|
Hmmm, $9500 for some lovely Youtube videos or I could pay $10 and bookmark this thread.
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
No it's just you dont get it man you dont 'get it'. Tom Green was a comedic genius its just no one gets him.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Reading Rainbow is just under 3 million dollars now.  Dr. Video Games 0112 posted:No it's just you dont get it man you dont 'get it'. Tom Green was a comedic genius its just no one gets him. As a kid I didn't get why anyone thought Tom Greene was funny, and thankfully his annoying stupid poo poo died. Sadly the same didn't happen to Sasha Cohen, despite Da Ali G show being loving atrocious.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
tlarn posted:In the realm of Actually Good Kickstarters, though, there is the Don't Hug Me I'm Scared series, didn't know it was going until I was looking through whatever recently launched. Reposting because why the gently caress did it take me so long to find out about this. To those who may be concerned they they'll stretch it out too far, they've got a hard limit of four more episodes ever.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
Apologies to all who don't understand humor, and choose to not back Sam Hyyde
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 09:48
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:Remember that Harmonix Kickstarter? They reached their goal and then a week later they laid of 37 employees. That's why the Amplitude Kickstarter was so short, they needed to know that they had a project for people to work on. Had the Kickstarter failed then they would have laid off more than 37 people.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
Actually, they used the money to lay off 37 employees because uh, uhhhhhhh
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 09:56
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Actually, they used the money to lay off 37 employees because uh, uhhhhhhh Artificially inflating the number of employees you'll have working on a project is a pretty scummy thing to do. It's like when Double Fine waited until after their second Kickstarter had closed and they'd gotten the money before they announced their difficulty with the first one, they knew that if people knew what was going on behind the scenes they'd be less likely to give them money. It's manipulative and in very bad faith, which is exactly the kind of thing that indies crow about the big publishers doing.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:Artificially inflating the number of employees you'll have working on a project is a pretty scummy thing to do. It's like when Double Fine waited until after their second Kickstarter had closed and they'd gotten the money before they announced their difficulty with the first one, they knew that if people knew what was going on behind the scenes they'd be less likely to give them money. People still gave them even more money after that. And I'm alright with this, because the game they've made is actually good.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
I bet you'd absolutely love playing the game if you were one of the 37 fired.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0112 posted:I bet you'd absolutely love playing the game if you were one of the 37 fired. Maybe it's because I used to get laid off once a year, but I can't really get worked up over it  Doesn't the video game industry kind of involve a shitton of people getting fired quite often? I thought that was part of their business model.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Maybe it's because I used to get laid off once a year, but I can't really get worked up over it Yes, it's a lovely model and it's unlikely to change because despite the horrific lack of security and massive amounts of unpaid overtime that developers have to deal with to meet deadlines any attempt to actually get organized would fail if for no other reason that there being no shortage of young people who just want to work in the industry because videogames.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:Artificially inflating the number of employees you'll have working on a project is a pretty scummy thing to do. It's like when Double Fine waited until after their second Kickstarter had closed and they'd gotten the money before they announced their difficulty with the first one, they knew that if people knew what was going on behind the scenes they'd be less likely to give them money. ok then
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:Artificially inflating the number of employees you'll have working on a project is a pretty scummy thing to do. It's like when Double Fine waited until after their second Kickstarter had closed and they'd gotten the money before they announced their difficulty with the first one, they knew that if people knew what was going on behind the scenes they'd be less likely to give them money. A manipulative thing to do would've been for them to say "We're gonna have to lay off employees if this doesn't get funded"
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
Did a quick scan of the following pages and I can't see that anyones mentioned the Solar "freaking" roadways campaign. I mention it because I thought it was kind of an ok idea, and now it's got 1.7 million of funding (flexible funding of course). https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/solar-roadways How it got there? an infectious overly-enthusiastic morgan spurlock sounding guy and this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlTA3rnpgzU I'm not an infrastructure expert so I think its under a whole 'maybe if it works?' it'll be cool . And there's a criticism video here that has some valid points (warning -  half an hour).https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H901KdXgHs4 What do you think? Is it "Awful"? I think that at worst they're a scam, at best maybe an inventor with a dream that has yet to come face to face with the realities of national infrastructure. As impractical as that second video makes out I still kinda like the idea. 
posty has a new favorite as of 00:02 on Jun 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Wouldn't glass wear out really fast with hundreds of cars driving over it a day?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Pomp posted:Wouldn't glass wear out really fast with hundreds of cars driving over it a day? That second video goes into a shitload of problems with this, the least of which is that any dirt that gets onto the road would be ground into the glass by the cars, scratching it up and rendering it opaque and unusable. The real problems are that it would be astronomically expensive to implement, be slick as ice when wet, and require all road workers to be electricians too. The LEDs would be super hard to see in daylight, and the heating element to melt snow would be way more expensive, power wise, then plowing it like we do now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:Artificially inflating the number of employees you'll have working on a project is a pretty scummy thing to do. They do multiple projects at once. How would you know how many people would be working on this? Also Veotax posted:That's why the Amplitude Kickstarter was so short, they needed to know that they had a project for people to work on. Had the Kickstarter failed then they would have laid off more than 37 people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
posty posted:Did a quick scan of the following pages and I can't see that anyones mentioned the Solar "freaking" roadways campaign. Suppose to be finished sometime this year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
AlmightyBob posted:... be slick as ice when wet ... The LEDs would be super hard to see in daylight, and the heating element to melt snow would be way more expensive, power wise, then plowing it like we do now. I was pretty interested in this whole thing when I first saw it, so I looked through most if not all of their material. Their FAQ answers a lot of the concerns and I'd be baffled if they haven't bothered to test the visibility of the LEDS in daylight. One thing I wish they had emphasized in the videos is that they're not starting with highways, they're starting with driveways and parking lots. This gives them more time to not only test for highway use, but make sure the whole system works period. I haven't watched that 30-min video, but I think these people have put a lot more thought and work into this than people think. And if this was completely unfeasible, I don't think they would have gotten as much support from the FHA as they have.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
Frocobo posted:I was pretty interested in this whole thing when I first saw it, so I looked through most if not all of their material. Their FAQ answers a lot of the concerns and I'd be baffled if they haven't bothered to test the visibility of the LEDS in daylight. It doesn't make sense for actual roads. It does make sense as potentially being more durable solar panels that can be integrated with buildings and the like, as well as being something you might put on rarely used roads/parking lots. It could also probably be useful for like, sidewalks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
mexicanmonkey posted:A company in the Netherlands is working on a bike path using similar technology http://www.solaroad.nl/en/ontwikkelingstraject/ Quite sure I've heard about this sorta thing years ago, but it used a layer of porous asphalt embedded inside normal, non-porous asphalt with water flowing in it. The water would warm up, and the energy from that would be used somehow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 02:14
|
|
|
The solar roads are actually really stupid. They make no sense from a civil engineering, planning, or fiscal point of view. Their cost is massive, their benefits are low, and there is no way that anyone will ever implement them. It's a well-meaning scam. If the above posted video is the one with the British accent, then that accurately refutes them pretty well. Putting expensive technology in the roads is just asking for a ton of trouble. Their pitch was popular because of the romantic notion of putting led lights on the road like some space movie. But there are a million and a half better and cheaper ways we could do that. Sidewalks are possible, I guess, but good luck getting any government to pay for that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
Drunk Tomato posted:But there are a million and a half better and cheaper ways we could do that. Retroreflective paint's pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Drunk Tomato posted:The solar roads are actually really stupid. They make no sense from a civil engineering, planning, or fiscal point of view. Their cost is massive, their benefits are low, and there is no way that anyone will ever implement them. It's a well-meaning scam. If the above posted video is the one with the British accent, then that accurately refutes them pretty well. I suspect that if it ever goes to mass production it's going to be the kind of thing that random high end developments will develop. Welcome to Mountain Acres Condos! Our luxury living team includes: - Gated community - Golf course attached - Solar road
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
GF got a bit pissy with me last night when I said the road thing sounds neat but it'd be way more effective to throw panels on the roofs of every store with a parking lot before bothering to put them in the ground to get messed up by cars.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
LethalGeek posted:GF got a bit pissy with me last night when I said the road thing sounds neat but it'd be way more effective to throw panels on the roofs of every store with a parking lot before bothering to put them in the ground to get messed up by cars. Pretty much. Also, its not like we should be generating mass amounts of power with that style of solar when you can generate way more cost effectively with solar thermal, given that the collectors are basically mirrors. It's interesting tech, especially in places like Australia where we have so much sun we could potentially skip right past Nuclear with a concerted effort, saving a ton of money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
Maluco Marinero posted:Pretty much. Also, its not like we should be generating mass amounts of power with that style of solar when you can generate way more cost effectively with solar thermal, given that the collectors are basically mirrors. It's interesting tech, especially in places like Australia where we have so much sun we could potentially skip right past Nuclear with a concerted effort, saving a ton of money. That tech tree might seem like a dead end but it has some strong military synergies late game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Drunk Tomato posted:The solar roads are actually really stupid. They make no sense from a civil engineering, planning, or fiscal point of view. Their cost is massive, their benefits are low, and there is no way that anyone will ever implement them. It's a well-meaning scam. If the above posted video is the one with the British accent, then that accurately refutes them pretty well. One interesting idea I've heard of is using piezoelectric to take advantage of the strain of all the cars on the road. I have no idea if the costs bear out, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
What I have read is that the way piezoelectric roads would work would involve having cars need to burn more gas to get over the same stretch of road - to say nothing of how you'd be directly draining any electric vehicles to no benefit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
Yeah, that makes sense. The problem with kickstarting these kinds of projects is you're really just relying on uninformed people, who have no idea the feasibility of the project, to invest it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Nintendo Kid posted:What I have read is that the way piezoelectric roads would work would involve having cars need to burn more gas to get over the same stretch of road - to say nothing of how you'd be directly draining any electric vehicles to no benefit. Exactly. You're going to be drawing that energy from increased work for the cars to get over little humps in the road or whatever. And there's just so much road to improve, its insane. When improving efficiency, you find the bottleneck. Improvements to cars would affect everywhere you drive, not just a couple miles of road that were replaced. We're far better off improving energy efficiency just mandating that everybody has to drive Tesla cars, for instance, and we're a long way from doing that. Spain is putting solar panels in their graveyards though, that's pretty clever. Its not like the dead care, and it creates shade for the visiting families. Win/win as far as I see it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
it just seems there's no point making solar roads until we at least run out of appropriately angled roof space. A roof is already right there, it's designed to provide shade so you're not shading anything out like potential farmland or wildlife habitats, and houses are already hooked up to the grid and road system and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
Stick Insect posted:Quite sure I've heard about this sorta thing years ago, but it used a layer of porous asphalt embedded inside normal, non-porous asphalt with water flowing in it. The water would warm up, and the energy from that would be used somehow. Drunk Tomato posted:The solar roads are actually really stupid. They make no sense from a civil engineering, planning, or fiscal point of view. Their cost is massive, their benefits are low, and there is no way that anyone will ever implement them. It's a well-meaning scam. If the above posted video is the one with the British accent, then that accurately refutes them pretty well. mexicanmonkey has a new favorite as of 04:34 on Jun 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
And large bureaucracies have a long history of not making poor decisions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
In like 90% of cases solar panels are more about conspicuous consumption than anything else. Updating the insulation and windows on your house will do more to reduce energy consumption than putting up solar panels and for a fraction of the cost but they don't stand as a gleaming monument to your green lifestyle in the way that solar panels do so who cares.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Yeah, that's why they install them on tops of grocery stores where you can't even see them or put low profile ones on the back slope of your house's roof so it can't be seen from the street. Oh wait, that's completely the opposite of what you said. I know a number of people with solar. They did it because they got huge tax rebates and negative energy bills. I guess that doesn't really fit your narrative, though. The solar roads thing is dumb for a lot of reasons, but your assessment of why people have solar panels installed is pretty flawed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:In like 90% of cases solar panels are more about conspicuous consumption than anything else. Updating the insulation and windows on your house will do more to reduce energy consumption than putting up solar panels and for a fraction of the cost but they don't stand as a gleaming monument to your green lifestyle in the way that solar panels do so who cares. Or between the state & federal government I could get about 1/2 of the installation taken out of my taxes and likely have the electric company pay me at the end. You do know panels need to face a certain way to work too right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Also a ton of home solar systems are actually for things like getting hot water for essentially free and other stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
Please don't alternate-energy-denial-shame, read a webcomic about smoking a lot of weed. Instead of laying back in your seat like a normal person, here's a stand to rest your face against while you're sleeping during a plane flight.  
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 06:04
|
|
