• Bytemeister@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    12 小时前

    G-dawg, have you considered that…

    IT’S FACING THE WRONG WAY

    Also, objectively you would end up spending more money for fancy solar windows to intentionally let those precious photons seep through.

    The only place I could see something like this “working” would be in a predominantly glass-roofed building where the amount of light coming through the roof needs to be intentionally limited, and the location does not have space for a freestanding or conventional solar setup. That’s such an edge case usage that I can’t imagine why I’ve been hearing this same dumb idea for the last 20 years.

    • reptar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 小时前

      I’m not saying you’re wrong on the overall practicality.

      Just that you’re loudness is unwarranted, based on it’s contents.

      I don’t think you really know much about what you’re saying.

      Also, feel like maybe I’m being a dick.

      But, you did all caps so all is fair

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 小时前

        Just that you’re loudness is unwarranted, based on it’s contents.

        Been hearing the same shit about solar windows for the last 20 years. They fundementally don’t work. I literally cannot say it LOUD ENOUGH on ANY AND EVERY PLATFORM that people need to logically evaluate the technologies they are proposing.

        If you think about solar windows for more than 10 second and come back with “that’s a cool idea, it will totally work!” then you either have a room temp IQ, or you are too young (or old) to be allowed outside unsupervised.