81
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
81 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37692 readers
318 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think the main keyword here is could, unfortunately. I live in a first world country and could benefit from it, which means there's very little chance nobody will snatch it up and abuse it.
Came here to say this, but i see you have it covered. I get sooooo tired of the "coulds" ,"woulds" and "shoulds" we see in article titles like this. What is more likely to happen..... a promising new technology that's cheap to produce, maintain, and reduces prices for the delivery of the worlds most needed resource is universally embraced by ALL....or Companies like Nestle, who's massive water profiteering is threatened by this innovation, either buys out all the patents and sweeps it under the rug , and/or launches a campaign of legal litigation against it's developers so that it never gets funded nor ever gets to the practical production stage.
I know what kind of world we're living in... and it's not one that favors the hope and needs of the many over the greed of the few.
Jeeze you guys are so cynical 😂It’s true that many innovations from academic research fail to be commercialized or scaled. But it’s also true that many many successful technological innovations come out of academic research and impact the lives of millions.
The biggest barrier here will most likely be whether it can scale, not patent litigation.
You underestimate the greed of the .01 % ...my cynicism comes from seeing them getting their way the great majority of the time because money.
I'd normally agree, but the sheer necessity of desalination in the next couple of decades might actually make a dent in this issue, as the downstream effects might actually affect some profit margins. The real issue is scaling, as most of the "revolutionary" desalination headlines are generally only slightly more efficient, but often have issues staying operational for long periods of time. This might have a bit of an edge on those (being completely passive, and already trying to work on the issue of salt buildup clogging the system), but I got the feeling from reading the article that they hadn't figured out whether or not they could scale it beyond (essentially) a basic water collection service for very small communities, at least not yet.
Whether or not they can scale it is always a technical concern as to if its practical or not yes, but Scaling costs $, wheres that money going to come from if they find they can reasonably scale it...Hmmm?
It's based in China, and I'm not even sure how goverment aided funding works there, or for that matter how even private funding would. My point is there are bound to be those who will interfere with or straight up deny funding for things like this because it conflicts with OTHER competing interests. It's like all the two dozen articles we hear about rechargeable battery innovations only worse....we get a lot of the "oh thats cool, I sure hope that comes to pass"..."Thats neat good for those guys !" crowd who are always asking the same question years later if they ever do at all, that i ask up front... Where is this product...? Why am I not able to go out and purchase this marvelous thing to improve my life and the lives of those around me. I dont expect it yesterday, but it would be nice if we could ever see things like this actually become readily available soon after such praise and promising review, but they never do, and if they do they're never affordable...because if it's convenient it never is. If its that cool it's usually a tool only the wealthy can ever afford or have access to.
But usually all talk of it seems to just fade away like no one ever even heard of it..... This article disappears in time, and no updates are discussed ever again, but I'm never supposed to critically question anything...I'm supposed to have faith that it will all work out just like the tech bros envision it. The basic science and development i don't have a problem with, but the absurd dogmatic pragmatism I do, and I've already explained to you why.
No I do not underestimate profit incentives. I just realize that these things are not always so nefarious and there’s plenty of money for people to make by bringing things to market.
Regardless - cost effective, portable desal devices will be dramatically more profitable than sitting on a patent for 20 years (if even enforced!). Most people buying imported bottled water due so because they are lazy not because they are without access to potable water.
we removed responsibility from groups of humans and called it incorporation. then we distilled pure human greed into what is now called the stock market, built on a lack of responsibility.
it is so gross... the rich are addicted to profit, the poor cannot see past their next paycheck.
You’re living in a world where some very rich countries such as Saudi Arabia are absolutely desperate for desalination capacity.
Of course, and That's fine so long as it benefits everyone there equally. But Would you wager me the Saudi Government (or any goverment) is going to be that fair about it ?
Either way we have to wait and see where the Chinese developers take this to next.
I'm just pointing out that - irrespective of fairness - there is no shortage of potential funders if thyis technology is practical
It's really awkward to see multiple reactions critical of the article, yet zero downvotes (well only mind now). Why?
Because this instance doesn't use downvotes. The default interface doesn't show downvoting, and attempts to downvote through another interface are literally discarded by the server.
Aha, well that clarifies things.
I do think this article and comment chain show some reason why voting could be seen as a useable redaction method.