Solar-panel "trees" really are inferior

#1

Post by jdeastwood » Sat, Aug 20, 2011, 9:16 AM UTC

Solar-panel "trees" really are inferior
uvdiv.blogspot.com

Re: Solar-panel "trees" really are inferior

#2

Post by thaumaturgy » Sat, Aug 20, 2011, 9:43 AM UTC

This is unnecessary. There's already been a lot of discussion about it on HN, with much the same conclusions. All this is doing is adding to the noise.

It's certainly not kind to an intelligent and curious 13-year-old who just happened to become the online media-darling-du-jour.

Re: Solar-panel "trees" really are inferior

#3

Post by barrkel » Sat, Aug 20, 2011, 9:55 AM UTC

thaumaturgy wrote: post #2

This is unnecessary. There's already been a lot of discussion about it on HN, with much the same conclusions. All this is doing is adding to the noise. It's certainly not kind to an intelligent and curious 13-year-old who just happened to become the online media-darling-du-jour.

The same conclusions on the HN comments? I didn't see those conclusions, sorry; the bits about measuring voltage rather than power, for example, was buried in a comment well down the page. Most of the comments were about how the kid's results were not surprising / not revolutionary, not that they were most probably fundamentally wrong because of measurement error.

Re: Solar-panel "trees" really are inferior

#4

Post by randomanonymous » Sat, Aug 20, 2011, 9:57 AM UTC

barrkel wrote: post #3

thaumaturgy wrote: post #2

This is unnecessary. There's already been a lot of discussion about it on HN, with much the same conclusions. All this is doing is adding to the noise. It's certainly not kind to an intelligent and curious 13-year-old who just happened to become the online media-darling-du-jour.

The same conclusions on the HN comments? I didn't see those conclusions, sorry; the bits about measuring voltage rather than power, for example, was buried in a comment well down the page. Most of the comments were about how the kid's results were not surprising / not revolutionary, not that they were most probably fundamentally wrong because of measurement error.

Then why discourage the young lad with titles like this. Why not make it less harsh of a title for the blog, why not make less harsh comments.

I swear, adults are so incredibly harsh with very young people who are just trying to improve things, and using their minds, while learning.

I bet the kid reads this site, and all the comments on the stuff.