Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#31

Post by IncreasePosts » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:01 PM UTC

bensmoif wrote: post #15

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it must be said, as genius as Franklin was, sadly .. Some people can't help themselves from bringing irrelevant facts to the conversation.

I don't think it's irrelevant that a brilliant man like Benjamin Franklin may not have been able to achieve as much as he unmistakably did WITHOUT the heavy assistance of forced slave labor in his life, from cradle to grave. Pretending like these things can be separated is ignorance. Ignoring its brutality does a disservice to our history and that man's legacy

How did anyone manage to do it after slavery was abolished? Did the nature of genius change at that point?

Ben Franklin was one of the greatest minds worldwide of the 18th century. Odds are, even without slavery, he would have contributed just as much as he did with slavery. It's not like he made his money working slaves to the bone in a field and couldn't turn a profit without slavery.

He was a publisher. A few slaves were involved but they were largely incidental to the business. As in, he could have easily paid John and Sam a wage instead of paying to feed and house Peter and George and the business would be entirely unaffected

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#32

Post by ChrisbyMe » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:09 PM UTC

ck2 wrote: post #2

for a moment I thought this was going to be about arc-lights in the 1800s that mechanically touch electrodes and then draw apart * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arc_lamp it's amazing how far we've come think about Benjamin Franklin twenty-five years before Declaration of Independence naming the first "battery" (out of the concept of lined-up artillery) by connecting a series of lynden jars (basically capacitors) - he…

For any SF based people the Roxy Theater in the Mission is one of the few operating theaters that STILL use this (bc the others burned down)

https://missionlocal.org/2025/07/sf-roxie-theater-projection...

if you donate you can get a tour :)

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#33

Post by ggm » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:14 PM UTC

Is this "mechanical"?

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#34

Post by krapp » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:35 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #29

krapp wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? That doesn't affect the morality of slavery one bit. Subjective and relative moral questions do exist, but slavery isn't one of them. Likewise, Ben Franklin being a founding father doesn't somehow balance the scales in that regard. The existence of the United States doesn't retroactively make slavery ok.

What is moral and what isn't changes with the times. For example, blaspheming could get you murdered by the state in medieval times. The colonies had different views of morality, especially religious morality. It was immoral to work on the Sabbath. It was immoral to have sex before marriage. The Founders saw fit to abolish the nobility, and disassociated religion from government. We've forgotten what an enormous leap…

You say that people should be judged by the morality of their times, yet as has been pointed out to you, these men were judged by the morality of their times, and condemned by many for their participation in slavery.

Also, if we must judge by the morality of the times, we must also view abolishing the nobility and separating church from state to be immoral and unchristian. You seem to want to avoid a "modern moral framework" when it would tarnish the reputation of a founding father, but embrace it otherwise. You're not advocating slavery, but you don't want to judge slaveowners harshly.

It's perfectly fine to acknowledge the good that people do, while also acknowledging the evil. Jefferson, Franklin, and Washington all held slaves, and they were all evil for doing so. If we judged past people by our modern standards, they would all be condemned, and if we believe at all in some form of moral progress (which you must, since you bring up American freedom and the establishment of a secular republic as virtues) then we can condemn them all for some things.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#35

Post by bensmoif » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:45 PM UTC

fhdkweig wrote: post #23

bensmoif wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this century we have a word for that kind of talk by slaveholders who professed some longing for abolition (Franklin. Jefferson, Washington, John Jay) but did not really wanna be inconvenienced: trolling.

Trolls do things for the LOLs. They are motivated by humor. Someone who wants rules for others but breaks those rules personally is better referred to as a hypocrite. And while he did have a sense of humor (I hear that daylight savings time was just a joke), I don't think that is why he had slaves. He kept them because they were useful to him, and the moment he died they were no longer useful. The slaves owned by oth…

My brother: trolls troll out of cynical cruelty, there are many children's books that can illustrate this clearly.

Franklin's ability to speak plainly about the evils of slavery, in between his own acts of unspeakable cruelty, and robbing families of their dignity and humanity, requires a level of disconnect and pride that is worth significant mention whenever we do justice to his great legacy.

This talk of human utility sounds like a lot of chump shit.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#36

Post by WalterBright » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:50 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #34

WalterBright wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is moral and what isn't changes with the times. For example, blaspheming could get you murdered by the state in medieval times. The colonies had different views of morality, especially religious morality. It was immoral to work on the Sabbath. It was immoral to have sex before marriage. The Founders saw fit to abolish the nobility, and disassociated religion from government. We've forgotten what an enormous leap…

You say that people should be judged by the morality of their times, yet as has been pointed out to you, these men were judged by the morality of their times, and condemned by many for their participation in slavery. Also, if we must judge by the morality of the times, we must also view abolishing the nobility and separating church from state to be immoral and unchristian. You seem to want to avoid a "modern moral fr…

I wonder how the future will judge you and I.

I've lived long enough to see a distinct shift in what people consider moral and immoral. Are you certain in your moral rectitude? (I am, even though I fall short of it, and change my mind now and then.)

> these men were judged by the morality of their times

Half the colonies considered slavery to be moral in their time. So much so that, a few years later, fought and died in a terrible war to defend it.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#37

Post by bensmoif » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 9:53 PM UTC

IncreasePosts wrote: post #31

bensmoif wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's irrelevant that a brilliant man like Benjamin Franklin may not have been able to achieve as much as he unmistakably did WITHOUT the heavy assistance of forced slave labor in his life, from cradle to grave. Pretending like these things can be separated is ignorance. Ignoring its brutality does a disservice to our history and that man's legacy

How did anyone manage to do it after slavery was abolished? Did the nature of genius change at that point? Ben Franklin was one of the greatest minds worldwide of the 18th century. Odds are, even without slavery, he would have contributed just as much as he did with slavery. It's not like he made his money working slaves to the bone in a field and couldn't turn a profit without slavery. He was a publisher. A few slav…

I'll accept your conceit but answer this: why didn't he liberate his slaves? If it's a wash, why keep humans in slavery at all?

I think it's because, in his own calculus, he believed he needed to desecrate human beings, destroy their families, and humiliate their dignity to maintain his greatness.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#38

Post by Modified3019 » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 10:12 PM UTC

cush wrote: post #18

If you've never seen neon up close, plasma is such an incredible light source. It's like the light is just floating being emitted from empty space. I took a neon workshop a few years ago, and it became clear why people are still willing to painstakingly make these signs - there is really nothing comparable to them, they're like magic

I love plasma so much, I have multiple “Jr.” globes from Aurora Plasma Design (which have a voltage? adjustment knob), some gas tubes, ancient indicator bulbs from Ukraine/Russia, and an ancient VTG/Rabbit Systems “Eye of the Storm” E-6000 globe from 1987 (which has two adjustment sliders, and a few cheapo globes.

If you are interested in a globe, I’d highly recommend the “Phoenix Rising” Jr. globe they offer. At lower powers it’s near silent, and you can typically adjust them down to have 3-5 small tendrils wafting around each other lazily. APD’s gloves also have thicker glass, and are rated for running all day at below 80% power. At full power my phoenix rising globe uses ~12 watts, and at the lowest power it’s something like 3-4 watts. Unfortunately tariffs, inflation and noble gas cost have hammered the price in the last year.

I definitely prefer silent and lazy looking plasma instead of the frantic screeching storms that most globes have. I uploaded a few example videos here: https://imgur.com/a/bg8fsCW

One thing you can often do is take a cheapo Chinese glove, and use a voltage adjustable power supply and tune it down that way, though I couldn’t tell you if that’s ok for the electronics long term or not.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#39

Post by nater5000 » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 10:16 PM UTC

avian wrote: post #28

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #24

I wish I could just buy one of these as a commercial product. I'll never be able to make this and it's too cool to not be able to buy.

Maybe someone that has seen this first hand can chime in but I strongly suspect the real-life effect viewed with naked eye is much more disappointing compared to what is shown in this video. Real physics ain't need to get them likes and subscribes.

But did you not _hear_ this guy absolutely gush about how much of a spectacle it was for minutes straight?

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#40

Post by krapp » Wed, Jul 22, 2026, 10:23 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #36

krapp wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that people should be judged by the morality of their times, yet as has been pointed out to you, these men were judged by the morality of their times, and condemned by many for their participation in slavery. Also, if we must judge by the morality of the times, we must also view abolishing the nobility and separating church from state to be immoral and unchristian. You seem to want to avoid a "modern moral fr…

I wonder how the future will judge you and I. I've lived long enough to see a distinct shift in what people consider moral and immoral. Are you certain in your moral rectitude? (I am, even though I fall short of it, and change my mind now and then.) > these men were judged by the morality of their times Half the colonies considered slavery to be moral in their time. So much so that, a few years later, fought and died…

I can't control how the future judges me, if at all, and I won't let fear of that affect my own morality.

But I don't own other humans as property, so at least I have that going for me.

>I've lived long enough to see a distinct shift in what people consider moral and immoral.

And yet you have no issues making moral judgements yourself, as you so often do in political threads. You seem to believe in the absolute moral good of the US and free market capitalism, and the absolute moral evil of socialism and leftism, but you just can't bring yourself to say the founding fathers were immoral for owning slaves. Why? Because maybe in the future slavery might come back and someone might say "That Walter Bright guy didn't even believe in slavery that shmuck, we should tear down his statues forthwith?" Is that really how you think?

I'll leave you with the last word, since you're starting to go in circles. Good night.