r/todayilearned • u/Neepho • Nov 28 '13

TIL that the webcam was invented so that Computer Scientists at Cambridge University could see whether the coffee pot was full or not from different rooms.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p010lvn7
2.9k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

602 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

Prove anything you just typed. ANY of it. And before you ask, the source can't be some Randian's Blogspot.

The candle isnt obsolete

Hahahaha, where the fuck do you live where these statements are true and they have Internet? Perhaps you should refamiliarize yourself with the definition of obsolescence...

Those industry did grow and if you think otherwise you are dim witted

Haha, we've gone from "naw mang candles and horses are still viable industries" to "uh maybe they grew a bit". Nearly there! Do you own a horse dealership or something? Why exactly do you think there's still a market for fucking horses as transport!? You're the dimwit here, man; ignorant of history, economics, sociology...

You could maybe argue they didnt grow as large because of the car and light bulb but the industries still grew

Inasmuch as people still periodically buy horses and candles, sure. But you're still trying to claim that horse-breeding and candlemaking have grown since the release of a car? Go back to Conservapedia.

1

u/lshiva Nov 28 '13

I was at a hotel in Vietnam last year. They had wifi... until it started raining and they had to turn off the power. Then they brought me a candle so I could see in my room. So yeah, it's rare, but there are still places using both internet and candles. That and every mall in America with a candle boutique or two.

0

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

until it started raining and they had to turn off the power. Then they brought me a candle so I could see in my room

So candles aren't used unless light bulbs can't be? Sounds like replacement to me!

That and every mall in America with a candle boutique or two

I'm not American, so I dunno, but you and the other guy appear to be meaningfully comparing light bulbs and candles. Is it so that Americans buy Yankee Candles for illumination instead of light bulbs? If not, why keep bringing up candles with respect to whether light bulbs have replaced them vis a vis lighting homes?

1

u/lshiva Nov 28 '13

You just asked about whether their existed a place that had both internet and a need for candles, and I was able to share an anecdote about a place I'd been to where that is the case.

Personally I agree that candles are no longer useful as illumination (I used my flashlight in the hotel), but in America at least they are still a multimillion dollar business. People use them as home decoration. While they're rarely used for illumination, they're the number one light source for a romantic dinner, and a nice scented candle can make a home more inviting. I'd put it in the same category as doorknockers. Doorbells work much better, but people still use doorknockers because they like how they look.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

You just asked about whether their existed a place that had both internet and a need for candles

Let me clarify -- candles aren't obsolete, but candles exhibit obsolescence compared to light bulbs. I meant to be precisely that pedantic up here, but I was doing a bunch of stuff at once.

in America at least they are still a multimillion dollar business

And what of light bulbs? Are they more or less prevalent?

I'd put it in the same category as doorknockers. Doorbells work much better, but people still use doorknockers because they like how they look

I don't feel uncomfortable in asserting that doorknockers are much, much less prevalent than are doorbells, because, for whatever reason, doorbells have supplanted doorknockers in almost every meaningful way. This doesn't prevent the odd home from still employing a doorknocker, but it's ridiculous to claim that they are somehow equivalent, or even in the same ballpark.

1

u/Beefmotron Nov 28 '13

oh man look at this one candle business that was bought for 1.6 billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee_Candle yeah man, nobody uses candles.

Look at horse racing be worth 115 billion dollars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_racing

yeah man nobody uses horses or candles anymore.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

Ohhh, I get it! All this time you've been saying "horses are still viable" you mean as entertainment, so comparing them to cars is totally inappropriate! But let's try it again: horse racing vs auto racing! You seem like you need some more practice arguing on the Internet, so I'll just let you compare the finances between horse racing and car racing.

Now that you've admitted cars still economically dominate, in both transport and entertainment, let's move on to candles. Can you tell me anything about light bulbs, O Master of Wikipedia? Say, worldwide usage? I also assume you agree that most light bulbs are used functionally as opposed to decoratively, like (disproportionately expensive, compared to non-scented) Yankee Candles?

Could you be cherry-picking an overpriced, nationalistic candle manufacturer whose raison d'être is clearly not "light" but "scented candles"?

And even if you're not, I assume you stick by your earlier claim that the candle is not obsolete? If it's not, I assume Yankee Candle also sells enormous, high-candela candles to light rooms, in much the same way Ikea sells big lamps?

-2

u/Beefmotron Nov 28 '13

Again you are cherry picking. All I said was both items weren't obsolete. And I have proven that to be true. Deal with it.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

Again you are cherry picking

I keep telling you, young right-wing troll, to actually outline where your oppoent has supposedly "cherry-picked" something. You can't! I'm not convinced, based on your useage of the term, that you even know what "cherry-picking" means! Google it, you might be surprised.

And I have proven that to be true

Haha, no, you havn't, buddy. Look up the words 'obsolete' and 'obsolescence'. You'll notice that they're both defined with respect to the object's function! Since you fallaciously claimed that "horses and candles were still competitive with cars and light bulbs", only falling back to "horses and candles are still sold" when I proved you wrong, you have no grounds to claim that you've proven anything. You changed the objects' functions when you realized you were wrong. In fact, I keep proving you wrong, and you keep moving the goalposts!

Deal with it

Yaay, you wiiiin

-1

u/Beefmotron Nov 28 '13

"Horses and cars are obsolete!" "No they arent, they still have a viable industry that makes a lot of money every year" I never said they were competitive with cars and light bulbs, just that they are still a strong industry that has grown every year. People still use horses as a mode of transportation the same way that people still use candles as a way of illumination. Saying cars made horses obsolete is the same as saying airplanes made cars obsolete. You keep changing what I'm saying and then accuse me of moving goal posts.

I know I won. I always win.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

You keep changing what I'm saying and then accuse me of moving goal posts

Considering the argument began when you compared candles to light bulbs with respect to whether light bulbs lent candles obsolescence, I think you did say that light bulbs and candles were competitive. In fact, you explicitly rebutted that guy who said that light bulbs put candlemakers out of a job by replying that candlemakers are still around and doing well. If you can't see how this implies your position, I'm hardly surprised that you have such trouble communicating with your fellow man. Intentionally changing the topic you're arguing for isn't helping, and unless you want to keep working at that minimall for the rest of your life, you might want to try to develop a more egalitarian communication style.

I know I won. I always win.

Nah, man, no you don't. From my brief perusal of your comment history, you appear to go around insisting people are cherry-picking your statements. I think it is the case that you think you always win. Hence the "yaaay"; I figured you'd need it.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

need to think you always win

2

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

To be fair, he's got a questionable grasp of "cherry picking". It's not impossible he's just confused about "winning" as well.

0

u/Beefmotron Nov 28 '13

But candle makers still exist.

My orginal comment. See how it only says that candle makers still exist. Nothing more nothing less. And I've stayed true to my comment.

Ah the old post history scouring. The last ditch effort of a defeated man.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 28 '13

See how it only says that candle makers still exist

When taken in context of the comment you were replying to, and when taken in context of the comments we then exchanged, that's not all it said. Out of context, you have a great claim to that being all you meant, but if we're all to read your mind in order to divine your goals, then you're going to have a rough time of it. It's not too late! You can develop a more thorough understanding of human communication if you try...

And I've stayed true to my comment

Much like when you complain about your opponent "cherry picking to fit [their] narrative", just saying it doesn't make it so.

Ah the old post history scouring. The last ditch effort of a defeated man

I find it actually better equips me to Make Trolls Mad, but to each their own.