World's First Artificial Gills Re-breather

[John A Lewis]

Strangely, Business Insider put out an article at almost the same time today as mine, making the same points and even using much the same background material. Who knew great minds thought so much alike?

People have spent more than $600K on electronic 'gills' that experts say are science fiction

 

[CapNemo]

Even without the molecular requirements for oxygen, how does this device propose on extracting the average 15 litres per min SAC rate of actual gas to fill the lungs and allow respiratory diffusion? This is why I think air tank systems will always be needed for extended underwater breathing.

 

[fiduce]

Rebreathers (with external lungs, gaz analysis and on the fly mix balancing) could use some water gas extraction/compression to avoid gaz tanks. But first we need to master cold fusion and than to put it in a rucksack. 50 years later, someone could honestly reboot this campaign.

 

[tech_diver]

John L., you and Business Insider both beat me to the punch. When I saw that the money had gone from $300,000 to over $600,000, I was moved to plan a freelance article about this big joke. But, it looks like the word is already out.

For me this whole thing brings up questions about the crowdfunding system. If I can come up with some sci-fi idea that sounds exciting, then I can raise hundreds of thousands of dollars and live the life of a wealthy CEO. After a couple of years with no results, I tell my investors that the project is behind budget, encountering insurmountable challenges and will be shut down. At that point, my house, boat and car will be completely paid off.

I can almost rationalize the scam. If someone is going to invest thousands of dollars on the internet to fund a new hybrid of magic bean, they need to do their research. Investing is risk and if you invest large amounts of money in a unicorn breeding ranch with out doing your due diligence, you will lose just as you might in any unresearched investment.

 

[fiduce]

You need information before you invest.
Crowdfunding platforms should not let the campaign publishers moderate the comments their way.
They should justify each delete and the comment section should be viewed by every backer before he throws his money.
Non-backers should also be able to comment in some way.

 

[CuzzA]

Great points and I'll add that these crowd funding sites make it appear like it's a business to consumer relationship, like eBay but you get the new product first when it comes out, when in fact the "consumer" is actually an investor with very little upside reward other than maybe you get the product at a small discount and a sticker or acknowledgment on a website. Good investors know how to weigh risk and realize any investment may be lost, there are bad investments out there and to choose wisely, do your research, and expect that you'll win some and lose some, but the goal is to never lose.

All of these people are going to lose.

 

[tursiops]

All of these people are going to lose.

Almost correct, just the tense is wrong.
All of these people have already lost.

 

[peterbucknell]

Pete Bucknell: Triton Underwater Rebreather Scam

 

[peterbucknell]

Pete Bucknell: Triton Underwater Rebreather Scam

 

[CuzzA]

Almost correct, just the tense is wrong.
All of these people have already lost.

Somewhat true. I believe you have 10 days to cancel and get a refund per Indiegogo's TOS. Hopefully some of these people will find this thread and the growing number of articles being written and published online.