upvote

points

by xdertz3 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby MomsAVoxell2 hours ago|
[-]
This is so obviously wrong. Show me a field-rechargeable gunpowder-based device for launching things, and I will show you someone who is about to run out of ammo on the side of a mountain they’ve just climbed after a single day of work.

Honestly, what the hell. Where do you think gunpowder comes from, thin air? Oh, is gravity a subscription service in your country?

Come on, try to at least be sensible about your response.

reply
upvoteby anon_cow11111 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Guns are already ~20-50% efficient at turning chemical energy into kinetic energy. If you're not using a direct chemical reaction for energy, then you're using a human which is a lot less energy-dense than a backpack full of ammo.

And yes, people who do avalanche control typically fire explosives out of a cannon or drop them from a helicopter. Getting a machine supply all the energy is the whole idea instead of climbing mountains yourself.

reply
upvoteby MomsAVoxell1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Do you not understand the immense amount of energy and resources required to manufacture a single consumable cartridge?

The point is to avoid that entirely and harvest gravity.

Re-wilding teams already climb far and wide, and this would extend their reach without increasing their dependencies.

Ammo is a dependency.

reply
upvoteby anon_cow111149 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Do you not understand your argument is exploring a made-up scenario where we're no longer an industrialized civilization where these things are manufactured cheaply by the billions?

And if you INSIST on making everything completely low-tech and renewable, build a potato gun and use high-proof alcohol as fuel. It'll weigh less and last longer than whatever rube-Goldberg trebuchet design you have.

reply
upvoteby MomsAVoxell42 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
Sheesh, calm down, consumer. Nobody is pissing in your gunpowder-flavored cornflakes.

Have you ever climbed a mountain with the intent to live on it for a month, doing re-wilding work? I don’t think you have. You will not be happy about having to climb back down to replenish the ammo can.

Mountains don’t have supply chains. Neither do remote rewilding areas. A low-cost, low-dependency, highly reusable device for throwing small things, long distances, is of immense value - even to our always-on, subscription-based cultures.

> It'll weigh less and last longer than whatever rube-Goldberg trebuchet design you have.

This is false and unimaginative. Put the optimized trebuchet in a backpack and get out there for months, chucking things around without requiring a single re-supply mission.

>manufactured cheaply by the billions

Are you even paying attention to the fact that this thing doesn’t need to have anything else manufactured for it in order to operate usefully?

Seriously, I don’t want to hear your consumption-addled argument. No, the point is to NOT have to constantly be dependent on a supply chain.

reply
upvoteby anon_cow111122 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
>This is false and unimaginative.

A good one will weigh about 5 pounds and not have moving parts to break. Ferment your own alcohol from plants you grow yourself. You can at least do that much, right?

reply
upvoteby MomsAVoxell14 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
A good one will have as few parts as possible, and be optimized for both portability and distances.

>Ferment your own alcohol from plants you grow yourself

I suppose I could just harvest gunpowder from the bullet trees that grow all over candy-land, too.

Or, I could just have an ultra-optimized trebuchet in my backpack for throwing things with very little effort besides the energy (me) required to reload it, wind it up, and let ‘er rip ..

reply
upvoteby p1mrx37 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Gravity is not "harvested", it just stores the energy briefly. Someone or something has to lift the weight for every shot, which requires energy.

It's not obvious whether a trebuchet is better than compressed air, like a BB gun.

reply