It can be. There’s other methods too. Newton’s Method (nearest squares) is a pixelating approach approximating rough solutions smaller and smaller ’til you get “close enough”. Yours is kind of a chipping away marble way which also works. There’s also a whole methodology of invention that a Russian dude came up with called TRIZ. http://wbam2244.dns-systems.net/EDB/index.php

It can be. There’s other methods too. Newton’s Method (nearest squares) is a pixelating approach approximating rough solutions smaller and smaller ’til you get “close enough”. Yours is kind of a chipping away marble way which also works.

There’s also a whole methodology of invention that a Russian dude came up with called TRIZ.

http://wbam2244.dns-systems.net/EDB/index.php

—–

 

I have a lot of ways. My favorite is:
Finding or making boundaries.
Cutting a diagonal through it.
Making that diagonal home base.
Cutting further triangles from the home base to the boundaries until I find a good solution.
 
It’s similar to newton but it’s subjective and I have choices.
=====
 As far as appeasing negative folks?
That can be a neverending task in itself.

Law of diminishing returns.

I can undercut almost any argument and I bet you can too. I think for good ideas you have to hit a point where you plunge ahead and just do it. Get rid of the big glaring obvious flaws and then run with it.

====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


six − 1 =

Leave a Reply