6 ms·

You don't need working demos or even abide to physical laws to attract investors. Thanks to the power of social media you just have to choose a good cause, make

by nom 10y ago

You don't need working demos or even abide to physical laws to attract investors. Thanks to the power of social media you just have to choose a good cause, make it look cool and create a fake demo video. Most people just repeat what they read, critical thinking is a thing of the past. See WaterSeer [0], SolarRoadways [1], Fontus self-filling waterbottle [2], ... [0] https://www.waterseer.org/ https://www.waterseer.org/ [1] http://www.solarroadways.com/ http://www.solarroadways.com/ [2] http://www.fontus.at/ http://www.fontus.at/

benologist 10y ago
You don't need a scam or ill intentions to fail to deliver.
- mbrumlow 10y ago
  Sure, but all 3 of the projects listed had people very early on point out that back of the envelope calculations don't add up and warned them that their projects are going to fail. Each of those those groups proceeded to ignore or not understand the evidence presented to them and continued to collect money. At that point I consider it a scam. Ignorance is not an excuse. That being said what we are seeing here is a education problem. The masses of people who (including government officials) who seem to be so gullible and lack basic science skills and critical thinking to understand how some of these technologies might work is astounding. And with the 3 efforts listed above it has slowly come out that the minds behind the idea did not know how it would all work either. A good example of that is fontus. This as dream big art design project. How awesome is that? We can make a 3d model of this cool device! A year later confessing to taking apart dehumidifiers to "understand" how they work as if it was some mistry. As if they could somehow crack this alien technology then they too could build one! At the rate these too good to be true ideas are coming out one has to stop and think that maybe, just maybe, somebody is gaming the system.
  - benologist 10y ago
    It's easy to find someone who is certain your idea is impossible even if someone's already done it! Even when they're right they haven't accounted for anything that will work, they've just got one way it won't. Edison ended up finding ten thousand ways a lightbulb doesn't work.
    - mbrumlow 10y ago
      There is a big difference between Edison and what is going on with these projects. It's not merely that somebody found a way that it won't work, it's they showed the laws of physics will prevent it from ever being a reality. These projects are not billed as research projects. They are billed as "let's just make it" projects. Anybody can come up with an product that if made would change the world. The hard part is coming up with a feasible idea that will change the world. Not a single one of the projects listed in the parent ever produced a viable working prototype. They sold a promise they could not keep. Yet keep taking money.
    - neotek 10y ago
      There's a substantial difference between someone dismissing your idea, and someone demonstrating how it breaks the laws of physics. Every project will have its naysayers, yes, but when your idea is literally impossible maybe it's time to listen to them.
      - benologist 10y ago
        NASA's currently testing an engine that isn't supposed to be possible - http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test.html http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test... In space where flight also wasn't supposed to be possible - https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13556-10-impossibilities-conquered-by-science https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13556-10-impossibilit... "Impossible" has been wrong before.
        neotek 10y ago
        How ironic you should choose the EmDrive, which has been thoroughly busted[1] in much the same way as Water Seer et al, as your example. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCAqDA8IfR4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCAqDA8IfR4
- nom 10y ago
  True. I'm not saying Lily Drones was a scam, they could've made it to production under sane management, but there are other projects attracting a lot of funding even though they are bound to fail from the start. I'm not sure if the people responsible are even aware that it won't work - they might be 'scamming' without knowing, due to lack of common sense. It's really sad and enrages me more than it should.
everybodyknows 10y ago
An engineering impossibility that's been collecting crowd-funding for about 4 years now: http://www.pluspool.org http://www.pluspool.org
- londons_explore 10y ago
  Why's it impossible? You just need the water level in the pool to be lower than sea level to generate bouyancy.
- neotek 10y ago
  Do you happen to know of any good scientific breakdowns of this project ala Thunderf00t and his Water Seer / Solar Roadways / Fontus videos? Doesn't have to be a video necessarily, just somewhere I can read more about why the project won't work as described. Thank you!
TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
I think you're romanticising a past that never existed. Critical thinking is a tool only ever used by a small subset of the population, and even they are subject to their own biases. Pedlars of snake oil have featured in cautionary tales since time immemorial.

by nom 10y ago

benologist 10y ago

You don't need a scam or ill intentions to fail to deliver.

mbrumlow 10y ago
Sure, but all 3 of the projects listed had people very early on point out that back of the envelope calculations don't add up and warned them that their projects are going to fail. Each of those those groups proceeded to ignore or not understand the evidence presented to them and continued to collect money. At that point I consider it a scam. Ignorance is not an excuse. That being said what we are seeing here is a education problem. The masses of people who (including government officials) who seem to be so gullible and lack basic science skills and critical thinking to understand how some of these technologies might work is astounding. And with the 3 efforts listed above it has slowly come out that the minds behind the idea did not know how it would all work either. A good example of that is fontus. This as dream big art design project. How awesome is that? We can make a 3d model of this cool device! A year later confessing to taking apart dehumidifiers to "understand" how they work as if it was some mistry. As if they could somehow crack this alien technology then they too could build one! At the rate these too good to be true ideas are coming out one has to stop and think that maybe, just maybe, somebody is gaming the system.
- benologist 10y ago
  It's easy to find someone who is certain your idea is impossible even if someone's already done it! Even when they're right they haven't accounted for anything that will work, they've just got one way it won't. Edison ended up finding ten thousand ways a lightbulb doesn't work.
  - mbrumlow 10y ago
    There is a big difference between Edison and what is going on with these projects. It's not merely that somebody found a way that it won't work, it's they showed the laws of physics will prevent it from ever being a reality. These projects are not billed as research projects. They are billed as "let's just make it" projects. Anybody can come up with an product that if made would change the world. The hard part is coming up with a feasible idea that will change the world. Not a single one of the projects listed in the parent ever produced a viable working prototype. They sold a promise they could not keep. Yet keep taking money.
  - neotek 10y ago
    There's a substantial difference between someone dismissing your idea, and someone demonstrating how it breaks the laws of physics. Every project will have its naysayers, yes, but when your idea is literally impossible maybe it's time to listen to them.
    - benologist 10y ago
      NASA's currently testing an engine that isn't supposed to be possible - http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test.html http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test... In space where flight also wasn't supposed to be possible - https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13556-10-impossibilities-conquered-by-science https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13556-10-impossibilit... "Impossible" has been wrong before.
      - neotek 10y ago
        How ironic you should choose the EmDrive, which has been thoroughly busted[1] in much the same way as Water Seer et al, as your example. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCAqDA8IfR4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCAqDA8IfR4
nom 10y ago
True. I'm not saying Lily Drones was a scam, they could've made it to production under sane management, but there are other projects attracting a lot of funding even though they are bound to fail from the start. I'm not sure if the people responsible are even aware that it won't work - they might be 'scamming' without knowing, due to lack of common sense. It's really sad and enrages me more than it should.

everybodyknows 10y ago

An engineering impossibility that's been collecting crowd-funding for about 4 years now: http://www.pluspool.org http://www.pluspool.org

londons_explore 10y ago
Why's it impossible? You just need the water level in the pool to be lower than sea level to generate bouyancy.
neotek 10y ago
Do you happen to know of any good scientific breakdowns of this project ala Thunderf00t and his Water Seer / Solar Roadways / Fontus videos? Doesn't have to be a video necessarily, just somewhere I can read more about why the project won't work as described. Thank you!

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

I think you're romanticising a past that never existed. Critical thinking is a tool only ever used by a small subset of the population, and even they are subject to their own biases. Pedlars of snake oil have featured in cautionary tales since time immemorial.