> Dismissing legitimate concerns by calling them "lazy" and "sceptics" is unhelpful
Agreed. I have significant experience in this field and I’m having difficulty making heads or tails of half of the company’s explanations here. I can’t tell if it’s an attempt at watered-down explanations assuming a non-technical audience, or if they’re simply trying to change the subject whenever the difficult questions come up.
Now that they’re resorting to ad-hominem (“lazy” comments to legitimate questions without even attempting to answer the questions) I’m becoming even more skeptical.
having gone through the employees of the company and looked at their backgrounds and how long they've worked at the company, and the CEO (guy in thread) describes himself as "Serial tech entrepreneur and growth hacker, with over 15 years trajectory in deep tech, Internet, and mobile. Turning great ideas into successful businesses. Specializes in Disruptive Innovation, Rapid Prototyping and Technology Commercialization.", basically, this Emrod guy will have no idea how this really works. Their "lead" scientist is a guy called Ray Simpkin, who seems reputable, but hasn't really worked in this area too much, and so far their only demonstration is something over 2m. I got a feeling reality is going to bite this company in the ass, but happy to wait for actual evidence of long range transmission. It seems everything is pretty much hype based on a lab experiment, likely trying to get some investment $s
Thanks for digging that up, helps in setting the expectations for the whole thing to correct level.
I guess this goes into the same bucket I have had for new battery/energy storage technologies for the last 10 years: until there is an actual, working prototype fulfilling ALL of the promised features, it doesn't exist for me.
Having been working with IoT hardware for over a decade, I used to get so excited that new advances in energy storage would solve some of the problems. Yeah, I'm still waiting :)
Thanks for your 5 minutes of research, biased interpretation, insulting use of quotations and incorrect summary of "this Emrod guy will have no idea how this really works". I know some of the people on the team and can assure you that they know how it works.
There's nothing wrong with creating an account to post a comment about a situation you have some personal connection to. On the contrary, we want people to post about what they know—and if they wait for a topic they know something about, so much the better for the rest of us.
>an attempt at watered-down explanations assuming a non-technical audience
I think this is the case. The founder, or whatever PR employee is handling these comments, has misjudged hackernews and assumed that it is used by the same nontechnical crowd as facebook or twitter.
Pretty sure lots of top researchers use this forum. Talking down to them with a "It works using science and engineering :)" won't go down well.
Agreed. I have significant experience in this field and I’m having difficulty making heads or tails of half of the company’s explanations here. I can’t tell if it’s an attempt at watered-down explanations assuming a non-technical audience, or if they’re simply trying to change the subject whenever the difficult questions come up.
Now that they’re resorting to ad-hominem (“lazy” comments to legitimate questions without even attempting to answer the questions) I’m becoming even more skeptical.