HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

⬐ artemonster

Its funny how they have framed the video so that you will not see the end of the flame (there are some shots with full length blade, but really short) or see how the flame behaves in horizontal position.

⬐ jessriedel

I agree they are doing this, but you can more or less get a feel for how it looks tilted pretty close to the horizontal here:

https://youtu.be/xC6J4T_hUKg?t=702

I think the real problem is probably how it must look when you move the blade quickly. It's essentially just a hose, so the "beam" will be very loopy. As far as I can tell, they really avoid moving the beam in the video for this reason.

⬐ coddle-hark

Yup, I’m sure they could have made a regular creme brûlée burner look like a viable lightsaber if they wanted to.

The handle and backpack looked really cool though!

⬐ Timpy

I think this is a cool project, but yeah of course they're stretching the definition a little bit. "Backpack powered laminar flow propane torch" doesn't get you 12mil views on youtube.

⬐ DoofusOfDeath

I had that thought as well, but TBH I don't know much about physics.

At 4000 degrees Fahrenheit, would the flame's fuel gasses technically be a plasma?

And if so, then what's the detail that made both of us think that what they built doesn't match our expectations? Maybe we assumed they'd say "flame" for this design, and only say "plasma" if it was a cold plasma?

⬐ gurustave

If the gas is hot enough to be seen, its generally a plasma. Basically all fire is plasma.

⬐ solstice

So given a sufficiently strong electromagnet I could bend a campfire? That seems wrong

⬐ rssr

This is absolutely false. Fire is NOT plasma. Also, CO2 doesn't start to dissociate until around 4000 F. Which means basically all the electrons are still bound to elements and the chemical bonds and not free as to a plasma.

⬐ mondoshawan

I dunno, if Colin Furze did this with that kind of title, I suspect he wouldn't have aaaany trouble getting that much exposure without stretching the truth.

⬐ DoofusOfDeath

The video made me curious about eye protection. For any of the flame colors he created, was there the possibility of a strong UV component that could cause eye damage?

A few years ago I considered showing my kids some pyro demonstrations using magnesium tape and thermite. I know magnesium flame has a strong UV component, and I figured I'd just keep that out of direct line of site. But I couldn't get enough info on the spectrum of thermite flame to feel comfortable going forward with the demo.

⬐ frickinLasers

Even intense visible light (for instance from burning thermite, or perhaps a propane torch) can cause eye damage.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaophthalmology/article-a...

⬐ Grazester

Wish someone told me this as a kid because I burnt many strips of Magnesium that I got my hands on from my older sister's chemistry lab when she was in high school.

⬐ solstice

What happened? Eye damage or weird tan?

⬐ bananapear

For anyone thinking UV isn’t dangerous because it’s a component of sunlight, don’t underestimate the power of the radiation from a small nearby source.

A few arc welds while wearing a t shirt is enough to give you an unwanted “tan”.

⬐ progre

Radiation burn is what it is. Don't try to get an actual tan this way. Edit: parent knows this of course. Not every one does.

⬐ marcodiego

TLDW: their LightSaber is a beautiful finely tuned propane and oxygen blowtorch.

⬐ 29athrowaway

What happens when two lightsaber beams collide in a lightsaber battle? Nothing good, apparently. The gas would be dispersed everywhere and the users would get burnt.

⬐ mleonhard

You could put a solid rod in the middle of the flame. The rod would need to be extremely durable. Making the rod retractable would be challenging.

⬐ mnl

I must be getting old because all I can see is an insanely dangerous gas welding torch.

⬐ dTal

I was a tad nervous watching him wave it around right next to the propane tank!

⬐ Octopodes

As opposed to how safe lightsabers must be in the reality of Star Wars? I never understood the scene where the younglings were practicing their lightsaber moves about three feet apart from each other. Surely that was also insanely dangerous!

⬐ TeMPOraL

Fictional light sabers were also insanely dangerous, so this is true to television. It's just that the movies didn't show saber mishaps.

⬐ mnl

The difference is that in fictional works these devices might harm fictional characters, but in the real world this can maim, disfigure and blind actual people causing actual and pretty nasty suffering. There are safety regulations for this kind of equipment, at least where I live there are.

I find troubling the mindset in which fictional devices, societies, persons and universes aren't perceived clearly as just narrative tropes meant for making the narrative where they're contained work.

⬐ TeMPOraL

> I find troubling the mindset in which fictional devices, societies, persons and universes aren't perceived clearly as just narrative tropes meant for making the narrative where they're contained work.

Because that would ruin fiction for everyone. You're meant to suspend your disbelief when perusing fictional works.

Otherwise, you can just scroll through TvTropes instead of ever reading or watching anything. Or you could just read this:

  template<typename Hero, typename Sage, typename Villain, typename MacGuffin>
  void Story(Hero hero, Sage sage, Villain villain, MacGuffin macGuffin) {
    while(true) {
      auto what = hero.advance();
      if(what == sage) { sage.teach(hero); }
      else if(what == villain) { hero.fight(villain); }
      else if(what == macGuffin) { roll_credits(); return; }
    }
  }

That's literally it. The whole of fiction, if everything is just narrative tropes.

⬐ bserge

There's always going to be a tradeoff between strictly following safety protocols and presenting their product on camera.

Besides, everything's a risk. Driving, crossing the road, eating chicken wings, getting out of bed, being born. Gotta have some tolerance otherwise you'll go insane.

⬐ elcritch

And this attitude of absolute safety over everything would preclude many of the most interesting sports, hobbies, and possibly inventions. They're not selling it nor even producing kits. In another episode they played with 'light saber rods' but carefully wearing full heat shielding suits. And yes, only people with actual Jedi semi-prescience could probably use a real or even imitation light saber as real weapons without maiming themselves. That makes it even more fun to watch this build, IMHO. Science fiction not remaining fictional has been the cause for many actual inventions.

⬐ mrfusion

If a flame is a true plasma I never understood why a magnet doesn’t seem to affect it.

⬐ est

The best lightsaber theory I've read is how lightsabers cut through everything but not another lightsaber. It's by magnetic repulse force of course.

⬐ dfox

Magnet does affect flame, but you need surprisingly strong magnet for the effect to be noticeable.

⬐ beckler

electromagnetism does affect it tho

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7_8Gc_Llr8

⬐ nadavami

It does, here's a great video by Ben at Applied Science showing some examples of the effects. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV4Fk3VNZqs

⬐ wayneftw

The pinnacle of science fiction technology is not light sabers in my opinion, it’s teleportation.

Beam me up!

⬐ ch4s3

The idea of teleportation stirs up something like existential dread in me every time I think about it. The idea that your matter is disassembled, and then somewhere else it is reassembled from local atoms is at once fascinating and horrifying. You die ever time you are transported, and the copy of you has no memory of that event. It really hints at a lot of interesting philosophical questions.

⬐ mmastrac

You might also consider yourself as dying every time you sleep and waking up a different person. Any interruption of consciousness could be a mini-death.

⬐ ch4s3

I think that's an interesting line of thought, especially if you replace sleep with anesthesia.

⬐ Grazester

Not the same thing. When I fall asleep and wake up, I don't wake up a new copy of myself.

⬐ kthejoker2

As far as you know?

Or rather: if someone invented real life transportation but it required you to be sedated, what would be different?

It's only the conscious/unconscious aspect that's troubling.

Imagine all of the yous that have ever woken up are in fact copies of yourself.

Now imagine it happens every time you sneeze (again - why not?)

Makes the concept seem fairly innocuous.

⬐ bserge

Introducing the new "tele" feature. Tired of everything? You can now just tele. No port. Guaranteed to fix all of your problems!

*terms and conditions apply

⬐ wayneftw

It’s been said that you have a whole new body every seven years. Perhaps teleportation is just a matter of speeding that process up.

⬐ nottorp

It does if you go by that definition of teleportation.

Since no one has actually done it, it may work in a completely different way.

⬐ willismichael

In case you are not aware, the first episode of Existential Comics explores this very subject: https://existentialcomics.com/comic/1

⬐ marton78

This was a good read, thanks!

⬐ dbingham

Good read, but it still doesn't address the issue of what happens when there are two of you - the copy and the original from the same pattern. Does consciousness split at the moment the patterns diverge? Is it shared?

The analogy to sleep really doesn't connect at all, at least not for me. Consciousness isn't fully interrupted by sleep. Your brain is still working and processing, even when you're not dreaming. Your physical self is continuous, it's not the same as it being disassembled and reassembled immediately out of different material.

And sure, even if the substance of your is being changed over, it happens as a gradual refactoring, not an instance decomposition and recomposition miles from the original point. The electrical patterns that make up your brain are never interrupted - not by sleep nor the gradual replacement of your body. They would be by (star trek style) teleportation. They would be ended and a (presumably) identical pattern started up at a different location.

Can you tell I've spent a lot of time thinking about this?

⬐ TeaDude

Hmm. Very interesting.

Still not the sort of thing you could put together in your garage. That nozzle price is a real roadblock.

One day though... :)

⬐ orliesaurus

Saw the whole video, but you don't get to see the fun stuff.. using the saber. Apparently you need to pay to see them handle it by subscribing to another service. Is this a new strategy to monetize videos? You're basically baited into watching a fun video and then...kaboom...nope, no fun stuff unless you pay up?? Sad face.

⬐ elif

Hacksmith said the video would be released in a week to the public. It is not a new strategy at all to release content early to your financial supporters.

⬐ wmeredith

Yeah, this isn't some new trick. And considering the amount of knowledge and work on display, it seems totally reasonable.

⬐ regulation_d

Hard disagree. The bit where they're machining the hilt was definitely worth my time. The glass blowing nozzle also super cool. I'm not likely to pay for the rest of it, but I definitely don't feel like my time was wasted.

⬐ dhagz

Besides, the video with the demo of the lightsaber goes public tomorrow (Oct 14). I can wait until then.

⬐ Atlantium

He clearly says at 17:37 "...for everyone else it will be out next week."

⬐ thspimpolds

Which in this case is tomorrow. The original video was posted last week

⬐ lhorie

They said they'll release that video on youtube a week after this one.

In the meantime, they have a ton of other similar content that you could watch until then.

⬐ blamestross

They will release it on YouTube eventually. They have to make money somehow. "Early Content Access" is a model folks are trying right now.

⬐ whoomp12342

I liked youtube more when it didn't have google.

⬐ IshKebab

You mean back when content like this wasn't on it?

⬐ tsujp

I'll bite.

Google bought YouTube in 2006 which was ~1 year after it spawned.

The _idea_ of being social on the internet then -- apart from forums et al -- was very new. I was using YouTube as an 11 year old and all that was really being posted were cat videos, blogs, Fred, and these kind of low-budget home videos. People were still figuring things out. It was an exciting time because it was a new thing; but _precisely_ because it was a new thing that's what was exciting.

The content on YouTube now is orders of magnitude more diverse than then and still includes the stuff of yonder. Let's leave hyperbole out of it.

⬐ MeinBlutIstBlau

I always hate when people say stuff like "things were better back when..." specifically for the internet stuff. There are a lot of people that wax nostalgic about how "it was a better era" but in reality, it was god awful video quality, low effort or simple content, creators that made stuff when they felt like it, and much harder to use youtube as a search engine as opposed to just an entertainment machine.

The internet pre-today was just garbage. The issues with being tracked and Facebook...blah blah blah are all minor in comparison to it's convenience it's brought. Remember when you ACTUALLY had to make a forum post and engage with others online to maybe get the answer you were looking for? What about online shopping? Did you really like relying on some sketchy website that someone whipped up and didn't bother to secure your info with they're half-baked payment processing page?

The thing these people often forget is, that garbage content they think is so great is still there. They just don't actively look for it anymore. They just see the top promoted channels and go "oh wheres the good stuff!" but don't bother to search for it. They never sort by new I bet on any website.

⬐ whoomp12342

no, I'm not being nostalgic. In the early days of youtube it was just content. Sure the content is crisper and more available, but there was no motivation to like & subscribe. There was no drama with demonitization. There were no ads. All of this was brought on by google.

is youtube still a decent product? Sure

⬐ MeinBlutIstBlau

You don't have to have ads on your youtube site. This is what happens when people go with the path of least resistance and don't host things themselves or at least utilize someone elses video player while they host the video.

I don't have sympathy here because these people are playing on Googles platform. Google is trying to navigate these waters with as much automation as it can. Unfortunately it can't do a good job of it just because there is an absurd amount of content given to them every second.

If you're livelihood is based around someone who does the corralling, you can't get upset they weren't perfect. You should've been aware of this from the get go seeing as you are not the one in control.

⬐ tweetle_beetle

> They have to make money somehow.

- multiple ads on the video itself

- multiple links to their merchandise in the description

- link promoting a paid YouTube membership in the description (which links to a sponsored video with a referral link to an unrelated financial product)

- 26 referral links in the description

- referral link to a completely unrelated mobile game in the description

- referral link to a completely unrelated mobile game as a pinned comment

- promotion of Patreon in the video itself

It's a bit disingenuous to suggest that without early content access they have no way of monetising their content.

⬐ slimginz

Not quite the same since it's a much larger team but Linus Tech Tips actually just released a video[1] on how they make money and it shows that diversifying your revenue stream as much as possible is key to be successful on YouTube.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zt57TWkTF4

⬐ coddle-hark

Or you could just sign up for the Patreon and get their videos without all that. I don’t see how giving people the option to pay for stuff is a bad thing?

⬐ baron_harkonnen

Oh you want to get a base salary as well?

- already have RSUs

- annual bonus

- health care benefits

- paid vision

- paid time off

- snacks in office

It's a bit disingenuous to suggest that without a base salary software engineers have no way of monetising their skills.

⬐ ada1981

But who cares if they do use early access content as a way to pay the bills?

You seem like you expect people to work for you for free to create content to entertain you?

⬐ devthrowawy

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. They should willingly be making less money?

⬐ NikolaeVarius

Give them money to bypass it

⬐ tweetle_beetle

It seems I've missed the window to edit my comment, so to address all the negative sibling comments: I am not moralising - I don't care what they do.

Grandparent complained the good content is paywalled. Parent suggested that's because they can't monetise any other way. I provided examples of how they are monetising already.

⬐ gurustave

They're also a LOT higher budget than the vast majority of other YouTube channels, necessitating all the additional funding streams. I don't know what the final cost for that Protosaber was, but including all the R&D and Man Hours along with the materials, I'm sure its pretty crazy.

⬐ baron_harkonnen

I find it so bizarre that high paid software developers can't imagine the idea of paying for something they want to see.

The vast majority of people doing creative work that you enjoy largely for free are making barely enough to survive off of it, or doing it as a "labor of love".

For years people said "oh if only there was some way to pay the content creators directly!" now with Patreon there is.

Most software engineers have no problem dropping $20 on a four pack of nice beer, but can't be bothered to pay $5 to watch more of a video they already spend 20 min watching for free? With the added bonus that you are supporting the creation of more content you like?

It's not a big deal if you don't want to buy the product, but to complain that it's something you have to buy is absurd.

⬐ effingwewt

If the video had stated the fun stuff was in another video I'd have been fine watching ads for what I'd intended to see. 18 mins with ads even as part of the video makes this pure clickbait.

⬐ abstractbarista

Basically I inherently value non-copyable things more than easily-copyable. This means I'm fine paying $10 for a 6-pack of Miller High Life at the gas station, but will still torrent The Office even if I could pay $5/mo to stream it for the next year.

It just is what it is honestly. You're never going to change this mindset. I'm sure there are many ways you could list that it is detrimental to society, people, etc. And I'd be inclined to agree! But I just don't care, and many others don't either.

⬐ adanto6840

As an indie game developer, this kind of saddens me. I'll give you the benefit out the doubt, I'm guessing you make some kind of distinction as far as "SaaS" vs "bigCorp" vs "indie" -- but I still don't think it's the right perspective. I guess at EoD I'd encourage you/everyone to consider the content makers and support the ones that make content you enjoy, big and small alike.

⬐ est

Dat jlcpcb print speed...

⬐ user5994461

It's a blow torch... with a ton of video effects added on the flame to make it look like a light. More shocking than this is the 10 horrific ads scattered all though the video, the video itself just being an ad to pay them to see more private videos.

I suppose there's a lesson in marketing there. That's how you raise money and viewers like theranos without having a real product.

⬐ elif

No. it's not a cutting torch. It is a glass-blowing torch, as he said in the video.

There are not video effects added.

⬐ lostgame

They are not using any serious video effects on this.

They've also created something very cool. This is certainly a real product. It's a little misleading in the sense that it needs to be connected to something. Which honestly makes sense.

But if this isn't 'cool hacker nerd' stuff I don't know what is. Stuff like this is the reason I love HN. :)

⬐ whoomp12342

Its not just that, its the idea of building something that so many people want to be true...

⬐ trhway

yep, lets wait until somebody fits a 100KW IR laser into a saber handle.

⬐ packetslave

You don't have to pay to see the "private" videos. You just have to wait a week until they release them to the public. Early access on Patreon is a very common monetization strategy right now.

Also, I hardly think the ads are "shocking" or "horrific"... maybe dial down the hyperbole a bit?

⬐ user5994461

I wish it were hyperbole but it is truly horrifying to me. However we can certainly agree that the advertising is well done and integrated if that's what you mean.

The video is crafted specifically to embed an obnoxious ad every 1-2 minutes. The "content" is largely filling and setup for the next ad placement to come.

I've never seen anything like that before. I've seen youtube videos where the youtuber was paid to promote a product in a strange way, they did it once somewhere and that's it, it wasn't spread through the entire video with the video only existing to deliver ads.

⬐ korse

Run ad blockers and skip the single 'play this game' pitch. It isn't hard.

⬐ 10-1-100

Sad but not surprised about the negativity from some comments here.

So many complaints about monetization and pointing out how it's not a perfect just-like-the-movies lightsaber.

I enjoyed the video and thought it was awesome. With just a pinch of imagination I really was amazed at how close this is to my childhood fantasies.

Why would I expect content creators to work for free? And frankly I just can't believe the comments which come across as offended that it is a gas torch and not some magical new technology that has all the properties of movie lightsabers.

Then again, putting down others to make yourself feel better is a tale as old as time.

Hacker news - come here to find out all the reasons why you should be unimpressed by cool things.

⬐ Balgair

This build is just another stepping stone in a long process. Their older videos on other lightsaber prototypes are here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUdLlGLSQHQ&list=PLbncXbXlaN...

They aren't shy about their process of iteration at all. And that is a great thing that I think a lot of HN could appreciate. Especially in hardware, things take their own time.[0]

More power to Hacksmith (pun intended). I think they stuff they are putting out is amazing considering the budgets, time, and manpower issues. They somehow are managing to fund, off YouTube and ads, the crazy ideas you'd get from too many beers with too many Lockheed R&D researchers. That's impressive on it's own. These guys are embodying the old MIT 'hacker' ethos very well.

[0] Good Lord, I wish they would spend more time on the safety part of the builds. The lasers they get from StryoPyro will blind them sooner than later. I remember being caviler about lasers. But then I lost some vision, and now I'm not.

⬐ abfan1127

I thought it was really impressive how they created it. So, at least the both of us enjoyed it. :)

⬐ 10-1-100

Cool - I'm glad someone else here did :)

⬐ agumonkey

well the name, it's a gas saber :)

⬐ user5994461

The video would get more credit if it showed the "light saber" some more (rather than pushing to pay to get more footage) and if it weren't filled with ads.

It's a great idea to use a blow torch and all that. I want to see it. It's just sad the video is more about getting eyeballs and monetization than showing anything.

⬐ Aunche

This video was just showing the build. They said that they'll share the lightsaber in action on Youtube next week.

⬐ ethbr0

You reply to the parent with exactly the sort of opinion they despair of?

Hacksmith is transparent this is how they fund builds.

I realize we've become entitled to expecting people to work for free for our entertainment, but expertise, shop equipment, parts, and build time are not free.

⬐ user5994461

>>> I realize we've become entitled to expecting people to work for free...

Do you realize that they made around $30k from youtube alone for this single video?

⬐ ethbr0

$30k income

$2k laminar flow gas nozzle (believe that was mentioned in the video)

~$1k misc parts? (including prototypes and testing)

So that's ~$27k for labor and shop depreciation (machinery and building)

So ~$25k left.

Let's say it took 4 people 1 week (40 hours) to build. 160 person-hours total.

$25,000 / 160 = $156 / hr

For feast-or-famine creative work, that doesn't seem unreasonable.

⬐ pugworthy

No they are not free. But there are other ways to approach monetization. There is a style to some videos that some of just just find annoying and a real turnoff. Literally.

⬐ WrtCdEvrydy

> There is a style to some videos that some of just just find annoying and a real turnoff. Literally.

Maybe because we reward this style with views, engagement and ultimately money.

⬐ djfkgljd

>...a real turnoff. Literally.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

⬐ ipython

What are the other, more “high brow” ways, to approach monetization?

⬐ brg

By way of example, NileRed and AppliedScience take extremely different approaches to both presentation and acknowledging sponsorship.

⬐ ballenf

Here are 5 YT channels covering technology, engineering and tools that feel much less monetization-focused, but still produce very informative content:

- Tech Ingredients

- DIY Perks

- Brainiac75

- Project Farm (not really about farming -- cut & dry tools & such review)

- AvE (Arduino vs. evil) (not really about arduino)

(sibling comment included a couple others that I would have included here also)

The first two focus on engineering and building unique things, so are probably the most similar to the creators in question. AvE is all over the map and an either love or hate kind of channel -- and the channel seems more about educating, teaching and evaluating others' engineering.

⬐ pugworthy

Go watch some of the videos from “Primitive Technology” or “My Mechanics” or "Silently Cooking".

No talking, no music, goofy thumbnail pics with emoji faces or red circles. Just creating.

The content may not be your cup of tea but personally I as well as others seem to enjoy them.

⬐ pugworthy

Not the same style but Marques Brownlee is hugely successful while creating useful, entertaining, and valuable content.