Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Segway inventor's next endeavor (cnn.com)
79 points by mactitan on Feb 3, 2013 | hide | past | favorite | 37 comments



<pedantry> David did not kill Goliath with a slingshot[1], the weapon of choice of Dennis the Menace. He killed Goliath with a sling[2], a weapon capable of hurling stones 400+m and one which was regularly used by ancient armies. </pedantry>

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slingshot

[2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sling_(weapon)


I'll take your pedantry and raise you one: "Slingshot", the shot (rocks, clay, etc.) that is slung from a sling.

It's a stretch though...


Or "sling shot", as in the event of a shot with a sling.


I think it's usually called a bullet.


I sure hope Dean Kamen will not be remembered as the guy who invented the Segway but as the guy who came up with AutoSyringe and his work on dialysis pumps.


Fun fact: The core of AutoSyringe and his dialysis pumps was delivering super precise dosages of medication. DEKA applied that same technology to the new Freestyle Coke machine (delivering super precise amounts of soda concentrate), in return for Coca Cola helping them distribute the Slingshot.


That fact is not just fun but incredibly helpful to understand what's going on with this story.

The Cola company is apparently not that altruistic after all - world view saved.


And hopefully the creator of the FIRST Robotics competition for HS students.

http://www.usfirst.org

I've met dozens of students at MIT who say the experience with FIRST was the main reason they decided to study science and engineering. (And I've heard similar stories from folks at Stanford, CMU, etc.)

Dean's a genius with an amazing team, but that impact can only go so far. Inspiring thousands of new students in STEM careers is solving the world's problems at a meta level.


Especially since the Segway was just a spinoff of technology developed for the awesome iBot wheelchair that can balance the user at normal eye-level, negotiate curbs, and even climb stairs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibot


The Segway was actually pretty complex -- definitely not just a spin-off. (Though I agree the iBot is awesome.)

If you want to learn the full story, I recommend the book Code Name Ginger. http://www.amazon.com/Code-Name-Ginger-Behind-Segway/dp/1578...


"Kamen believes that the program could have 5 million women entrepreneurs running businesses by 2020."

So they're only hiring women? Why? Seems like a pretty sure way to violate local anti-discrimination laws.


First of all, it doesn't sound like they are "hiring" anyone; that would run counter to being an entrepreneur =).

Second, I assumed the statement meant that Kamen et al. would be especially receptive to local women running the machines. Remember, that women are likely to be repressed in countries where this machine is going to be useful. Empowering women in developing countries has a history of being an effective way to lift people out of poverty. For examples, I point you to the success that microfinance has had in lending money to women.


"Women continue to make up seventy-five percent of all microcredit recipients worldwide." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microcredit#Lending_to_women

Microcredit loans are for persons starting their own business. Selling drinking water sounds like a good match.


It sounds like an attempt to hit as many buzzwords as possible.


I don't understand. What happened to his Stirling Engine that was supposed to provide low-cost energy and also produced potable water as a side-effect?


I think that was a common misunderstanding/misreporting, Dean Kamen proposed using the Stirling Engine to power the Slingshot (the Slingshot being the waterpurifier which is mentioned in the linked article).

At least according to How Stuff Works, they were two separate machines: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-tech/re...

"But the two devices may fit together even more harmoniously. The generator happens to make a lot of extra heat as it burns fuel -- up to 85 percent of it doesn't get used. But when the generator and purifier are connected by a tube, hot air can blow into the purifier. There, it can do work, heating the incoming water and surrounding the purifier like a jacket, trapping heat inside. With help from the generator, the purifier can be even more efficient."


I used to work at DEKA, and this is correct.


Hmph. And I recall seeing Kamen on TV touting the completed Stirling Engine and showing pure drinking water as a side-effect. This is why I asked.


It creates drinkable water, which is valuable in the absense of drinkable water. But its a stretch to think everybody should use one, to 'save water' somehow. It takes energy to run; that energy comes at an ecological price. In fact, energy and water have been called analogous in ecological calculations (reference?). So it may be a net loss, greenwise, to use this machine to recycle wastewater from your house for instance.


True, but if you have energy that can't be easily stored or transported, it might be worthwhile using that energy to make clean water. For example, the solar panels in 3rd world countries can only charge batteries up to a certain point. The solar cells would still generate energy but there's no place to store it so one might as well use the excess for clarifying water.


Interesting move from Coke, especially after their criticisms by countries such as India after abusing the water supplies in rural cities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Coca-Cola#Water_us...


I don't trust Coca Cola on this one bit.

They're in the business of scarcity (Dasani bottled water).

Why teach a man how to fish when you can keep selling him the fish?


>Why teach a man how to fish when you can keep selling him the fish?

If you think someone is going to come along to teach fishing anyway.


I want one of these hooked up to my house - all outbound water should be run through it and i would like to be returning/recycling the water I receive.

At 8K in its current form, that's worth every penny.

They should get the cost to 4K and charge everyone in the developed world 8K for it - get one give one fashion.


Rainwater and urine - ok. But when it comes to human waste (the other kind) I'll rather trust our waste processing / drinking water facilities (as well as a couple hundred kilometers of nature in form of rivers).


"Coke has the distribution channels to get the Slingshot into the hands of those who need it."

I think this is the key .. as long as it's not anther profit venture, this might just work.


One thing that is interesting about this story is the fancy new Coke machines you see that let you choose from a hundred of combination of flavors via a touch-screen was a joint development led by DEKA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola_Freestyle

Basically this was a method to get their foot in the door and gain trust to a point to get the Slingshot project going, as far as I understand it.


Why is it the key that a company helping people doesn't make a profit?



Because I don't want to live in a world of profit and power.


Even if that were shown to be a much more effective way to reach these goals?


I'd like to know how much water this makes in how long. A hair dryer is no 60w bulb, that's for sure.


from the article: "this 300 pound, dorm fridge-sized box can take any kind of sewage or even salt water and create 200 to 250 gallons a day of clean water."


Well you are looking at 24-48 kwh per day of use and the article says that the machine purifies ~250 gallons in that time. So approximately 10gph at 1-2kw.


(1.5kW*24hr)/225gal ~~ 150 J/g, which is in line with the figures reported here

http://www.aquatechnology.net/vaporcompressiondistillers.htm...

Ideally, one only has to push the water back and forth over its phase boundary by an arbitrarily small delta-T, so the energy consumption can be arbitrarily small too. The 150 J/g is all heat leakage.


I think that localization and distribution of these types of processes like making water drinkable is going to become a huge trend, just because it makes a lot of sense.

For one thing, its easier to scale out in smaller chunks. Its also more robust to have lots of small production going on than to centralize. And technology tends to miniaturize.

I think that there may be other small but incredibly capable devices for producing things like food and goods. This leads to less reliance on more centralized traditional 'economic' distribution systems and greater security for local groups and individuals.


There does seem to be a trend toward more distributed and self-reliant production being enabled by improving technology: 3d printing, aquaponic gardening, biofuels, etc.

Still, the lower-level components and building blocks of the technologies that enable these applications still needs to be designed and distributed, and even those who generate their own electricity, grow their own food, and purify their own water are going to find it challenging to manufacture their own solar panels, construct their own pump systems, etc. More and more hackers might be designing homebrew electronics, but we're still a long way from DIY silicon fabrication.

So it's not that the large-scale, centralized economy will go away; it's that as the value of economies of scale in production of consumption goods diminishes, the centralized production systems and complex distribution networks of the industrial economy will pivot, and end up supplying tools and raw materials more, and finished goods less.

I bet over the next century, we'll see a gradual reversal of the economic patterns of the last 150 years or so, with more and more people adopting a kind of high-tech homesteading, fewer people working as employees for others, and finished goods being increasingly produced by end-users themselves or by smaller cottage industries, with the industrial infrastructure increasingly supplying inputs rather than final products.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: