Welcome to Incremental Social! Learn more about this project here!
Check out lemmyverse to find more communities to join from here!

SchmidtGenetics

@SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

SchmidtGenetics , (edited )

The voice… Prana-bindu, there’s others, but spoilers ahoy.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The majority of force abilities is basically that. Voice control isn’t mastery of muscle or nerve, it isn’t magic in a sense, but controlling someone’s mind to do what you want for all intents and purposes is.

Also, where do you think Star Wars got inspiration for most of their force abilities at the start?

SchmidtGenetics ,

The sci-fi artists were really all copying each other and building off of one another anyways.

It’s the same with almost all art anyways, it’s “inspiration” by another word.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Well even paintings and music is usually inspired by something as well, it’s not just limited to the medium of story telling.

SchmidtGenetics ,

It gains value because people want it and people want it because it gains value is both a perfect description of cryptocurrency and scams.

Or gold, or any other precious metal, or any other currency really for that matter….

SchmidtGenetics ,

Haven’t multiple governments accepted it as real currency at this point? The arguments are valid, but fall flat when you actually look into each.

Hell diamonds are valuable because of artificial scarcity, so that’s a wrench in every precious metal argument….

SchmidtGenetics ,

The circlejerking and hive mind on Lemmy is shockingly worse than Reddit somehow. Not what I ever expected.

SchmidtGenetics ,

There’s no way this won’t affect the final CFM or Velocity of the air.

This would be no different than running it at a little less than 100% power, but wastes that energy instead.

Why else would they not provide any technical detail, even a wind velocity test would be huge FFS.

SchmidtGenetics ,

I’ve read the article attached, the article linked in that, and the video linked as well.

Not one talks about anything technical other than it doesn’t decrease the power, so where’s the stats to prove it? You can’t silence or muffle something without a tradeoff, we ignoring basic physics here?

So what is it do your think your non-informational comment is proving? Theres no test information to support the non power diminishing claim, and I call bullshit from basic physic principles.

SchmidtGenetics , (edited )

Just saying it doesn’t decrease the power is a bold claim without providing anything technical to support it.

I’ve read multiple articles and videos and yet this very crucial information is intentionally not included.

The claims are false, you can’t suppress or mute something with a tradeoff, unless they have somehow magically figured out physics anomalies. Would love to see some proof of this claim it doesn’t decrease power output.

SchmidtGenetics ,

So they could provide the testing data to prove it. Even the numbers, don’t need a full detailed video.

The lack of proof to their claims is concerning.

They’ve made a claim they should have known would need to be verified, eventually….. its bush league for that on its own.

SchmidtGenetics ,

I thought having a conversation about the validity of their claims would be an okay thing to do in this community?

Or are you saying this place is for something else?

SchmidtGenetics ,

It’s data they should have had to begin with, they made the claim. Of course it’s going to be questioned, they could have been upfront with the data.

What other reason would they omit it? Other than to mislead if it wasn’t actually 100%.

It’s funny how I am “demanding” something that would be just basic decency to include along with their claim, they provided the data for the sound after all…..

SchmidtGenetics ,

I am saying every single one of these claims have never wound up being actually true since they go against the very nature of physics. Yet people perpetuate the claims and defend them without the supporting data.

So to not provide the data for one claim, while providing the data for another is only done to mislead from the truth.

Sorry for not accepting what they say at face value since it goes against multiple things.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Except if you read the information its only actually a 2 db decrease…

SchmidtGenetics ,

It’s a wild statement to claim it doesn’t reduce power when even increasing the length of the discharge tube would affect its performance, and they’ve added a good 8”. Every time like this comes out without the data to back it up, it’s always false, everytime. If it wasn’t the data would be provided now wouldn’t it? Even just showing the CFM data would be enough, but they purposely omit it.

The fact that they purposely omitted data that they have is extremely concerning, it’s not a bold claim say it’s obviously false. It’s bold to claim something like that that goes against what we already know about physics.

I am sorry you are eating up this “marketing”, it’s why products like this are even sold, it’s hilarious, the amount of people defending this asinine claim is honestly quite shocking, especially on a community like this.

Not exactly a good scientific method here, mate.

Uhh… I’m not the one making claims that goes against common knowledge of aerodynamics and then not providing that data. So sure, wanting someone to prove their claim makes me bad at scientific method…?? Maybe the people defending bullshit claims are the ones you should be calling out, oh wait that you yourself. Give you head a fucking shake lmfao.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Every claim where they omit the actual data to support the claim is never fully true. Provide the CFM testing data they must have to even make that claim.

There is no valid reason to omit that data unless to mislead.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Even increasing or decreasing the length of the discharge tube will change its power and CFM and they’ve added 8”. There is no way the aerodynamics and the overall performance isn’t affected.

SchmidtGenetics ,

It’s also only 2db overall, the one frequency they dropped that much.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

You omitted the most important data, it’s 2db overall, not 12db.

So your own “recalculation” isn’t even in the right ballpark as the correct answer.

Its people that misinterpret the information and perpetuate it like you are doing here that makes these look far better than they actually are.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

It’s an insignificant 2db, I don’t know why buddy didn’t provide the relevant information.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

It’s an insignificant 2db, I don’t know why buddy didn’t provide the relevant information.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The team reduced the overall leaf blower noise by about two decibels, making the machine sound 37% quieter.

It’s an insignificant 2db, I don’t know why buddy didn’t provide the relevant information.

SchmidtGenetics , (edited )

They provided the DB data so your argument for all of those reasons is invalid. They could have easily spent a single sentence providing the CFM data. So no, not a single one of those reasons is valid to omit 6 words.

They made a claim, they didn’t need to mention the power claim, but they did. They should have omitted the claim itself using your logic, instead of the supporting data. The argument is flawed itself.

and we commonly have to accept that a certain presupposed level of knowledge as well as ambiguity is necessary.

Like knowing making a discharge tube longer or shorter affects its aerodynamics….? So we know the claim is false already…? Their ambiguity is meant to mislead people with zero working knowledge of the subject… anyone with any experience will see its flaw immediately.

SchmidtGenetics ,

We agree that the -12dB is what's important for human hearing ... Now, you may agree that the 94% reduction is what counts regarding engineering // fabrication // design.

-2db* and 37%*

Why are you perpetuating the wrong information?

SchmidtGenetics ,

Is it? Because the next sentence in the paragraph (and the only sentence missing in the quote) is the overall sound reduction. Which is far more important and far less misleading than saying 12db and 94% quieter.

Its intentionally misleading to deceive people, and than the general public incorrectly defends it, this is you.

SchmidtGenetics ,

So they can talk about the relevant commercialization technical bits (the db) and they can’t talk about the part that’s not…? Uhh… what…?

Is that your argument? Does that make any sense to you…? The part that should be restricted is being talked about freely… and the part that shouldn’t be restricted is…? You’re defending the system that’s backwards. And you want to call me naive and obtuse… okay, defend marketing fluff that you ate up like they were expecting….

SchmidtGenetics ,

They just reload a previous cached comment, doesn’t matter how many times you edit or delete, it’s all logged and backed up.

SchmidtGenetics ,

A sawyer is an occupational term for a person who operates a sawmill.

Okay I just wanted to make sure you were talking out of your ass. Your mill and miller uses hand tools? Because that’s what a sawyer is dude…

Give it up. Yes a 2x10 can move 1/2 while drying, if you used them, you would know and understand this.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Furring strips are used in plenty of places, I provide one example where it is used in most residential homes to support drywall.

Is it not structural if it’s holding ceiling drywall…? So why are people still bickering that walls aren’t structural when they still hold drywall up…?

If it’s part of a code wall detail, would that not be structural…?

What’s with the pedantism over something like this to try and save face over not knowing what a furring strip is?

SchmidtGenetics ,

Follow those wiki links, they all use hand tools, to use it to refer to one who operates machined mills instead of manual in a sawmill would be incorrect since there is already a term.

A miller operates a machined sawmill.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Drywall is structural, when used on block walls it helps provide lateral support.

This is why being pedantic usually backfires.

Drywall is inherently structural.

Regardless. It’s furring strips, you want to argue furring strips aren’t used in structural applications? They are used in all three applications the person said they haven’t used them in. They also claimed to be a wood wroker elsewhere, so I don’t see how they would use anything structural anyways….

SchmidtGenetics ,

Yes the link that refers to SAWMILLS as a whole, where there can be millers who use the tools you linked, and sawyers who would use the tools used in the other links.

Who’s being dishonest? You’re claiming you work in a field you’ve shown zero actual education in.

SchmidtGenetics ,

What’s that got to do with furring strips that can be used in structural drywall applications? We are getting too far from the original point.

You agree drywall is structural and that’s all that matters to this discussion.

And yes, if the furring strips and drywall are detailed in the plan, they are structural components since it has to be built as designed.

Just because they can also be used in non-structural uses doesn’t negate their structural use dude.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Absolutely incorrect

SchmidtGenetics , (edited )

You’ve never heard of a drywall shear wall…?

God, why is so hard for people to accept drywall is structural lmfao. It’s not stiffening it, read the provided link it explains it quite well multiple times with extra resources for you to follow up if you choose.

Every component we have talked about can be used structurally, I’m sorry you just apparently haven’t encountered one of the over 1500 different wall assemblies that use them…?

SchmidtGenetics ,

Uhhh what…? I was explaining how everything is structural while you kept moving the goalposts away from furring strips being able to be used structurally. Yeah I picked a not so great example, but they are still fucking structural components lmfao.

Give your head a shake.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The roof can be put down without the furring strips. It might bend, but it still function as a roof.

What…? Roof trusses go parallel with the length of the cladding panel, you require furring strips on the perpendicular to install them. Just like in a wall with the studs vertical, you need horizontal furring to install them.

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/22b2cd82-fc17-4f81-9786-714cac114cf8.jpeg

These required larger furring strips due to truss spacing.

Furring strips are not visual lmfao. They are structural components in a lot of assemblies. Without knowing the assembly you can’t say if they are or aren’t structural, that’s the entire point I’ve been trying to make here. You aren’t the quickest one are you? I’ve pointed this out multiple times. There are thousands of use cases where furring strips are structural. To say they aren’t structural is fucking asinine lmfao.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Did you respond to the wrong comment or something?

SchmidtGenetics ,

Okay then, that has nothing to do with whats being discussed, but you’re free to comment about electrical I guess.

SchmidtGenetics , (edited )

I’ve been defending my points about how certain components of structural assemblies are structural.

You can also use a sheet of plywood in non-structural ways. No different than claiming that these furring strips and sheets of drywall aren’t structural. I can point out plenty of places where plywood isn’t structural, but that doesn’t change that it’s still used structurally.

I think this thread is being taken over by people with zero education on this subject. What’s with all the insults for pointing out the painfully obvious? Oh that’s right, people don’t like being proven they are dumb and lash out as a last result. That’s right.

Blocked.

SchmidtGenetics ,

But, furring strips don’t have the integrity or quality control to be structural components.

Why do you claim that? Lots of assembly details call them out.

Part of why they’re so cheap is because they’re complete junk structural.

They aren’t cheap though? Almost all dimensional lumber is paid by the board foot. A 2x2 furring strip is about 50% the price of the same length 2x4.

Why are you being continuing to be disingenuous and still moving goal posts…? They are absolutely structural. They are used to hold up ceiling panels, which is always a load bearing structural use.

SchmidtGenetics ,

I just realized that you’re confusing gypsum board with drywall. While they are similar, gypsum board can be used for the loads you’re describing.

Uhh… what…? They are the exact same product. You’re gonna have to provide a link for this one lmfao.

Are you seriously just going to throw shit at the wall and move every goalpost to try and save face now? Jesus fucking Christ lmfao.

Due to its inherent fire resistance, gypsum board, commonly known as drywall is the premier building material for wall, ceiling, and partition syst…

From

I feel like yours still going to make an idiot of yourself after this comment as well.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Those aren’t furring strips in that photo. That’s dimensional lumber. In this case, those spans are large enough that they require the strength of actual lumber.

Yes I literally just explained that in detail in the comment you responded to…..

SchmidtGenetics , (edited )

If the trusses were closer together you would use the 2x2 furring strips since it could support the weight. Since it can’t support the weight you need to use 2x4s so the picture isn’t showing 2x2 furring strips but if you aren’t a fucking moron you would realize that’s where they are used.

Buddy got caught saying something structural isn’t, so now they’re throwing shit at the wall to save face. And unfortunately down in this part of the thread is all the the fucking morons.

People in the industry would know what I was talking about, clearly it’s a bunch of people who aren’t since I apparently need to explain it in this section like people are 6 years old.

2x2 furring strips are fucking structural and are used in thousands of uses where they are structural. Yet this moron is claiming they aren’t lmfao. You guys are fucking idiots lmfao.

SchmidtGenetics ,

The Architects and Civil Engineers that I have known, do not consider drywall or furring strips to "structural" when designing a building. I'm going with their consensus on this matter.

Jesus Christ, just because it can be used in non-structural application does not mean it can’t be used structurally else where. It’s also hilarious that you think we are ever going to think this has come up in a conversation before lmfao. You clearly are already taking out of your ass, but I’ll bite since the idiocy people are coming up with is entertaining as hell….

Furring strips and drywall are both used in structural applications since they are both structural components.

If a ceiling is strapped with them to provide lateral support and the ceiling is also cladded with drywall for additional lateral support. Congrats, both just got used in a load bearing application… I’m sorry apparently the architects and engineers you use haven’t come across this very common application?

You clearly have no clue on the matter lmfao.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Furring strips can be any material, plywood, 2x4, 2x6.

I think people are getting stuck on the 2x2 furring strips being the only type of furring strip, which isn’t the case. You can just use 2x2s in a lot of cases, and there is a specific product called furring strips to use for furring or whatever else you want.

Some people even buy 2x4s and rip down their own furring strips of 2x2 if the span doesn’t need the 4 inches.

SchmidtGenetics ,

Furring strips and drywall don't count as load bearing.

Except for the thousands of use cases where they are used for lateral bracing to support the structure….

Like in shear walls… strapped drywall ceilings… load bearing walls….

Yes they can be used non-structurally, I’ve never claimed otherwise, yet you are ignoring the fact that they can, and are used in load bearing structural applications…..

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • incremental_games
  • meta
  • All magazines
    •