Just EEVBlog calling out tech scams

drdabbles , 8 months ago

I think Dave’s burnt out on this BS, and it’s starting to show. These scams are a dime a dozen, and the only thing that exposing them gets you seems to be a bunch of raving scam victims angry at you as though you’re the one stealing their money. At this point, if you’re giving money to indiegogo, kickstarter, or whatever other campaign programs exist you’re getting screwed. If you’re a government agency giving money to today’s version of Solar Roadways, then you should be kicked out of office.

XeroxCool , 8 months ago

29 minutes to animatedly blast one of the two claims that were “nutter bullshit”. This isn’t worth the watch. There’s maybe 2 minutes-worth of content refuting the 80% loss of energy due to reflection claim. Nothing is actually discussed about the TIPA’s attempt to improve output with higher angular offset from the sun. He also forgot part of their total efficiency improvement claim comes from greater packing density. Granted, the vertical array would get a reduced watt/m2 density per panel, but it could still have an overall improvement for daily/annual solar angles. Probably not worth it compared re-angling standard panel arrays a few times a year.

So the improvement percentage is bullshit and the leader gave a shitty response - nothing new here. That doesn’t mean the concept is entirely trash. But this could have been 5 minutes

ToeNailClippings OP , 8 months ago

If you think it can be done, then I say do it. You know this is how youtube and other creator sites work.

Usernameblankface , 8 months ago

I only got through a few minutes, it seemed like an average reaction video. I was hoping for more of a point by point breakdown with detailed scientific or engineering analysis, but just saw a lot of scoffing.