand steps and vice-versa in the following steps) we start with a l (left hand side) without loss of generality. Further more it is also interesting to note that there are only two ways to end a tie. You bring the broad part out of the left (or right) region, L⊙; into the right (or left) region, R⊗; out of the center region, C⊙ and tug it into the loop just made (refer the figure below:)So we represent these endings as rlc or lrc (The T at the end is irrelevant because we always HAVE TO tuck the tie in the final step, so we shall not count it in the number of steps). Moreover, it can be understood that one l can't be followed by another one, i.e., one step in a particular region (l/r/c) can't be followed by another one in the same region. Thus after each step we have two choices of regions. Also, we can't have two steps in same direction (⊗ OR ⊙) consecutively. That is, two consecutive ⊙/⊗ can't occur. So given the fact that we always end with a ⊙ (in both the endings shown above), the size of the sequence decides the sequence of ⊙s and ⊗s. So in a knot of odd number of steps we HAVE to start with ⊙ and in one with even steps with ⊗.So our problems boils down to calculating the total number of sequences that start with l and end with lrc OR rlc with total elements less than or equal to 9 (remember we chose 9 as the limit of the number of steps that we could take to make a tie!) A little permutation and combinations give us a number 85- the total number of ways to tie a tie.BUT, not you wouldn't like to sport many of those combinations even in an informal occasion, let alone a formal meeting. Why? Because they are not all 'aesthetically beautiful'. Considering the fact that the ties need to be aesthetically beautiful Fink and Mao tell us that there are 10 such knots possible (6 other that those known traditionally and mentioned by Evans above). How did they come up with a measure of 'aesthetically beautiful'? They devised a parameter which measures the balance between the number of the right hand steps and the left hand steps in a particular knot. Moreover they correctly observe that a knot with a large number of C steps will be more cylindrical, making it unpleasant to look at. So they limit their search of beautiful ties in those knots in which 1/4 ≤ g/h ≤ 1/2. Where g/h is the ratio of the number of C-steps to the total number of steps.Using all this they come up with the number 10 for aesthetically beautiful knots.A good detailed mathematical description can be found in the reference [1] below. Reference [2] is the nature article by the authors mentioned above.References:[1]http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~ym101/tie4/long_article.pdf[2]http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~ym101/tie4/nature_tiepaper.pdfPictures taken from these articles.