• Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      True serverless architecture doesn’t.

      It’s the computers that cause all the trouble after all.

      • Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 minutes ago

        It turned into a heated argument with a manager who, in the middle of project she complains is “taking too long” (despite constant scope creep, moving targets of adding stuff and changing expectations)…she walks up to my desk with her home modem/router she got from ISP. She kept saying it’s “wireless” but didn’t understand that 1. You still needed to plug the coax into the wall and 2. YOU STILL NEEDED TO PLUG THE POWER CORD INTO THE FUCKING WALL

      • exu@feditown.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        75
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        wireless not wirefree

        Edit: apparently Voyager doesn’t do underscores for italic?

            • Mac@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Deceptive marketing and scams are interchangeable because they’re the same thing—the direction doesn’t matter. I put scam first because it was in the previous commment.

              • AliOski@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Makes sense

                Btw, do you still need help with your Microsoft account? I offer the service for free. But I do need your credit card information. For identification purposes.

        • cavitationfetishist2@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          39
          ·
          20 hours ago

          There’s a bit in ‘deadpool and wolverine’ where they’re in the multidimensional junkyard and characters from marvel properties with aborted film projects also end up there. So like ‘blade’, and the various attempted ‘fantastic four’ movies.

            • toynbee@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              I actually quite liked all of them to some degree. I even enjoyed the awful CGI rubber ninjas fight scene; I know the movement was unrealistic but I was young enough that I figured it was superhuman vampire flexibility. However, I agree that the first one was the best.

              Trinity was my second introduction to Ryan Reynolds, so that helped some. (I’m pretty sure I first saw him in Van Wilder.) Also Wesley Snipes saying “gootchie goo” to a baby was pretty hilarious, though reflecting on that I’m not sure they ever explained how he got that child back to its mother.

              Also, I think Natasha Lyonne was in that. I knew I recognized her when my wife started watching OitNB, but it took me forever to figure out why.

              • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                20 hours ago

                Well, I guess I’m about to watch Blade 3 again.

                The “rubber ninjas” instantly ruined the film for me. That scene is seared into my memory, and takes second place after the entirety of The Phantom Menace for film betrayal.

                • toynbee@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  Like I mentioned, I honestly kind of enjoyed it as I was able to explain away the lack of reality. What really bothered me was, I think right before it, Whistler comes out with some sort of big firearm, then just stands there while a ninja knocks it out of his hands and slaps him in the face.

                  Again, I explained it away to myself (vampire ninja has superspeed, standing still was just meant to demonstrate that) but, even if that was what was intended, it just wasn’t very well done.

  • NarrativeBear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    146
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    Its true there is a fan in the base of all bladeless fans, but the fan is smaller then traditional fan designs and moves the same if not more air then traditional fans.

    Air is pulled in through the base and forced through a thin slit. This fast stream of air creates an area of low pressure, drawing in and amplifying surrounding air behind the slits.

    Because air “sticks” to itself, when you get some air moving (by breathing out, for example), the initial bit of air that you move “drags” some air with it from beside and behind. This is what Dyson calls “air multiplier technology”.

    Dyson uses this property of air to claim that they only have to move a fraction of air (with the fan in the base) of all the air that blows past you.

    Here is a example of how this works, and how you can use one breath to fill a large bag.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAAelB7nN14

    Here is a image of the multiplier effect, from the original intake of air at the bottom. You can see the air is multiplied from behind and infront of the fan.

    1000063718

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      And yet despite the fact that they’re using less electricity and a smaller fan somehow the product costs five times as much as a normal fan. How does that work?

      • Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 minutes ago

        Partly because of the overall quality of the fan. Like you can go to Walmart and get a comparable bladeless fan for 49.99 but it’s gonna be louder, won’t be as efficient and won’t last as long.

    • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Speaking of the dyson. IMO one of the worst fans out there: extremely weak (see measurements on YouTube), extremely loud and very fragile… Have one in the office, and I hate it…

      A classic fan, fraction of the price performs better in all relevant categories…

      Btw. They also create a “bigger” airflow around them so in that regard not better…

    • rethnor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I’ve never really understood this multiplayer thing, sounds like a free energy gimmick. You can move more mass at the same speed without putting in more power.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Basically they’re trying to claim that the Bernoulli principle is some amazing concept that only they’ve come up with.

        Their fans do work in the sense they do move more air but it creates so much back pressure that most of that air movement is lost. So you might as well not bother.

      • reksas@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        maybe it works kind of like how water works. Water also sticks to itself, like how separate droplets combine very fast when close enough.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Well in fluid dynamics you don’t really make the distinction between liquid and gas. You can model air as basically just a very low viscosity fluid and it works. No one really knows why it works because it shouldn’t, air doesn’t stick to itself, but if you pretend that it does the simulations still work, even though they’re wrong.

          If you look in most physics textbooks even at quite a high level they will tell you that aircraft fly because air sticks to itself, but again, it doesn’t. No one is quite sure why aircraft work, no one’s all that certain where the lift comes from. But physics textbooks hate to admit that so they just pretend that air sticks to itself.

      • GTG3000@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 hours ago

        You’re basically trading energy to move higher volume of air. The fan can move smaller amount of air at higher speed, but larger amount at a gentle breeze feels nicer and helps with circulating the air in the room better.

        You could achieve it by taking that exact motor and slapping a bigger fan onto it, but that looks less cool and probably produces more noise? Maybe there’s some efficiency differences if the motor is better at spinning fast, but as a spherical cow in vacuum it should be similar.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      It’s also just Dyson’s completely overpriced bullshit. It makes weak air flow and has no real benefit for use as a fan.

      Project Farm has tested them a couple different times. They’re expensive aesthetic toys.

      *Edit: While I’m on a bit of a Dyson rant; I’d just like to also say that I HATE their hand dryers that some places bathrooms use.

        • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Any similar priced fan likely works better. Especially the fans seem to be garbage IME…

          The dyson we use in the office is worse than the other fairly standard fan for a fraction of the price (airflow and loudness…)

    • ToxicWaste@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      121
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      still a miss-labeling to call them bladeless fans, just because the blades are hidden. by that logic my beef raviolis are vegetarian (tbf: the catholic church made a similar claim during the medieval ages).

      Bernoulli Fan is not only more accurate, it also sounds much cooler.

    • hOrni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      A traditional fan also pulls air from around its blades using the same principal. A bladeless is just a gimmick it has no actual benefits.

      Here’s a video on the subject:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySSo5PmZZJM

      It turns out, a bladeless fan is even less efficient than a traditional one. It works better, when you remove the casing.

      • turtlesareneat@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Thank you.

        Much like Sharper Image’s Ionic Breeze, this is a very expensive bullshit tower, but I am seeing them everywhere lately. Box fans are fucking amazing. Get a box fan.

      • Seppo@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Of course they have benefits. Depending on the situation of course. I wouldn’t put one in my computer, but I sure as shit have one in my home with a kid running around. Turns out a fan with all the heavy spinning hardware stuff in it’s base is less likely to fall over than one with all that stuff up on top. Honestly all my Dyson stuff work fucking great for their intended purpose.

        Paying the absolute minimal amount for something isn’t necessary the goal of life. You’re not a corporation.

        • hOrni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          8 hours ago

          None of what You said is about efficiency, which is the subject here. Not paying corporations for bullshit is one of my goals in life.

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        19 hours ago

        it has no actual benefits.

        • no toddler will put their hands in to it
        • can look better for some people
        • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          18 hours ago

          Toddler hands don’t go through the protection of a classic fan, if it’s built like after 1965.

          Also we were not discussing esthetics but efficiency.

    • vogi@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      unironically love Lemmy for the explainers you get on a shitpost. Only stumbled on this cause I was looking it up myself. Thanks for the write up :)

    • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Smaller fans = more noise

      And why isn’t a regular fan getting the “surrounding air” to move too? Is there a subscription for that?

      It’s most probably dyson bullshit (the moved extra air is slowing the original air down, or it’s magic) marketing.

      Magnets!

      • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yeah don’t understand the hype for dyson, for (almost?) every category they have a product for there’s a higher quality product for a lot less money.

        They really seem to have perfected their marketing…

        The products are not even high quality, thin fragile plastic everywhere…

      • Jumi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        I got one years ago when they still were a lot cheaper and I must say it’s the best one I ever had. It’s powerful and so quiet that I can leave it running next to my bed when it’s hot.

    • danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      It’s the same reason I use a beef bouillon cube in place of real meat when I feed my vegan friends. It’s much smaller so it doesn’t count.

    • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Fans are usually loud in proportion to their speed. Quiet ceiling fans have a big diameter and many blades. Doesn’t a small fan cause a lot of noise?

      • HikingVet@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Honestly depends on speed, quality of bearings and motor, blade geometry and thickness as well as any possible enclosures.

        The biggest source of noise with fans is air cavitation.

        • percent@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          It’s also possible to reduce perceived noise with some blade spacing tricks. I remember reading about how Apple designed the MacBook fan blades to seem really quiet under normal load. It was pretty interesting to read. I’m too lazy to find a link, but it should be easy to find with a quick search, if interested.

    • expatriado@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      21 hours ago

      i don’t think the point of the post is about being useless or inefficient, but about the misleading name

    • Etterra@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      That’s totaly worth the $300 price tag that the OG Dyson one has cost when it was new.

      Edit: they still cost hundreds of dollars. You can get any other brand’s version for like $50.

  • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Ionic wind generators also exist. Cool to have a particle accelerator but not very strong and catches dust (that’s why they’re called “air purifiers”)

    • D_C@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I remember going to the local waste dump about two or so years after the Dyson vacuum cleaner came out and seeing a shit ton of them in a shipping container. As I was throwing my rubbish away I asked a worker why and got the reply that a specific part inside always breaks so they put them all together and a company collects them to fix up as resell.

      Which was a good thing to do, but I left there thinking, “yeah I’m not ever buying a Dyson anything.”
      I’ve not followed the company but it does seem that every time they bring out a product all they’ve done is reinvent the wheel and then marketed the shit out of it.

        • D_C@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Interesting.

          I did read somewhere that it was a plastic impeller type thing that would break due to the speed, not a capacitor. Though both can be true. Either way, thanks.

          • 666dollarfootlong@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Yea they probably have multiple issues, considering these tend to be designed form over function so durability is likely sacrifced in many areas

  • daannii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I always thought it was a rotating, wide rubber belt. Maybe with fins. Idk

    Surely that would work better. ?

    • Etterra@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I looked up the Dyson one and it uses a turbine rather than a fan, but it’s effectively the same concept. The spinny part is in the lower part.