EEVblog Electronics Community Forum

Electronics => Crowd Funded Projects => Topic started by: EEVblog on April 30, 2013, 08:11:09 pm

Title: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on April 30, 2013, 08:11:09 pm
As the title says, a list of dodgy sounding hardware crowd sourced projects on Kickstarter, Indigogo, Pozzible etc.
To make the list a project must have no real hardware to show (so essentially just promises and fancy marketing), or generally claims that don't seem to add up.
You can also list projects that have ultimately failed to deliver.
A project could also have gotten close to it's estimated shipping date with no hardware or evidence presented that it actually exists and will be delivered.
If you have one to add, email me dave@eevblog.com and I'll update this first post.

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mu-thermal-camera-a-great-tool-to-save-on-energy-costs (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mu-thermal-camera-a-great-tool-to-save-on-energy-costs)
(No evidence of any real hardware, even with many backers demanding they show something)

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/meterplug-lower-your-electricbill-measure-real-electric-cost (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/meterplug-lower-your-electricbill-measure-real-electric-cost)
(days away from the delivery date, only one photo of pre-production units, no updates)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Towger on April 30, 2013, 08:29:13 pm
Umm... Photoshop and why are the BS 1363s upside down in all the pictures?

(http://meterplug.com/images/prototypes1.jpg)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on April 30, 2013, 09:53:10 pm
I can't believe there is space for a relay or SSR in the UK one capable of switching 13 amps.
I also suspect the pin to edge distance is inadequate.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on April 30, 2013, 09:57:51 pm
I can't believe there is space for a relay or SSR in the UK one capable of switching 13 amps.
I also suspect the pin to edge distance is inadequate.

I suspect the same. One of the resons why it's on the list  ;D
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ivan747 on May 01, 2013, 04:37:24 am
Absolute bullshit detected right here:


"If you leave your Xbox 360 or Playstation 3 on, it continues to consume roughly 170 watts of power 24/7"

Tell me how would that pass any sort of Energy Star certifications or even run on its fan when on standby.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bored@Work on May 01, 2013, 05:15:22 am
Absolute bullshit detected right here:


"If you leave your Xbox 360 or Playstation 3 on, it continues to consume roughly 170 watts of power 24/7"

Tell me how would that pass any sort of Energy Star certifications or even run on its fan when on standby.

PS3: 0.5 W to 1 W in standby according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_hardware#Form_and_power_consumption (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_hardware#Form_and_power_consumption) However, I won't trust the figures completely. Whoever wrote the table didn't even know that it is always Watt, never Watts, even when it is about more than one Watt.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: darko31 on May 01, 2013, 07:39:16 am
Hm, at the 2:18 of the video you can see the circuit and the relay itself. It seems some kind of low profile relay, the smallest one I managed to find at my store is 15,8mm

http://www.omron.com/ecb/products/pdf/en-g5rl.pdf (http://www.omron.com/ecb/products/pdf/en-g5rl.pdf)

which fits with video, and they can handle up to 16A, so that could be plausible. Also at 2:18 you can see the placement of circuit, and probably not in the UK plug casing, and it's blurred.

And there seems to be one more PCB with blue solder mask, what's that?

The numbers are pretty much off, 250$ a year for PS3 or XBox when they are turned on? In standby mode they won't draw that much power, not even in parallel universe. Or they calculated that by the maximum power draw of the consoles?  They probably aim at the market of hard core gamers who play 24/7 and want to see how much power they are consuming while gaming. That got to be it.

Now, how they handled isolation from and creepage distance in that small casing? That seems dodgy.


BTW A little joke about the receptacles, the US receptacles seem frightened by the ghostly face of the UK receptacles.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on May 01, 2013, 07:58:14 am
BTW A little joke about the receptacles, the US receptacles seem frightened by the ghostly face of the UK receptacles.

It is rather ghostly, isn't it?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: tron9000 on May 01, 2013, 10:13:56 pm
EU directive states that for a device to be in stand-by it must only draw 0.5W (I would quote numbers on pages here, but I know its this as I'm working on some kit that must conform to this).

There may be devices prior to this directive being implemented that may draw more than 0.5W, but they'd be junked by now! but if your device is drawing more than the 0.5W in standby, then your buying your kit from a dodgy source and would expect nothing less!

so the "vampire detect mode" or whatever bullshit its being flogged as is as much use as a chocolate fire guard, here in the UK and europe!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: metalphreak on May 01, 2013, 10:40:18 pm
"If you leave your Xbox 360 or Playstation 3 on, it continues to consume roughly 170 watts of power 24/7"

It says ON not IN STANDBY. It's still deceptive wording though. Who leaves their console on 24/7? Both of them have auto shutdown timers enabled by default.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jucole on May 02, 2013, 11:04:30 pm
Doesn't look like a Photoshop job.   I thought all UK adapters etc had to be "shuttered" to stop kids poking things in them;  not sure these look shuttered to me.  They promise a lot of spec for such a small space; bet they wished they hadn't gone for the apple charger size format now ;-)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Towger on May 02, 2013, 11:19:00 pm
There is an update on the site today, saying they are sending them to UL for testing, for a 3rd time.  There is no need for the UK version to be so small, there is about 1cm of space between the Live/Neutral pins and the sides on a standard plug.  That's one of the reasons the photos look computer generated, they would look strange with a much wider plug plugged into them
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: david77 on May 02, 2013, 11:27:44 pm
The Schuko socket on these things looks dodgy to me. Looks like it's maybe halve as deep as a proper socket.
I have my doubts this would be legal as it seriously diminishes the contact area of the PE clips. A little wiggle and your class 1 appliance becomes a death trap.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: DenzilPenberthy on May 03, 2013, 12:51:43 am
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mayan-quantum-energy-pyramid-in-the-usa (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mayan-quantum-energy-pyramid-in-the-usa)

 :-DD   :palm:  :scared:

Their cost breakdown doesn't specify how much they plan to spend on catering so I think this sounds a bit dodgy!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: DenzilPenberthy on May 03, 2013, 12:57:20 am
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/energy-multiplier-cleaner-efficient-energy-production?c=home (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/energy-multiplier-cleaner-efficient-energy-production?c=home)

 |O

Check out all the cool stuff you get if you donate $10,000!

"Receive a paper certificate stating your level of contribution with your name and personally signed by the inventor. Also receive exclusive updates via indiegogo.com on the progress of development. Get exclusive access to our VIP Platinum Members area of our website. See website for details. ** This is redeemable through direct purchase of products offered only through our members area **"

... A piece of paper with the guy's name written on it! Wow!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: tom66 on May 05, 2013, 09:28:24 am
Umm. Wow. I just bought an energy consumption meter for £6 on eBay, but even "rip-off Maplin" sell them for around £10~£15.
Granted, it's not wifi, but it does everything you need it to do. Volts, Amps, Watts, PF, VA, Cost, kWh.

So, power consumption of some household appliances:

Panasonic 46" 1080p plasma TV. Standby: 0W (min 1W measure). Operational with no signal 130W. Average TV around 350W, peak 635W with random black/white noise pattern. (Power limiter kicks in after 20 seconds and drops power consumption to 550W max.)

Samsung 40" 1080p LCD TV. Standby: 0W. Operational: 180W.

Yamaha RX-V450 amplifier. Standby: 0W. Operational (no audio): 40W. Operational with average TV program audio 44W.

Desktop PC. Standby: 8W. Operational: 180W idle, 200W under load.

Cheap LCD monitor (24"). Standby: 0W. Operational: 40W.

Laptop (Thinkpad X201): Standby with charged battery: 0W. Operational with no battery: 13W.

PlayStation 3, 80GB early gen "fat". Standby: 0W. Operational: 145W**.

** This is probably where they get their "170W" figure from; while on the home screen (not playing a game) it does use a metric ton of power. However, it also makes quite a lot of noise. I doubt I'd leave this running.

As can be seen, almost everything, bar my desktop, uses less than one watt in standby. People fuss over standby power, but it really isn't a big deal. Watching my plasma TV for 2.4 seconds uses the same amount of power as it would in one hour being in standby (the service documentation rates it at 0.2W.)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MacAttak on May 05, 2013, 12:17:11 pm
"If you leave your Xbox 360 or Playstation 3 on, it continues to consume roughly 170 watts of power 24/7"

It says ON not IN STANDBY. It's still deceptive wording though. Who leaves their console on 24/7? Both of them have auto shutdown timers enabled by default.

My XBOX 360 consoles run for very large portions of every day. Not 24/7, but probably more like 12/7. I have a networked WMC system for DVR and inefficient older model XB360's running as "extenders" in 3 rooms of the house... I wouldn't be shocked to learn that they consume 170W in that mode, although I've not ever tested it.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 05, 2013, 04:58:31 pm
Oh .....For FOOKS sake!

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fusion-powered-car-part-2 (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fusion-powered-car-part-2)

COLD FUSION!
don't get me started!!!!!!


The Professor is IN!
2011 - The Failure of Rossi's Energy Catalyzer, Caught on Video PART 1/2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-8QdVwY98E#)

 :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rufus on May 06, 2013, 05:16:31 am
Quote
As can be seen, almost everything, bar my desktop, uses less than one watt in standby. People fuss over standby power, but it really isn't a big deal.

Not a big deal on its own, but there are billions of devices consuming standby power.

Is it worth spending $50 to save 1W of standby power? No. Is it worth spending $50,000,000,000 to save 1,000,000,000W of standby power? No.

Technical illiteracy of those determining energy policy is bad enough, arithmetic illiteracy is a double whammy.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Ferroto on May 06, 2013, 08:20:57 am
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/energy-multiplier-cleaner-efficient-energy-production?c=home (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/energy-multiplier-cleaner-efficient-energy-production?c=home)

 |O

Check out all the cool stuff you get if you donate $10,000!

"Receive a paper certificate stating your level of contribution with your name and personally signed by the inventor. Also receive exclusive updates via indiegogo.com on the progress of development. Get exclusive access to our VIP Platinum Members area of our website. See website for details. ** This is redeemable through direct purchase of products offered only through our members area **"

... A piece of paper with the guy's name written on it! Wow!

Yep believe it or not some people are that full of themselves.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: g7gij on May 06, 2013, 09:31:54 am
I've got one, its a the flying drone alarm, that's based on a raspy pi.
http://droneshield.org/ (http://droneshield.org/)

Its certainly one for the Alex Jones crowd.
Though it does kinda look legit, and supposed to be open source. 
Open hardware Alfoil hats any one?

cheers

James
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on May 06, 2013, 09:36:16 am
I've got one, its a the flying drone alarm, that's based on a raspy pi.
http://droneshield.org/ (http://droneshield.org/)

:-DD With the amount of ambient noise and the variation from one "drone" to the next, I don't think this thing's going to give a positive ID of the drone unless you stick it up the drone's ass. Is a three-inch warning enough?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: g7gij on May 06, 2013, 10:06:13 am
perhaps droneshield.org should go down the Acoustic mirror route http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_mirror (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_mirror) .

"Here at Giant Acoustic mirror.com We build the best 20 ton concrete  non steerable acoustic mirror  money can by. Forget all that radar nonsense
and be the envy of all your crack pot fellow Alex Jones followers, with this gorgeous  monstrosity in your back yard."


I should get into marketing .


cheers

James
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: flapjackboy on May 06, 2013, 06:40:04 pm
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/gyrokinetic-plasma-engine (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/gyrokinetic-plasma-engine)

This just screams of woo to me.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 06, 2013, 07:38:59 pm
Oh! for furks sake....not the Papp Engine again!!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Papp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_Papp)
(take an old scam....recycle it through Indiegogo.....My Dog how the munny rolls in :-DD

http://www.rgenergy.com/ (http://www.rgenergy.com/)

OMG!!!!!!!

"Why are we pursuing this research so aggressively?
Why are we helping for all the help we can get?
We had it all in our day, clean air and all the energy we could want!

What will we leave our grand-kids?
What will be our legacy?"


Fucked if I know....I'm a little teapot  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: flapjackboy on May 06, 2013, 08:03:16 pm
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/chargebite-a-social-charger (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/chargebite-a-social-charger)

Well, at least these guys have working prototypes. Can't see the concept catching on though.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rollatorwieltje on May 06, 2013, 08:12:44 pm
Tell me how would that pass any sort of Energy Star certifications or even run on its fan when on standby.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10470.pdf (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10470.pdf)

Even a fake gas powered alarm clock managed to get a certificate.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 06, 2013, 08:19:46 pm
Why not charge your Iphone with a Wanko-Charger tm. patent pending
Simply attach the alligator clips and hi-power niobium magnets to your plonker and apply vigorous hand motion.
Send munny now  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Winston on May 07, 2013, 04:26:48 am
Kickstarter is supposed to be a source for crowdfunding of new and, hopefully, innovative projects, not as a way for some individual to come up with the front money to make bulk purchases of already-existing Chinese hardware to sell at a profit to the ignorant:

Ultra-high capacity battery for mobile devices ($144,516 pledged of $25,000 goal)

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card)

This individual presented these battery packs of widely different styles (indicating different designers) which were undoubtedly already available from various Chinese manufacturers on alibaba.com as his own development at which point 2,461 clueless people who didn't know these sort of devices have been available for quite some time supported his "project."  All he actually was was nothing more than an eBay seller with people fronting the money to make his bulk purchases of already existing Chinese goods.  I mention this here in case he tries to pull something like this again.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 07, 2013, 07:47:32 am
He's got the money.
They're still waiting for their batteries.
Nice one dude  :-+

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: John_Edward on May 07, 2013, 08:06:18 am
Kickstarter is supposed to be a source for crowdfunding of new and, hopefully, innovative projects, not as a way for some individual to come up with the front money to make bulk purchases of already-existing Chinese hardware to sell at a profit to the ignorant:

Ultra-high capacity battery for mobile devices ($144,516 pledged of $25,000 goal)

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card)

This individual presented these battery packs of widely different styles (indicating different designers) which were undoubtedly already available from various Chinese manufacturers on alibaba.com as his own development at which point 2,461 clueless people who didn't know these sort of devices have been available for quite some time supported his "project."  All he actually was was nothing more than an eBay seller with people fronting the money to make his bulk purchases of already existing Chinese goods.  I mention this here in case he tries to pull something like this again.
Well, he does make up a fight though, as there is a long-ass post at the end of the FAQ where he claims to disprove the china-copy accusations.

TL;DR, he pretty much says that yes, the cases were designed by a Chinese company, but that they have 'our' one-of-a-kind charging circuit in them.
Best case scenario, if he is telling the truth?
He asked a Chinese manufacturer to make a USB charger with a circuit that he hired someone experienced to design just for him.
Not very kickstartery thing to be honest.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: cybergibbons on May 07, 2013, 05:41:31 pm
The incoherent designs of the three different products really does look suspicious to me.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: snoopy on May 07, 2013, 10:27:06 pm
Has anyone heard of these Lutec dudes ? They are still at it with their "free" energy contraption after 10 years. Somehow they still need to drive it from a power source and can't get it to run itself and provide that extra "free" energy at the same time. They obviously failed high school calculus which is what you need to calculate average power ;)

Like PT Barnham said there is a sucker born every minute ;)

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/10/121755_local-business-news.html (http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/10/121755_local-business-news.html)

Quote
Engineers unveil Lutec 1000 free energy machine

Daniel Bateman

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

© The Cairns Post

THE world may soon be able to buy one of the Far North's most controversial yet revolutionary inventions.

The Cairns creators of the Lutec 1000 free energy machine have resurfaced after six years of steering clear of the public spotlight, having been granted patents in at least 60 countries around the world, including the US, China and India.

Engineers John Christie and Lou Brits, who have endured intense criticism after they first unveiled their invention in The Cairns Post in 2001, are now preparing to construct a prototype of their revolutionary power device they hope to market within the next two years.

The dynamic duo said they felt somewhat vindicated they had been able to land patents for their device and have had the Lutec verified by an independent engineer.

"When we first kicked off, there was a huge fuss about it and people said we’d never get patents for it," Mr Christie said.

"They said it would never work, so we couldn’t get patents, so it’s a good thing to see now."

The generator works as an energy amplifier, generating up to 10 times the amount of electricity it consumes.

The Lutec draws its power from a bank of batteries, with the motor turning due to powerful permanent magnets at its core being attracted and then repulsed from steel cores of fixed coils.

It does not work via perpetual motion, rather it relies on natural magnetic forces and a pulsed electrical input.

The results of the generator were verified by independent engineers from SGS Australia following a test earlier this year, which confirmed the energy output from the generator was indeed greater than its input.

Mr Christie said he and Mr Brits were currently working on a production prototype to suit the domestic market, which they hoped to produce locally.

"If we go with our plan now, there is no reason why it couldn’t be available in Australia in two years," he said.

The engineers’ invention has drawn the ire of many people over the years, including the Australian Sceptics Society.

Mr Christie said it had been a roller-coaster ride since they debuted their invention, involving occasional death threats and rumours of their untimely demise.

"Last year I was apparently killed in a hotel in north  Perth somewhere, according to the internet," Mr Christie said. "I was really quite  surprised."


http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/10/28/lutecs-perpetual-mot.html (http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2008/10/28/lutecs-perpetual-mot.html)

http://pesn.com/2011/08/16/9501896_Update_on_Lutec_and_Evergreen_Enterprise_International/ (http://pesn.com/2011/08/16/9501896_Update_on_Lutec_and_Evergreen_Enterprise_International/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: TheEPROM9 on May 08, 2013, 12:14:40 am
The point is if you really want to save money on the electric bill, just switch off the socket at the wall (UK), anywhere else. Unplug the device, or build an adapter that allows you to switch it off, plenty of power switches in old appliances.

This is related but no the same, One thing that makes me laugh when ever I see it is products such as TVs being advertised with "power saving switches". Yes because TVs have not had power switches since they were invented, the funny thing is that people actually buy into this crap.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: free_electron on May 08, 2013, 01:47:14 am
TL;DR, he pretty much says that yes, the cases were designed by a Chinese company, but that they have 'our' one-of-a-kind charging circuit in them.
Best case scenario, if he is telling the truth?
He asked a Chinese manufacturer to make a USB charger with a circuit that he hired someone experienced to design just for him.
Not very kickstartery thing to be honest.
so what? this guy has an idea , went to a chinese manufacturer , specified i want these battery packs ( maH wise) i want to charge it through mini-usb , i want 4 leds and a button that show how much juice ie remainign and i want these colors.
chinese factory does engineering work , builds proto. dude looks at it , mods it a bit so it is more to his liking, contracts another company to make paper box , contracts desgn company to make logo.

there is nothing wrong with that. just because he didn't etch his own board , or knows nothing about electronics means this is a fake. he just sources various bits , has written a specification of what it needs to do and found a manufacturing partner.

his last post shows the chinese truck loaded with boxes coming this way.

its no different than the makerbot guys. their first version they simply bought an arduino and slapped on some bits of wood and two motors. they had no clue how to make a pcb. they simply sourced something. worse. they even 'found' their software. it's all slapped together bits from other people.. even today...

it' also no different from sony ... you buy a lcd tv from sony , take the shell off and what do you find ? samsung... all the way. sony specs it , desings the case and packaging and has samsung mass produce the . the 'design' is sony as far as the livery and logo. they didn't even specifiy one resistor in the whole thing. samsung produces that model for sony and sony only.

this is what a lot of OEM's do. they design 50 different products all variations on a theme and they publish a catalog. proespective buyers pick a model and pay for the rights to make it their own. that particular model is then 'tweaked' in dress colors and sold under the buyers name.

Haier , Taepo and Minhwa are a wellknown manufacturer of such things. they have a massive catalog of products. first come first pick and its yours's. nobody else will get that exact model.
almost any LCD tv you buy from off-name brands (coby, magnavox, memorex , westinghouse and others ) are made by taepo. they have over a thousand models. but model 734 is exclusively licences to coby and will get the coby logo on it. nobody else can use model 734.  these catalogues are updated every year or every 6 months.

So this batterypack dude did the same. he went through the catalogue, picked three models he likes ,specced blue lcd's ( all these models can be finetuned with options. the option mix is your exclusivity ), psecced batterygauge, specced the cables that need be in the box. then he picked a packaging supplier , signed contracts , plonked down money and off we go. he did the legwork.

condemning for him would be like blasting away at a car dealer becasue 'he doesn't build the cars.. he gets them for a manufacturer, marks em up and then peddles em to the masses.  same stuff.

i know one thing. when that aluminum one hits the store shelves, i'm getting one.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: maiakaat on May 08, 2013, 05:27:30 am
When trying to cut the electricity bill we tried turning off every device not being used by removing the plugs from the socket, and it made NO difference at all on the electric reading.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 08, 2013, 07:45:40 am
High capacity battery packs with usb are readily available from China and have been for several years.

http://tinyurl.com/d5tzaf5 (http://tinyurl.com/d5tzaf5)

What part of SCAM don't you understand? |O
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: free_electron on May 08, 2013, 08:30:46 am
High capacity battery packs with usb are readily available from China and have been for several years.

http://tinyurl.com/d5tzaf5 (http://tinyurl.com/d5tzaf5)

What part of SCAM don't you understand? |O

And just what part of 'i buy cheap battery packs in china, put em in nice packaging, throw in a few cables , take care of importing them in bulk to get price down ,  take all the work out of the process so you don't have to deal with shady sites and add a markup for this work' is part of a SCAM ?

Anything sold in western stores sails under the above flag...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 08, 2013, 08:39:07 am
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card)
Read the pitch
Read the comments and updates.

$150,000 raised and nothing delivered as yet.
Sharp business practice?
Scam?
 :-\
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on May 08, 2013, 08:55:25 am
Why the hell is an "ultra-high capacity battery for mobile devices" even worth backing for people?? The batteries are rechargeable! I've never had a phone that didn't last me almost all day at least. Get better phones...  ???
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on May 08, 2013, 09:41:55 am
Has anyone heard of these Lutec dudes ? They are still at it with their "free" energy contraption after 10 years. Somehow they still need to drive it from a power source and can't get it to run itself and provide that extra "free" energy at the same time. They obviously failed high school calculus which is what you need to calculate average power ;)
Like PT Barnham said there is a sucker born every minute ;)

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/10/121755_local-business-news.html (http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/10/121755_local-business-news.html)

So, it's two years done the track, can I buy one?  :-DD
These Lutec guys have been pushing this forever it seems.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: snoopy on May 08, 2013, 10:20:10 am
Has anyone heard of these Lutec dudes ? They are still at it with their "free" energy contraption after 10 years. Somehow they still need to drive it from a power source and can't get it to run itself and provide that extra "free" energy at the same time. They obviously failed high school calculus which is what you need to calculate average power ;)
Like PT Barnham said there is a sucker born every minute ;)

http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/10/121755_local-business-news.html (http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/08/10/121755_local-business-news.html)

So, it's two years done the track, can I buy one?  :-DD
These Lutec guys have been pushing this forever it seems.

They claim to have patents in 60 countries so it must work except they can't seem to demonstrate it powering itself which is the true test of any of these claims. Why do they keep wanting money for if they claim it works ? If something like this worked as they claimed, it would easily sell itself in much the same way as a battery that never went flat !! The BS meter is working over time with these dudes  :bullshit:

There's a whole webpage devoted to their crap. http://www.rexresearch.com/christie/christie.htm#challenge (http://www.rexresearch.com/christie/christie.htm#challenge)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Skimask on May 08, 2013, 11:18:31 am
When trying to cut the electricity bill we tried turning off every device not being used by removing the plugs from the socket, and it made NO difference at all on the electric reading.
Just maybe all of those devices you turned off and/or unplugged, had a negligible draw while idle or in standby mode...
And the last time I checked, most electric meters don't have a sub-unit resolution (e.g. won't indicate .1 or .01 kWh).
So, for example, let's unplug 20 devices, each of which draws 1 watt in idle/standby, all the time, 24/7...
1 W * 24 hours  * 31 Days = 744 WH = .744kWh.
In my area, that comes out to $.08USD.

Scale it up a bit...
50 devices, each drawing 5 watts in standby...
250 W * 24 H * 31 D = 186,000 WH = 186 kWh.  Again, @ $.11USD/kWh, comes out to about $20.46USD.

Can you really make a good call as to whether or not unplugging all those devices for a month can save you any money?
Is anybody's electrical usage bill that constant over time (and changing seasons) that they'll see a measurable, noticeable difference without some well thought out analysis and number gathering?
Me thinks not...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: free_electron on May 08, 2013, 11:36:01 am
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card)
Read the pitch
Read the comments and updates.

$150,000 raised and nothing delivered as yet.
Sharp business practice?
Scam?
 :-\

his timeline says delivery mid may. his last post from a few days ago shows a chinese truck full of cardboard boxes with his product on its way to the harbour ... so he's still on track.
as for the pitch . i understand from the pitch that it;s a box with a rechargeable battery in it that can be used as a powersource to recharge your phone. ideal as a mobile powerpack if you are going on a multiday hike where there are no poweroutlets around. you can recharge your gps , cellphone or whatever. ideal for devices with non-removable batteries as an extrnal mobile powerpack.

it's no more or less than that and he doesn;t make any claims beyond that either. it has a fancy charge status bargraph that tells you how full it is , comes in 3 capacities and the unit itself can be charged from a standard usb port allowing you to charge it from a desktop computer or a usb wall-wart.

i don't see what is wrong with this. it's in the same leage as that bearded dued trying to pitch his newest super shammy or silicone burger spatula or kaboom cleaner on tv.
he has a product idea. he will have em made according to his specs , cables thrown in as well as a carrying pouch , packaged , and will import them . he takes care of everything.
in order not to shell out a ton of money he basically takes pre-orders. anyone signing up through kickstarter basically buys one. he collects the orders and place the bulk order in china. once they arrive in us he sends them out to the end buyer. he pockets a markup for his work.

so again : where is the SCAM ? it's only a scam if you pocket the money and deliver nothing.

the fact that there are other power banks ( i vaguely remeber having seen something lableled 'power  bank' already . i believe energizer ) does not preclude this one.
after all there are already 500 other cleaners , burger spatulas made from non stick silicone, tomato slicers or super absorbent synthetic towels.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: metalphreak on May 08, 2013, 11:44:38 pm
How much of a percentage do indiegogo and kickstarter take from pledged payments?

What stops someone funding half of the required target themselves to make it appear as if there is big interest? They don't have much to lose since all the money will be going back to themselves anyway... I have seen a few where there are no pledges except one overly-enthusiastic individual who also posts comments.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: elgonzo on May 09, 2013, 12:09:54 am
How much of a percentage do indiegogo and kickstarter take from pledged payments?

Indigogo: http://www.indiegogo.com/how-pricing-works-on-indiegogo (http://www.indiegogo.com/how-pricing-works-on-indiegogo)
Kickstarter: http://www.kickstarter.com/start (http://www.kickstarter.com/start) (look for "What fees does Kickstarter charge?")

What stops someone funding half of the required target themselves to make it appear as if there is big interest? They don't have much to lose since all the money will be going back to themselves anyway... I have seen a few where there are no pledges except one overly-enthusiastic individual who also posts comments.

Nothing stops them. While potential con artists don't risk paying fees on Kickstarter if their con game doesn't play out, the involved fees are probably not much of an issue for a professional con. Their concerns are likely more about executing a convincing (faux) campaign than about the involved fees...

EDIT: And executing a Kickstarter campaign means to have a demonstratable(?) prototype, which creating can be a significant cost factor and requiring expertise the con artist doesn't have. So, although Kickstarter does not charge fees in case funding goals are not met, Kickstarter won't be easy-peasy for con artists -- in most cases it would presumably be more difficult than Indigogo...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on May 09, 2013, 12:11:12 am
he has a product idea. he will have em made according to his specs

His product idea was being sold on dealextreme 2 years ago, probably in same case with same electronics :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: GermanMarkus on May 11, 2013, 09:10:52 pm
What do you think about this one: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/retrievor-the-complete-gps-tracking-retrieving-solution (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/retrievor-the-complete-gps-tracking-retrieving-solution)? I think it´s a scam. They were always talking about the GPS module and there is no information at all how the GPS positioning signal will be transferred (online?) to any receiving device. So at least the GPS module has to be connected to any 3G transceiving device to transmit the actual positioning data to a mobile phone or central positioning station via SMS or other message service. They also claim "Using satelites orbiting the earth to keep track of your RETRIEVOR is an expensive business, which means there is a $5.95 monthly subscription fee for your first RETRIEVOR." Isn´t that complete bullshit? - for me it is! And all the comments seem to be erased.
For me also it seems that in indiegogo there are a lot more scams than in kickstarter. Anyway, my problem is that I´m living in Germany and it seems a lot more easy to me to set a project in indiegogo than in kickstarter, because in kickstarter I need some "friend" in the US or UK.

Best regards, Markus
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 11, 2013, 11:25:42 pm
Similar GPS trackers are available for purchase
http://www.dhgate.com/hot-sale-mini-personal-tracker-for-pet-kids/p-ff8080813d66b868013d6cdc125872a0.html#s1-2-1 (http://www.dhgate.com/hot-sale-mini-personal-tracker-for-pet-kids/p-ff8080813d66b868013d6cdc125872a0.html#s1-2-1)

The "artists impressions" of the proposed Retreivor make it look very desirable.
It's a whole lot smaller than the real world models that you can buy at Aldis or on Ebay.
Always a good trick that.... it sounds nice....people will WANT to believe in it.

But wait.... here's another one...  http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/trax-gps-tracker/trax-gps-tracker-for-children-and-pets (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/trax-gps-tracker/trax-gps-tracker-for-children-and-pets)

Sounds almost Too Good To Be True!

I wonder how the kickstarter campaign is going

"Amit Shivkumar 7 days ago
Hi All at the TRAX team.
Just wondering if there has been any updates. Less than a month for the deliveries to start !!!
Very keen to get my hands on these gadgets
."


The idiegogo version has had all the comments removed. The updates are enlightening though!

RETRIEVOR Development Team posted an announcement 9 days ago
AS already mentioned, we will re-launch a second campaign once this one has run it’s course. We feel that the campaign video and the project page design needs to be of a better standard for our follow on campaign, so we will be calling in help to sort this out for us.

As stated earlier, as a gesture of goodwill to those who have supported us from the beginning with this campaign, we will not be offering the $129 early bird perk on our follow on campaign. The early bird pricing will start at $149 ($30 less than our expected RRP)


What's that horrible ratty smell?
 :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: flapjackboy on May 12, 2013, 02:58:43 am
SUMPOD 3D printer. http://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/164862/campaigns (http://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/164862/campaigns)

This guy has 7 campaigns going concurrently, 4 of which are for the same product!

My bullshit meter is going off the scale with this one.  :bullshit:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 12, 2013, 08:02:55 am
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/aluminium-3d-printer--8?c=comments (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/aluminium-3d-printer--8?c=comments)
Richard Sum said 5 months ago
Hello,

Please could anyone who doesn’t have a shipping notification please send a phone number for the courier.

Thanks

SUMPOD


GOLLY, where did I hear that before?

http://amasci.com/weird/wsmot.html (http://amasci.com/weird/wsmot.html)

From: "Greg Watson" <gowatson asiaonlinenetau>
To: "Energy Vortex" <vortex-leskimocom>,
        "Energy FreeNrg" <freenrg-leskimocom>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 11:35:46 +1030
Subject: [FG]: SMOT Refunds

Hi All,

I need your help to rebuild my list of those who ordered & paid for SMOT
kits.  I lost my original files but do have bank records with dates &
amounts I paid in or came in via overseas funds transfers.

I intend to refund ALL the money whether you want it back or not but I
need you to send me (via the private email below) the date & amount you
sent me.  I can then put names to the dates.

I would prefer to do a direct bank to bank transfer but I can do US or
other currency bank cheques if you prefer.

Thanks for your help as I really do need to get your money back.

I do apologize for the delay but I just haven't been able to afford to do
the refunds until now.

========================
Good Health & Long Life,
 Greg Watson,
 

 :=\
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: snoopy on May 12, 2013, 10:37:21 am
Jeez how many 3D printers are they re-inventing and how many more can the market bear ?   |O

And this one takes the cake. A programmable torch. Are you fricken kidding me !!! :palm:

HexBright, an Open Source Light

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/527051507/hexbright-an-open-source-light?ref=category (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/527051507/hexbright-an-open-source-light?ref=category)

Quote
HexBright is a stylish, rugged, high-power compact light you can use as-is or reprogram however you want using open-source code.

Why do I need a programmable light? What can I do with that? I don't know yet. And that's the point. I want to release the HexBright Flex into the wild and let the community develop original source code. I want to see how brilliant (pun intended) people can be and supply an outlet (hexbright.com) where folks can swap and share ligthing code. I'm not fundraising just to make creative lights, I want to build online creativity.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on May 12, 2013, 10:45:01 am
And this one takes the cake. A programmable torch. Are you fricken kidding me !!! :palm:

No, the torch enthusiast market is HUGE. It will likely have a big ready market.
Visit the Candlepower forum sometime and see the passion the torch enthusiasts have.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: snoopy on May 12, 2013, 11:22:05 am
And this one takes the cake. A programmable torch. Are you fricken kidding me !!! :palm:

No, the torch enthusiast market is HUGE. It will likely have a big ready market.
Visit the Candlepower forum sometime and see the passion the torch enthusiasts have.

Torch enthusiasts !!  That's a new one to me. Now I have heard everything  :-DD

I was mucking around with torches in 1st grade in primary school. Looks like I went in the wrong direction when I gave up on torches :(

If I'd had of known this I would have left school early instead of getting an engineering degree ;)

There is hope for us engineers yet ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on May 12, 2013, 11:33:57 am
Torch enthusiasts !!  That's a new one to me. Now I have heard everything  :-DD

I was mucking around with torches in 1st grade in primary school. Looks like I went in the wrong direction when I gave up on torches :(

If I'd had of known this I would have left school early instead of getting an engineering degree ;)

There is hope for us engineers yet ;)

There are people with flashlight fetish.
http://youtu.be/bypi7h6WOGg?t=5m1s (http://youtu.be/bypi7h6WOGg?t=5m1s)

Hexbright took almost two full years, time you could spend using one of the $20 Dealextreme flashlights instead of waiting. On the other hand it appears to be a high quality product, and at the very least ships (I sure hope so :P) with genuine high bin CREE LED (unlike ebay/dealextreme/alliexpress ones).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on May 12, 2013, 11:35:23 am
There are people with flashlight fetish.
http://youtu.be/bypi7h6WOGg?t=5m1s (http://youtu.be/bypi7h6WOGg?t=5m1s)

Nonono, that's not a flashlight...  ::)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 12, 2013, 11:44:01 am
Round here you can get arrested for flashing  :)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052831/Liam-Warriner-moons-Queen-Australian-protester-charged-flashing-monarch.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2052831/Liam-Warriner-moons-Queen-Australian-protester-charged-flashing-monarch.html)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Keef Wivanef on May 14, 2013, 12:10:15 pm
Kickstarter is supposed to be a source for crowdfunding of new and, hopefully, innovative projects, not as a way for some individual to come up with the front money to make bulk purchases of already-existing Chinese hardware to sell at a profit to the ignorant:

Ultra-high capacity battery for mobile devices ($144,516 pledged of $25,000 goal)

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/560071831/ultra-high-capacity-battery-for-mobile-devices?ref=card)

This individual presented these battery packs of widely different styles (indicating different designers) which were undoubtedly already available from various Chinese manufacturers on alibaba.com as his own development at which point 2,461 clueless people who didn't know these sort of devices have been available for quite some time supported his "project."  All he actually was was nothing more than an eBay seller with people fronting the money to make his bulk purchases of already existing Chinese goods.  I mention this here in case he tries to pull something like this again.
Well, he does make up a fight though, as there is a long-ass post at the end of the FAQ where he claims to disprove the china-copy accusations.

TL;DR, he pretty much says that yes, the cases were designed by a Chinese company, but that they have 'our' one-of-a-kind charging circuit in them.
Best case scenario, if he is telling the truth?
He asked a Chinese manufacturer to make a USB charger with a circuit that he hired someone experienced to design just for him.
Not very kickstartery thing to be honest.


 amspire
Member

Posts: 2311
Country:
   

Aldi Traveller MPP-7400
« on: November 05, 2011, 05:31:31 PM »
Quote
Aldi have just released in Australia the Traveller MPP-7400 7400mAH battery pack for about $20.  It includes mains charger, 10 output adapters. I believe it is a limited time sale probably ending 9th to 11th Nov. There is I think a smaller unit that will be $12.99 from the 9th to the 15th.

Not a bad thing at all for the price.

http://www.traveler-service.de/popups/MPP_7400_au_popup/index.php (http://www.traveler-service.de/popups/MPP_7400_au_popup/index.php)

The thing is it has 5 charging LEDs on the front panel.  The instruction book says 4 LEDs means it is fully charged, but in practice no-one can get past 3 LEDs. So I had to take it apart, and photos will be coming. I can confirm that with 3 of the 5 LEDs lit, the battery is fully charged.

The main charger IC has had the most thorough milling job I have ever seen to erase the identity, so now I want to work out what it is.

More photos soon, but I am just giving some advanced notice in case anyone else is interested.

Richard

 mpp7400.jpg (84.55 kB, 916x805 - viewed 253 times.)

WTF?
These batteries were already available from Aldi but these gentlemen could still run their silly kickstarter campaign?

Aaaaaaarrrgh!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: JVR on May 18, 2013, 12:36:04 am
What do you think about this one: http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/retrievor-the-complete-gps-tracking-retrieving-solution (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/retrievor-the-complete-gps-tracking-retrieving-solution)? I think it´s a scam. They were always talking about the GPS module and there is no information at all how the GPS positioning signal will be transferred (online?) to any receiving device. So at least the GPS module has to be connected to any 3G transceiving device to transmit the actual positioning data to a mobile phone or central positioning station via SMS or other message service. They also claim "Using satelites orbiting the earth to keep track of your RETRIEVOR is an expensive business, which means there is a $5.95 monthly subscription fee for your first RETRIEVOR." Isn´t that complete bullshit? - for me it is! And all the comments seem to be erased.
For me also it seems that in indiegogo there are a lot more scams than in kickstarter. Anyway, my problem is that I´m living in Germany and it seems a lot more easy to me to set a project in indiegogo than in kickstarter, because in kickstarter I need some "friend" in the US or UK.

Best regards, Markus

Quite easy to do that, battery management is a slight issue though.   But the subscription is for the data costs on the simcard.  Unless of course it uses WiFi/BT/USB and only dumps the data when its back home.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: AlienRelics on May 23, 2013, 01:31:19 pm
How about a magnetic battery?

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-magnetic-battery (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-magnetic-battery)

Through the magic of IndieGoGo's "flexible funding", he gets to pocket all the money raised and not give anyone anything.

From the project page:

What the Magnetic Battery is:

Following in the footsteps of Tesla, Maxwell, Farraday & Crookes, I've used concepts from electrodynamics, chemistry, magnetism and physics to devise a modified electrodynamic generator that accepts Alternating Current (AC) electricity to be converted into an electromagnetic field. Circulating without resistance (heat) and stored in-phase, the magnetic flux acts as both a seal between the surrounding alloys (preventing damage to circuitry) and as a plentiful power source.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: snoopy on May 23, 2013, 08:20:00 pm
How about a magnetic battery?

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-magnetic-battery (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-magnetic-battery)

Through the magic of IndieGoGo's "flexible funding", he gets to pocket all the money raised and not give anyone anything.

From the project page:

What the Magnetic Battery is:

Following in the footsteps of Tesla, Maxwell, Farraday & Crookes, I've used concepts from electrodynamics, chemistry, magnetism and physics to devise a modified electrodynamic generator that accepts Alternating Current (AC) electricity to be converted into an electromagnetic field. Circulating without resistance (heat) and stored in-phase, the magnetic flux acts as both a seal between the surrounding alloys (preventing damage to circuitry) and as a plentiful power source.

they need to stop this kind of sh.t. It doesn't do much for the reputation of the website :(

At least kickstarter has the right idea of forcing people to come up with a working prototype and hopefully an un-doctored video to prove its credibility ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rougeaux on May 24, 2013, 12:46:54 am
Following in the footsteps of Tesla, Maxwell, Farraday & Crookes, I've used concepts from electrodynamics, chemistry, magnetism and physics to devise a modified electrodynamic generator that accepts Alternating Current (AC) electricity to be converted into an electromagnetic field. Circulating without resistance (heat) and stored in-phase, the magnetic flux acts as both a seal between the surrounding alloys (preventing damage to circuitry) and as a plentiful power source.

Suggested applications:  Detecting cloaked Romulan warbirds, powering time machines, triggering supernovae.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on May 24, 2013, 09:18:29 am
That SumPod 3D printer guy had at least 3 of his 7 campaigns fail to meet funding goals, yet still earned over $20,000 total as flexible funding.  Two of his campaigns ( for the same product no less ) exceeded funding goals by several thousand dollars and there doesn't seem to be any updates, or anyone complaining, for several months up to a year... what's up with that ?

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on May 25, 2013, 12:30:26 am
Quote
what's up with that ?

Could it be a fun way to do money laundering? I guess most funds would come via PayPal, and that would be tricky (not to mention tedious) to channel anonymous cash.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Hily on May 25, 2013, 05:08:49 am
Looks like these guys are just reselling an existing product?

Headphone With Touch Technology and Bluetooth
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/headphone-with-touch-technology-and-bluetooth?c=home (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/headphone-with-touch-technology-and-bluetooth?c=home)
http://www.hammacher.com/Product/83551?promo=search (http://www.hammacher.com/Product/83551?promo=search)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rougeaux on May 27, 2013, 09:08:52 am
Looks like these guys are just reselling an existing product?

Headphone With Touch Technology and Bluetooth
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/headphone-with-touch-technology-and-bluetooth?c=home (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/headphone-with-touch-technology-and-bluetooth?c=home)
http://www.hammacher.com/Product/83551?promo=search (http://www.hammacher.com/Product/83551?promo=search)

Wow, check out that impendance!

The real question is, if they're reselling the HS product, how will they be able to make ones in black, red or "limited edition platinum," or any combination thereof? (My money's on spray paint.)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: AlienRelics on June 05, 2013, 04:30:42 am
I see only $155 from two donors, both anonymous. Shills?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nathancrum on June 06, 2013, 06:49:34 am
This one is so obviously a fraud I don't understand how even indiegogo allowed it to post:
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-health-care--2 (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-health-care--2)

At least no one has put any money into it, but this guy obviously has nothing but a shell to try and dupe people into giving him money.

Additional links:
http://www.ezcourses.org/ (http://www.ezcourses.org/)

His over-the-top, psychotic response to some simple inquiries regarding his product & business plan is the most telling of all:
http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=2359356&type=member&item=244937141&commentID=141351408&report%2Esuccess=8ULbKyXO6NDvmoK7o030UNOYGZKrvdhBhypZ_w8EpQrrQI-BBjkmxwkEOwBjLE28YyDIxcyEO7_TA_giuRN#commentID_141351408 (http://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=2359356&type=member&item=244937141&commentID=141351408&report%2Esuccess=8ULbKyXO6NDvmoK7o030UNOYGZKrvdhBhypZ_w8EpQrrQI-BBjkmxwkEOwBjLE28YyDIxcyEO7_TA_giuRN#commentID_141351408)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MacAttak on June 06, 2013, 09:21:10 am
It seems to be a pretty good idea to just avoid IGG unless they take some steps to prevent scams. At least Kickstarter has some moderation in place. IGG just seems to not give a sh*t if their platform is a vector for criminal activity.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: CanadianAvenger on June 06, 2013, 02:01:22 pm
Agreed. IGG does not care, at least that is my perception based on my interactions with their "support" staff.  Basically report a shady project, and you'll get a form like letter response. Keep pressing, you get told they'll pass on your comments to their fraud department, and they would contact you IF they have more questions-- you never hear back again.

As an example: I reported a project that violated the first law of thermodynamics, and basically told them so... the response I got was the following [I didn't keep pressing on this one, as it obviously wasn't going anywhere]

"Indiegogo empowers campaign owners and contributors to raise money for, or support, the things that matter to them. Because Indiegogo is an equal opportunity platform, a wide variety of subject matter and opinions may be expressed through campaigns. Because we do not curate these campaigns, the views reflected by campaign owners are not necessarily those of Indiegogo."

I wasn't aware that the laws of thermodynamics were a matter of "opinion".

My take is that they think they can provide a platform, and by turning a blind eye they are free and clear. I'd like to see what happens when it inevitably ends up in court... that position didn't play well for Napster back in the day.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bored@Work on June 06, 2013, 03:20:29 pm
To summarize, Indiegogo is in on the fraud.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Corporate666 on June 06, 2013, 04:58:02 pm
To summarize, Indiegogo is in on the fraud.

No,

I think it's a much simpler explanation.  I also don't think IGG lets things slide because they only care about their cut.

I think, rather, that if IGG takes on a moderation role, then they take on liability in case things go wrong.  If their position is "we just provide the venue, it's up to you to do your due diligence on the project", and they apply that rule to all projects, then they are in the clear.  If they start exercising a level of oversight beyond the most basic items, then they are now in a role of subjectively critiquing and vetting each project for authenticity/legitimacy.  And when they get it wrong, people will want (all) their $$ back from IGG, despite the fact that IGG only has a small portion of that money.


They ought to follow Kickstarter's lead and require a real prototype. 

The main issue with all these sites is that there is zero qualification done on the ability of the project creator to actually get the job done.  Most projects are about getting sales, not about "raising funds", but KS plays dumb about that while they claim to be enacting rules to protect users, but that which do anything but.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nathancrum on June 07, 2013, 04:46:52 am
Speaking of law suits - someone here poked the hornets nest (not that I mind) and Joe apparently feels the need now to sue LinkedIn, the venture capital firm he posted in (DFM Ventures) and our own aussie "Village Idiot" as a result.   :palm:

http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=244937141&gid=2359356&commentID=142538721&trk=view_disc&ut=20YAiEKk8lz5M1 (http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=244937141&gid=2359356&commentID=142538721&trk=view_disc&ut=20YAiEKk8lz5M1)

What a turd.  Who the F does this guy think he is?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nathancrum on June 07, 2013, 05:57:56 am
This is probably distracting from the original thread topic, but it's entertaining as hell.  Whoever made Village Idiot and taunted this fruad - you have a brilliant sense of humor!   :clap:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/village-idiot/63/bab/9bb (http://www.linkedin.com/pub/village-idiot/63/bab/9bb)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Pentode on June 07, 2013, 11:48:35 am
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/scanadu-scout-the-first-medical-tricorder (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/scanadu-scout-the-first-medical-tricorder)

WHAT IS THE TECHNOLOGY BEHIND THE SCANADU SCOUT™, IS IT SAFE?

The device uses passive sensors (electrodes, visible and IR light sensors, accelerometers, thermistors, gyroscopes, microphones etc.) to acquire your vitals. The only energy being delivered to the body is in the form of low-power LED light pulses.  To acquire your data, just place the device on the forehead.

 :wtf:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on June 07, 2013, 11:53:34 am
To acquire your data, just place the device on the forehead.

HeadOn. Apply directly to the forehead. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeadOn)
HeadOn. Apply directly to the forehead.
HeadOn. Apply directly to the forehead.

Sorry. All I could think of.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Pentode on June 07, 2013, 12:04:23 pm
Three related products are currently produced by former manufacturer of HeadOn Miralus Healthcare:
ActivOn - described on the company's website as a topical analgesic for arthritis-like joint pains, in multiple formulations. Additionally, the product originally named FirstOn, a topical anti-itch product, is now called ActivOn Maximum Strength Anti-Itch.
PreferOn - A topical product containing Vitamin E, claimed to improve the appearance of scars.
RenewIn - A pill claimed to improve joint comfort, flexibility and mobility, in multiple formulations.
A homeopathic hemorrhoid cream, FREEdHem, was withdrawn from the market. Like HeadOn, FREEdHem featured repetition in its ads, which said "Freedom from hemorrhoids, FREEdHem hemorrhoid cream" or "FREEdHem, the only one-application hemorrhoidal cream" three times.

 :-+
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Pentode on June 11, 2013, 10:02:36 am
This one is creating quite a buzz  http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/minna-limon-couples-vibrator (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/minna-limon-couples-vibrator) :clap:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on June 11, 2013, 10:06:55 am
Quote
And Limon will arrive in discreet, unmarked packaging so you don't have to worry about ruining the surprise when it arrives.

That's a funny way to spell "so your mailman won't know what he's delivering"...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MacAttak on June 11, 2013, 12:35:13 pm
Is nobody else bothered by the fact they keep that thing in a bowl of lemons on the dining room table?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on June 11, 2013, 12:38:35 pm
Is nobody else bothered by the fact they keep that thing in a bowl of lemons on the dining room table?

It's all part of their halfhearted attempt to pretend it's not really for sex. The whole language of the thing says "I'm making this thing that I'm embarrassed of".
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Pentode on June 11, 2013, 02:31:29 pm
Is nobody else bothered by the fact they keep that thing in a bowl of lemons on the dining room table?

That's got to bring tears to your eyes  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on June 13, 2013, 05:06:49 pm
It's all part of their halfhearted attempt to pretend it's not really for sex. The whole language of the thing says "I'm making this thing that I'm embarrassed of".

Standard marketing fare for anything related to such "taboo" subjects. You'll see the same thing with condom ads, feminine hygiene products etc.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MacAttak on June 15, 2013, 07:31:33 am
This article is about a crowdfunding project that isn't technology related, but wow.

http://www.reddit.com/r/kickstarter/comments/1g9utn/likely_major_kickstarter_fraud_uncovered_kobe_red/ (http://www.reddit.com/r/kickstarter/comments/1g9utn/likely_major_kickstarter_fraud_uncovered_kobe_red/)

And to think, this one was stopped just in the nick of time. It would have sailed right on through on IGG, and if these guys hadn't really dug in and done the research it would have succeeded on KS too.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: orbiter on August 18, 2013, 08:20:49 pm
Quote
And Limon will arrive in discreet, unmarked packaging so you don't have to worry about ruining the surprise when it arrives.

That's a funny way to spell "so your mailman won't know what he's delivering"...

He will if the thing has managed to *turn itself on* in the post :D
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: SeanB on August 18, 2013, 09:25:38 pm
If it is vibrating then the post office will blow up the bag containing it when it is detected. Had the bomb squad blow up the bag of cement mix the plumber left outside my door one day while he went around the corner to park. Hear the bang, open the door and look out to see the whole lot of them behind the APC looking back. I asked them to replace the bag but they declined. They were a little paranoid about security with the summit at the convention centre, even going to the point of welding shut the manhole covers ( you really cannot weld cast iron, it just goes brittle there and cracks) and painting marks on the concrete covers. Real Kabuki theatre.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Hypernova on August 20, 2013, 01:32:13 pm
If it is vibrating then the post office will blow up the bag containing it when it is detected. Had the bomb squad blow up the bag of cement mix the plumber left outside my door one day while he went around the corner to park. Hear the bang, open the door and look out to see the whole lot of them behind the APC looking back. I asked them to replace the bag but they declined. They were a little paranoid about security with the summit at the convention centre, even going to the point of welding shut the manhole covers ( you really cannot weld cast iron, it just goes brittle there and cracks) and painting marks on the concrete covers. Real Kabuki theatre.

That's crazy, how long did it take him to find parking? It sounds as if they set up shop across the street eying your front yard like a hawk the whole time and went bananas the moment the plumber showed up.

And condolences to your door, must have been a bitch sweeping up cement everywhere.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: SeanB on August 22, 2013, 03:35:19 am
About 15 minutes to hoof it back, the SWat were alittle paranoid as the G8 was in town for a convention. Even had the one cop shoot a bus that tried to drive through the closed road right in front of my door one Friday, made him a cup of tea afterwards to help with the stress of being shouted at all week. Happened as I was on the phone to the control room asking them to send him extra reinforcement.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: voice of reason on September 14, 2013, 06:01:00 am
http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/05/technology/indiegogo-kreyos-smartwatch/index.html (http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/05/technology/indiegogo-kreyos-smartwatch/index.html)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jancumps on September 15, 2013, 10:57:24 am
http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/05/technology/indiegogo-kreyos-smartwatch/index.html (http://money.cnn.com/2013/08/05/technology/indiegogo-kreyos-smartwatch/index.html)
posted by a competitor. This listing should be taken with a grain of salt.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Alex on September 15, 2013, 11:15:36 am
This one is creating quite a buzz  http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/minna-limon-couples-vibrator (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/minna-limon-couples-vibrator) :clap:

I guess this changes the saying:

If life gives you lemons, ask for batteries.


Alex.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: chicken on September 21, 2013, 05:47:39 am
Clang, $500K and 1 year later:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/posts/604023 (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/posts/604023)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dumle29 on September 26, 2013, 07:45:08 am
60$ worht of electronics in a "scope"watch. As if the fluke123 wasn't bad enough (and don't mention the dsonano)
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jancumps on September 26, 2013, 03:41:34 pm
60$ worht of electronics in a "scope"watch. As if the fluke123 wasn't bad enough (and don't mention the dsonano)
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category)
It might be a toy, but is it dodgy as a kickstarter?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on September 29, 2013, 06:56:27 pm
Clang, $500K and 1 year later:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/posts/604023 (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/posts/604023)

Shame. That was the coolest Kickstarter video ever!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bored@Work on October 02, 2013, 06:20:59 pm
Totally bogus project: http://www.pozible.com/project/35309 (http://www.pozible.com/project/35309)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ElectroIrradiator on October 02, 2013, 06:39:40 pm
Totally bogus project: http://www.pozible.com/project/35309 (http://www.pozible.com/project/35309)
:-DD

Afraid I cannot support that project, as the travel time would be impractical for me.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: neggles on October 05, 2013, 04:05:13 pm
60$ worht of electronics in a "scope"watch. As if the fluke123 wasn't bad enough (and don't mention the dsonano)
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category)
It might be a toy, but is it dodgy as a kickstarter?

Given that the guy's pulled off two successful kickstarters before in a similar vein, I don't expect he'll have any trouble getting it made - that doesn't mean it's actually useful, though.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: opticpow on October 09, 2013, 02:09:02 pm
60$ worht of electronics in a "scope"watch. As if the fluke123 wasn't bad enough (and don't mention the dsonano)
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/920064946/oscilloscope-watch?ref=category)
It might be a toy, but is it dodgy as a kickstarter?

Given that the guy's pulled off two successful kickstarters before in a similar vein, I don't expect he'll have any trouble getting it made - that doesn't mean it's actually useful, though.

About as useful as those calculator watches, but way cooler IMHO  O0
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: c4757p on October 09, 2013, 02:12:01 pm
Shhh.... don't let Dave hear you say that!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rafalpilat0077 on November 02, 2013, 09:27:32 am
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/energy-multiplier-cleaner-efficient-energy-production?c=home (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/energy-multiplier-cleaner-efficient-energy-production?c=home)

 |O

Check out all the cool stuff you get if you donate $10,000!

"Receive a paper certificate stating your level of contribution with your name and personally signed by the inventor. Also receive exclusive updates via indiegogo.com on the progress of development. Get exclusive access to our VIP Platinum Members area of our website. See website for details. ** This is redeemable through direct purchase of products offered only through our members area **"

... A piece of paper with the guy's name written on it! Wow!
Lol , this shit is hilarious
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: u271D on December 19, 2013, 06:06:02 pm
Ripoff of Dave's µCurrent GOLD

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/microcurrent-gold (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/microcurrent-gold)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: george graves on December 20, 2013, 01:21:12 pm
Well that was taken down quickly.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: hikariuk on December 20, 2013, 08:15:31 pm
Clang, $500K and 1 year later:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/posts/604023 (http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/posts/604023)

CLANG is really more an example of a project biting off a little more than it could chew, rather than a scam.  The hardware side of things, primarily.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Gallymimus on January 05, 2014, 03:40:06 pm
So these guys show big time media outlets like FOX ABC CBS, but I can't find a single article from any of the big media outlets they show at the front of their page.  Am I missing something or is this totally fraudulent marketing?

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thingcharger-the-awesome-new-charger-for-all-your-things (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thingcharger-the-awesome-new-charger-for-all-your-things)

Other than that it seems like a bad product to me.  I'd not want to balance a phone or tablet vertically on the tiny connector of this thing without any other mechanical support.  Again am I missing the point?  It seems like a great way to break stuff.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Lurch on January 06, 2014, 01:59:08 am
Other than that it seems like a bad product to me.  I'd not want to balance a phone or tablet vertically on the tiny connector of this thing without any other mechanical support.  Again am I missing the point?  It seems like a great way to break stuff.

Also looks a bit of a fire risk to me. This is the sort of thing I'd probably fail on PAT testing, like when you get loads of plug in adapters stacked up on top of each other.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Gallymimus on January 19, 2014, 12:41:45 pm
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/smarty-ring (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/smarty-ring)

Seems too small to do what they claim, but hey maybe I just don't know how to push the tech envelope.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: CanadianAvenger on January 20, 2014, 11:44:44 am
20% fuel savings.
http://igg.me/p/650364 (http://igg.me/p/650364)

Well at least that one is fixed funding, meaning it's all or nothing.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on January 21, 2014, 02:41:21 am
20% fuel savings.
http://igg.me/p/650364 (http://igg.me/p/650364)

Well at least that one is fixed funding, meaning it's all or nothing.
And you can have smooth skin if you don't own a car or don't want to pay full fare to buy the fuel-saver..  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rutger on February 06, 2014, 06:46:56 am
How about this one; http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices)

Replace you solar panels now with 6 ton glass bowls filled with water. Hope you have a strong roof!  :palm:

I guess the name gives it away; rawlemon... I prefer my lemons cooked (under a bowl of glass)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Gallymimus on February 06, 2014, 07:47:44 am
How about this one; http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices)

Replace you solar panels now with 6 ton glass bowls filled with water. Hope you have a strong roof!  :palm:

I guess the name gives it away; rawlemon... I prefer my lemons cooked (under a bowl of glass)

well why not?

http://www.rehnu.com/technology/receivers-and-cooling (http://www.rehnu.com/technology/receivers-and-cooling)

 :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dexters_lab on February 06, 2014, 07:47:52 am
How about this one; http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices)

Replace you solar panels now with 6 ton glass bowls filled with water. Hope you have a strong roof!  :palm:

I guess the name gives it away; rawlemon... I prefer my lemons cooked (under a bowl of glass)

while i dont think it's dodgey, it does seem a bit niche!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MadModder on February 25, 2014, 03:58:40 am
I don't think this one is mentioned in this thread?
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator)
Look at the fundings :wtf:  :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jucole on March 08, 2014, 11:04:03 pm
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/meterplug-lower-your-electricbill-measure-real-electric-cost (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/meterplug-lower-your-electricbill-measure-real-electric-cost)
(days away from the delivery date, only one photo of pre-production units, no updates)

lol - still not delivered!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: uwezi on March 09, 2014, 07:37:33 am
How about this one; http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices (http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rawlemon-solar-devices)

Replace you solar panels now with 6 ton glass bowls filled with water. Hope you have a strong roof!  :palm:

while i dont think it's dodgey, it does seem a bit niche!

It is dodgy!

A major part of the production cost of today's silicon solar cell modules is the flat sheet of glass on its front. And this is a plain sheet of glass! Not a sphere, whether solid or strong enough to hold water...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Gallymimus on March 09, 2014, 04:33:13 pm

A major part of the production cost of today's silicon solar cell modules is the flat sheet of glass on its front. And this is a plain sheet of glass! Not a sphere, whether solid or strong enough to hold water...

Where did you come up with THAT data?  The glass on top is most certainly not a major cost in a module.
If that were TRUE then thin film solar cells (which are on a glass substrate and then have the additional glass layer on top) wouldn't be significantly cheaper than silicon cells.  Also see this marketing report for a breakdown of material costs.

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53938.pdf (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53938.pdf)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: uwezi on March 10, 2014, 12:32:22 am
A major part of the production cost of today's silicon solar cell modules is the flat sheet of glass on its front.

Where did you come up with THAT data?  The glass on top is most certainly not a major cost in a module.
If that were TRUE then thin film solar cells (which are on a glass substrate and then have the additional glass layer on top) wouldn't be significantly cheaper than silicon cells.  Also see this marketing report for a breakdown of material costs.

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53938.pdf (http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53938.pdf)

Thinfilm solar cells are not significantly cheaper than silicon solar cells!

And neither are organic or dye-sensitized solar cells.

I did not say that the glass was the biggest cost in a solar cell module, I stated that it was a major (one of several) cost factors.

I am working as a university researcher in the field of thinfilm solar cells and have been part-time working in a company which we still have close collaborations with. The data I have is from recent international conferences on photovoltaics and up-to-date news.

Here you can find a breakdown of the costs in silicon solar cell modules as of 2012: http://www.cleanenergystates.org/assets/Uploads/Solar-PV-Manufacturing-Combined-Presentations.pdf (http://www.cleanenergystates.org/assets/Uploads/Solar-PV-Manufacturing-Combined-Presentations.pdf) slide 19 shows that about 20% of the cost of the module is in the front glass, lamination film and backsheet - and since then the price of the silicon cells themselves has gone down further, while glass has not become cheaper.

Even in the report from NREL which you have quoted, and which is yet another year older, the orange part in the breakdown of costs on the last page is significant.

Here is another source, analyzing the cost breakdown for major Chinese manufacturers of silicon solar cell modules - the purple part "Module" is the important part:
(http://dqbasmyouzti2.cloudfront.net/content/images/articles/Screen_Shot_2013-02-04_at_11.47.04_AM.png)
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/top-chinese-manufacturers-will-produce-solar-panels-for-42-cents-a-wat (http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/top-chinese-manufacturers-will-produce-solar-panels-for-42-cents-a-wat)

Here is a newer report from NREL (2013): http://www.uspvmc.org/proceedings/2ndAnnualCSiWorkshop0710/14.%20NREL%20c-Si%20Roadmap.pdf (http://www.uspvmc.org/proceedings/2ndAnnualCSiWorkshop0710/14.%20NREL%20c-Si%20Roadmap.pdf)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: daedalus on March 18, 2014, 11:05:34 am
100% efficient drivechain invention, seems legit :)

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/367465572/chi-eer-a-real-efficient-engine-motor?ref=category (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/367465572/chi-eer-a-real-efficient-engine-motor?ref=category)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Jarrod Roberson on April 06, 2014, 02:01:11 am
This one is not going to succeed either, kind of telling how NONE of the pictures of the actual device show the screen, just a plastic wrist band!

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-rufus-cuff-more-than-a-smartwatch-a-wrist-communicator (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-rufus-cuff-more-than-a-smartwatch-a-wrist-communicator)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: CanadianAvenger on April 06, 2014, 05:05:18 am
Well IGG just promoted it in an email, so lets wtch and see... hopefully IGG users are smarter than IGG staff.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: facumedica on April 07, 2014, 10:55:50 am
This one is not going to succeed either, kind of telling how NONE of the pictures of the actual device show the screen, just a plastic wrist band!

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-rufus-cuff-more-than-a-smartwatch-a-wrist-communicator (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-rufus-cuff-more-than-a-smartwatch-a-wrist-communicator)
Take a phone, make a case with a 3D printer... Done!  :bullshit:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Duane Degn on April 12, 2014, 01:50:29 pm
I think this one fall under the "Dodgy" category.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1686304142/the-mini-mobile-robotic-printer (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1686304142/the-mini-mobile-robotic-printer)

Their hardware demo video and what they are claiming don't agree.

Anyone with any robotics experience will recognize what they are claiming to deliver is next to impossible.

I'll quote from the other thread:

This has received a lot of backers and I'm afraid a lot of people are going to be disappointed in the final product.

The images on the Kickstarter page give the impression the robotic printer can print full page technical drawings and graphics. Yet the video just shows the robot printing single line of text.

Trying to get a robot to travel in a straight line with the precision required to print the type of documents they imply it will be able to print is a near impossibility.

These guys are business students dabbling in robotics and they don't have clue how to accomplish what they are promising. You can see some of the "development" work in posts at Let's Make Robots. The LMR member kkffiirr http://letsmakerobots.com/user/20833 (http://letsmakerobots.com/user/20833) has asked several questions revealing his lack of robotics knowledge.

I don't think they have been honest in describing the risks backers are taking by supporting the project. To make a robot capable of printing as well as they imply their robot will, is next to impossible.

Their "prototype" is a Parallax ink jet printer kit mounted on some omni wheels (normal wheels would have worked for their "demo" video). Here's a video of the printer kit used free hand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHS7rObiB2Q (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHS7rObiB2Q)

This printer might work reasonably well printing text only documents if you didn't need the print to be high quality, but it's certainly not going to be able to print the type of documents shown in the photos.

I think this qualifies as a scam.

I thought Kickstarter projects had to have a working prototype?

BTW, I like to build robots myself and I've made many different kinds including robots with omni wheels. I won't post links to my stuff by it's easy to find by searching my name.

I think I'm particularly annoyed by this one since I had some interaction with one of the developers prior to the Kickstater launch.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Jarrod Roberson on April 12, 2014, 02:35:38 pm
They went and purged their blog entries from "lets make robots" apparently. I didn't get to see what noob questions they were asking, but I can guess they didn't paint their "experience" in a good light.

Anyone with any common sense and critical thinking can see that this thing will NEVER track straight enough to print out anything resembling the laser printouts they are "simulating" ( scamming ).

Apparently kickstarter and igg are taking the old adage "there is a sucker born every minute" and "a fool and his money are soon parted" to the most extreme social experiment possible.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Duane Degn on April 12, 2014, 03:10:38 pm
Jarrod,

I don't think he had any blogs. His questions were in the forum. You can see this questions by clicking "track". Here's a link.
http://letsmakerobots.com/user/20833/track (http://letsmakerobots.com/user/20833/track)

They might be ignorant enough to think what they propose is possible.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: kony on April 14, 2014, 02:38:09 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/beta-bioled-the-first-hand-held-blood-analyzer (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/beta-bioled-the-first-hand-held-blood-analyzer)
Well, I don't have guts ti say it's scam right away, but it is at least very suspicious.
 
As I have some background in light measurements and chemistry (spectroscopy, radiospectrometry) - claiming, that their setup consisting of few assorted LEDs spread over the spectrum without any further filtering plus light integrator provided better results than commercital absobrtion spectrometers is just bullshit in my opinion.
Even with basic low cost miniautre spectrometer modules you have FWHM in 5nm range at least - and they are trying to convince me, that they can do better with LEDs, which spectra is gaussian shaped, spreaded over tens of nanometers will provide better results ? I don't think so. Based on this measurement, I would be able to resolve between basic colors of sample and mabye little bit about its transmittance, but hell no somethning about chemical composition of sample.
Only semiconductor light source capable of producing narrow enough spectra is laser diode, but then you are stucked basically to a few points in whole spectra - how could you estimate composition based on that (yep, Raman scattering, I know, but it really doesn't seem they are that far - and you are still tied to full spectra measuring and cost and effort for propper light filtering added) ? You simply won't get away without using prism, or diffraction grating - or am I missing something important ?
Oh, and did I mentioned that most valuable data about chemical composition of sample in case of optical spectrometry does not lie in visible part of spectra, but UV and infra ?

I'd like to hear somebody else opinion about this.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Jarrod Roberson on April 16, 2014, 03:41:16 am
I figure anything making medical or energy claims is 100% bogus and a scam and stop reading immediately.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dustout on April 30, 2014, 07:17:38 pm
"Meet SCiO. It is the world's first affordable molecular sensor that fits in the palm of your hand. SCiO is a tiny spectrometer and allows you to get instant relevant information about the chemical make-up of just about anything around you, sent directly to your smartphone."

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/903107259/scio-your-sixth-sense-a-pocket-molecular-sensor-fo (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/903107259/scio-your-sixth-sense-a-pocket-molecular-sensor-fo)

Some claims:

* Get nutritional facts about different kinds of food: salad dressings, sauces, fruits, cheeses, and much more.
* See how ripe an Avocado is, through the peel!
* Find out the quality of your cooking oil.
* Know the well being of your plants.
* Analyze soil or hydroponic solutions.
* Authenticate medications or supplements.
* Upload and tag the spectrum of any material on Earth to our database. Even yourself !
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on May 01, 2014, 08:14:53 pm
"Meet SCiO. It is the world's first affordable molecular sensor that fits in the palm of your hand. SCiO is a tiny spectrometer and allows you to get instant relevant information about the chemical make-up of just about anything around you, sent directly to your smartphone."

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/903107259/scio-your-sixth-sense-a-pocket-molecular-sensor-fo (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/903107259/scio-your-sixth-sense-a-pocket-molecular-sensor-fo)

Some claims:

* Get nutritional facts about different kinds of food: salad dressings, sauces, fruits, cheeses, and much more.
* See how ripe an Avocado is, through the peel!
* Find out the quality of your cooking oil.
* Know the well being of your plants.
* Analyze soil or hydroponic solutions.
* Authenticate medications or supplements.
* Upload and tag the spectrum of any material on Earth to our database. Even yourself !

not a scam, its an ir spectrometer in a very small form factor. same thing nasa uses to analyze stars hundreds of light years away
+ company lets journalists touch and use their _working prototypes_
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: riccardo.pittini on May 03, 2014, 11:35:56 pm
Seen this new project? what do you think about it...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lix3d/lix-the-smallest-3d-printing-pen-in-the-world (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lix3d/lix-the-smallest-3d-printing-pen-in-the-world)

Seems that the project is getting very popular... few things that I would put a warning are:

- Power from USB, let's say limited to 2.5W. This will limit a lot the melting speed of the filament
- I think that supports only one type of filament material /speed-temperature settings (for optimal extrusion)?



Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MacAttak on May 09, 2014, 01:19:31 pm
It's taken a while, but it looks like government is starting to take notice of crowdfunding scams. State of Washington vs. Asylum 5/1/2014 (http://www.scribd.com/doc/221464947/State-of-Washington-vs-Asylum-5-1-2014#)

Interestingly, within a day of that being posted to the comments page of a kickstarter project that's been mostly ignored by the creator for a year, they've made two update posts already. Might not have anything to do with them being a Washington state company / resident. But then again, maybe it's not a coincidence.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: george graves on May 09, 2014, 10:12:18 pm
Seen this new project? what do you think about it...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lix3d/lix-the-smallest-3d-printing-pen-in-the-world (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lix3d/lix-the-smallest-3d-printing-pen-in-the-world)

Seems that the project is getting very popular... few things that I would put a warning are:

- Power from USB, let's say limited to 2.5W. This will limit a lot the melting speed of the filament
- I think that supports only one type of filament material /speed-temperature settings (for optimal extrusion)?

It "prints" at about a snail's pace.(most all of the videos are speed up) - I'm sure they shot day's worth of video to get something usable looking.

But as a consumer it screams "YES, I can 3d print something!  I don't need to know arduino, or C or wire up a bunch of stuff!  I can 3D print in the AIR!"

You might laugh at it.  But that's what they want. (I'll call them/they "pro-sumers" - not quite consumers, and not pro)

That is how you start up a great kickstarter.  Like it or not.  Not that I would ever do that.  You'll sell 10,000 of something that is kinda pointless.





Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: george graves on May 17, 2014, 11:18:34 am
Not a scam....but this is an interesting breakdown of a kickstarter art poster project. It's a poster of the The Brooklyn Bridge made using typography.

The guy misspelled Brooklyn ("Brookyln"), and not him or any of his backers ever saw the error until most of them had shipped.

https://medium.com/@cameronmoll/5b374cfeb43c

 |O |O |O |O |O |O |O |O |O |O |O |O

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: tsmith35 on May 17, 2014, 01:10:17 pm
The guy misspelled Brooklyn ("Brookyln"), and not him or any of this backers ever saw the error untill most of them had shipped.
That's quite an interesting story! Thanks for sharing. I guess the focus was on that guy's amazing artwork, and not on the text at the bottom. :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Artlav on May 18, 2014, 06:07:09 pm
The guy misspelled Brooklyn ("Brookyln"), and not him or any of his backers ever saw the error until most of them had shipped.
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteres are at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a tatol mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
 
This actually works for real.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: george graves on May 18, 2014, 07:03:25 pm
Google Disemvoweling.  And make you you spell it right...or you might get some NSFW results.

..........a piece of alphabetic text is rewriting it with all the vowel letters removed.[1][broken citation] This original sentence:

    The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog

would, after being disemvowelled, look like this:

    Th qck brwn fx jmps vr th lzy dg






Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: DavidGoncalv on May 22, 2014, 08:35:29 pm
There is a Kickstarter a couple years ago that successfully funded and complete a first run of such a '3-d' pen - the 3doodler: http://the3doodler.com/ (http://the3doodler.com/)

I have one now for printing out simple toys and things for my nieces - it's ~ok~, and this new project isn't going to make a better one.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: corrado33 on May 27, 2014, 05:45:05 am
100% efficient drivechain invention, seems legit :)

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/367465572/chi-eer-a-real-efficient-engine-motor?ref=category (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/367465572/chi-eer-a-real-efficient-engine-motor?ref=category)

What the heck was he washing? Clothes covered in blood? Geeze.

(End of the video)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: tsmith35 on May 27, 2014, 06:30:22 am
What the heck was he washing? Clothes covered in blood? Geeze.

Looks like he was washing the bane of anyone who washes clothing (especially parents): new, brightly-colored shirts. :) Either that, or he added some dye for color...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on June 06, 2014, 08:05:38 am
I am speechless that some one actually is going to pay $199 or one of their early prototypes.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sparqee/umbrella-usb (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sparqee/umbrella-usb)

Not really dodgy since most people wouldn't know how to make one of this but charging $99 for a custom engraved yellow anodized aluminum edition sound like they don't care about taking advantage of ignorant people

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on June 06, 2014, 10:24:37 am
Quote
charging $99 for a custom engraved yellow anodized aluminum edition

They are not a shop, and people coughing the dosh are not customers. They are looking for funding, and punters are investing in their vision. The 'perks' are what you get for investing.

How do you feel about the $5 perk on most kickstarters that give you nothing at all except a warm feeling? Is that overpriced? Doesn't that "sound like they don't care about taking advantage of ignorant people"?

With the perk you express amazement about, no-one is buying a $3 USB plug for $99. They are investing $99 in this project, and the project people are gifting an anodised USB plug (limited edition) as a thank-you.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 10, 2014, 01:07:57 am
Quote
charging $99 for a custom engraved yellow anodized aluminum edition

They are not a shop, and people coughing the dosh are not customers. They are looking for funding, and punters are investing in their vision. The 'perks' are what you get for investing.

How do you feel about the $5 perk on most kickstarters that give you nothing at all except a warm feeling? Is that overpriced? Doesn't that "sound like they don't care about taking advantage of ignorant people"?

With the perk you express amazement about, no-one is buying a $3 USB plug for $99. They are investing $99 in this project, and the project people are gifting an anodised USB plug (limited edition) as a thank-you.

and in addition there are people out there which will pay whatever they need to pay just to have something different/unique.
so  why not let them pay and support the project if they're willing to pay much more for unique/limited edition item ?

and btw.. this project is not dodgy - that little thingy is useful and pretty doable. it's not only useful just because of security (for real end-users unaware of possible risks and ways to protect themselves ), but also to get rid of the annoying  "charge only/mass storage" prompt on many phones  while charging from a computer ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on June 10, 2014, 05:26:40 am
Quote
that little thingy is useful and pretty doable

It is not just doable: I have one I bought a couple of years ago (mini-USB to micro-USB adaptor, and I wanted a data connection so thought it was crap at the time!). Indeed, a quick search of Ebay turns up:

eBay auction: #321254386023

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 10, 2014, 05:42:59 am
Quote
that little thingy is useful and pretty doable

It is not just doable: I have one I bought a couple of years ago (mini-USB to micro-USB adaptor, and I wanted a data connection so thought it was crap at the time!). Indeed, a quick search of Ebay turns up:

eBay auction: #321254386023

the description seems to be dodgy. they're reffering to the  "dumb USB mode" which is the 0,5A spec. while they're talking about boost to 1A... most of the usb ports are not even capable of 1A (physically).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on June 10, 2014, 05:59:31 am
I included that as an example of stuff already out there (negating the need for the kickstarter, possibly). I didn't intend to suggest anything about the quality or implementation of it.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 10, 2014, 06:05:10 am
I included that as an example of stuff already out there (negating the need for the kickstarter, possibly). I didn't intend to suggest anything about the quality or implementation of it.

i know how you meant it ;) i was just commenting on the product itself, since i spotted something dodgy in the description ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on June 10, 2014, 07:34:17 am
Oh, right. Have at it, then  :box:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: djococaud on June 14, 2014, 12:03:52 am
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 14, 2014, 12:08:19 am
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...

because your Windows computer will provide only a fraction of the available power without correct device identification, so the umbrella has to identify itself to the operating system, ask for the highest possible power and pass through that power to the phone being charged.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: CanadianAvenger on June 14, 2014, 12:47:05 am
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...

because your Windows computer will provide only a fraction of the available power without correct device identification, so the umbrella has to identify itself to the operating system, ask for the highest possible power and pass through that power to the phone being charged.

Yes and no, it requires the computer [not just "windows"] HARDWARE to have a power management chipset that supports this [most desktops don't - many laptops do ... though this is changing]. Otherwise the port will be limited anywhere between 100mA and 900mA depending on the implementation. The phone in this case will follow the "low power" profile, as it was unable to negotiate more power with a host chipset.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 14, 2014, 01:40:40 am
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...

because your Windows computer will provide only a fraction of the available power without correct device identification, so the umbrella has to identify itself to the operating system, ask for the highest possible power and pass through that power to the phone being charged.

Yes and no, it requires the computer [not just "windows"] HARDWARE to have a power management chipset that supports this [most desktops don't - many laptops do ... though this is changing]. Otherwise the port will be limited anywhere between 100mA and 900mA depending on the implementation. The phone in this case will follow the "low power" profile, as it was unable to negotiate more power with a host chipset.

but mainly it's a windows problem - most of the drivers (all of them ?  :-//) allow the 100mA (low power) without identification on windows. on linux systems (with the same hardware) the drivers usually allows you to draw 500mA without identification. all of the controllers have power management, and it's the job of the driver (OS specific) to setup the controller and and control the power schemes.
Title: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: DomesticHacks on June 15, 2014, 07:31:46 pm
Not really crowd funded but with preorder: https://www.myvessyl.com

It seems that some marketing guys had a lot of fun.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: andtfoot on June 15, 2014, 08:04:36 pm
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...

because your Windows computer will provide only a fraction of the available power without correct device identification, so the umbrella has to identify itself to the operating system, ask for the highest possible power and pass through that power to the phone being charged.
But in this case, it's exactly that. The umbrella intentionally doesn't have any USB power negotiation chips or bias resistors; it is purely disconnects the data lines.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 15, 2014, 09:35:21 pm
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...

because your Windows computer will provide only a fraction of the available power without correct device identification, so the umbrella has to identify itself to the operating system, ask for the highest possible power and pass through that power to the phone being charged.
But in this case, it's exactly that. The umbrella intentionally doesn't have any USB power negotiation chips or bias resistors; it is purely disconnects the data lines.

actually it MUST HAVE a chip and it must disconnect the data lines on it's OUTPUT ONLY. otherwise it would be a piece of junk providing only 100mA of charging current.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: andtfoot on June 15, 2014, 10:24:34 pm
Umbrella USB :
Why not just making a USB A->micro USB cable with only 2 wires (5V + GND) in it ?
It would just be more practical than a big/ugly dongle plugged in the wall...

because your Windows computer will provide only a fraction of the available power without correct device identification, so the umbrella has to identify itself to the operating system, ask for the highest possible power and pass through that power to the phone being charged.
But in this case, it's exactly that. The umbrella intentionally doesn't have any USB power negotiation chips or bias resistors; it is purely disconnects the data lines.

actually it MUST HAVE a chip and it must disconnect the data lines on it's OUTPUT ONLY. otherwise it would be a piece of junk providing only 100mA of charging current.
Hmm, it looks like I could be wrong here. I had the impression that they didn't want to 'fry USB ports by pulling to much current through them' based on the comments section, but they may be specifically talking about >500mA.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: djococaud on June 17, 2014, 04:08:40 pm
Quote
Quote from: rob77 on June 14, 2014, 12:08:19 AM
actually it MUST HAVE a chip and it must disconnect the data lines on it's OUTPUT ONLY. otherwise it would be a piece of junk providing only 100mA of charging current.

In this case, THIS is a piece of junk, but in most cases, you will have 500mA (most of computers don't really care and just have a 500mA overcurrent protection on USB ports...)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MrAureliusR on June 20, 2014, 01:20:43 am
Quote
Quote from: rob77 on June 14, 2014, 12:08:19 AM
actually it MUST HAVE a chip and it must disconnect the data lines on it's OUTPUT ONLY. otherwise it would be a piece of junk providing only 100mA of charging current.

In this case, THIS is a piece of junk, but in most cases, you will have 500mA (most of computers don't really care and just have a 500mA overcurrent protection on USB ports...)

That's actually not true on most modern motherboards. The USB ports typically are 'grouped' in groups of 2 or 4, and have a current limit of 1 or 2A. So yes, technically, you could only draw 500mA per port simultaneously, but you can draw more from a single port if the other ports are not drawing.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on June 20, 2014, 07:06:08 am
Quote
Quote from: rob77 on June 14, 2014, 12:08:19 AM
actually it MUST HAVE a chip and it must disconnect the data lines on it's OUTPUT ONLY. otherwise it would be a piece of junk providing only 100mA of charging current.

In this case, THIS is a piece of junk, but in most cases, you will have 500mA (most of computers don't really care and just have a 500mA overcurrent protection on USB ports...)

That's actually not true on most modern motherboards. The USB ports typically are 'grouped' in groups of 2 or 4, and have a current limit of 1 or 2A. So yes, technically, you could only draw 500mA per port simultaneously, but you can draw more from a single port if the other ports are not drawing.

link to wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB#Charging_ports (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB#Charging_ports)

it's described there :
standard USB port -> 100mA max without negotiation, 500mA (some boards more) after negotiation with the host (switching to "high power")
charging port -> whatever current (within the limits of the board) without negotiation with the host.

so that umbrella shield must have a chip in order to be able to charge a phone from a standard USB port (it simply must negotiate with the host).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: tsmith35 on June 20, 2014, 10:30:03 am
Some info I looked up for an Amazon review:

---------------
USB Battery Charging Specification 1.2
Chinese Telecom Standard YD/T 1591-2009
Divider Mode, Compliant with Apple iPod, iPhone (1A), and iPad (2A) Mobile Digital Devices

Non-Apple devices that I know of don't use divider mode. They actually use a 2-step process to determine what kind of port they're connected to. For reference, there are 3 USB charge port-type acronyms used:

SDP (Standard Downstream Port), limited to 500mA (900 mA w/USB3)
CDP (Charging Downstream Port), limited to 1500mA
DCP (Dedicated Charging Port), limited to 1500mA

Here's the process that a device being charged uses to determine how fast it can charge:

The device will output 0.6V on pin 3 (D+) and check the voltage returned on pin 2. If the voltage returned on pin 2 (D-) is less than 0.3V, it thinks it's connected to an SDP. If the returned voltage is between 0.3V and 0.8V, it thinks it's connected to a CDP or DCP.

Next, the device will output 0.6V on pin 2 (D-) and check the voltage returned on pin 3. If the voltage returned on pin 3 (D+) is less than 0.3V, it thinks it's connected to a CDP. If the returned voltage is between 0.3V and 0.8V, it thinks it's connected to a DCP. To qualify as a DCP, there's one additional twist: both the USB Battery Charging Specification 1.2 and the Chinese Telecom Standard YD/T 1591-2009 require that pins 2 & 3 be shorted together (USB BCS 1.2 calls for a maximum impedance of 200 ohms, while the Chinese standard actually calls for a dead short).

A so-called "dumb" charger doesn't do anything fancy: it simply shorts together pins 2 & 3 with a maximum impedance of 200 ohms, leaving the device to figure out that it's connected to a DCP, since shorting pins 2 & 3 together means that 0.6V put on pin 2 will appear on pin 3 and vice-versa. This is how a lot of generic and car chargers work.

So... there is certainly a lot of detail in how devices figure out how much current they can get when plugged in. There is actually more going on than what I included above, but that's enough to figure out that USB charging isn't the same as just plugging in a regular power cord.

For those of you with Apple devices, an Apple device determines what kind of port it's connected to by checking the voltages present on pins 2 & 3 of the USB connector (D- and D+, used for data transfer). If pin 2 is a 2.7V and pin 3 is at 2V, max current is 1000mA (1 Amp). If both pins are at 2V, max current is 500mA. If pin 2 is at 2V and pin 3 is at 2.7V, max current is 2000mA (2 Amps).
---------------

Anyway, let me know if I got anything mixed up. :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on June 26, 2014, 04:48:32 am
That's actually not true on most modern motherboards. The USB ports typically are 'grouped' in groups of 2 or 4, and have a current limit of 1 or 2A. So yes, technically, you could only draw 500mA per port simultaneously, but you can draw more from a single port if the other ports are not drawing.

And relying on this "feature" is a really bad idea and poor design. Sooner or later some port on some laptop gets fried or the device will be unreliable due to the over-current protection tripping on some mobos.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: zeb on July 06, 2014, 07:01:43 am
Apologies for this being my first post.  I'm a long-time EEVblog watcher and forum lurker but just came across this IndieGoGo campaign that I just felt was worthy of adding to this thread:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype)

I watched all of the 33 minute video and found it unbelievable... utterly unbelievable!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on July 06, 2014, 07:27:21 am
The worse of it is that the person running the indigogo is not the same as the youtube channel.

Quote
Hi, my name is Brady Reed, I am currently a honors student and junior in a private high school. 

The guy in the video is definitely not a high school junior.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: zeb on July 06, 2014, 07:34:50 am
The worse of it is that the person running the indigogo is not the same as the youtube channel.

Good spot!  I was so overwhelmed by the sales pitch that I didn't notice!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on July 07, 2014, 02:54:53 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on July 07, 2014, 04:00:18 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype)

I watched all of the 33 minute video and found it unbelievable... utterly unbelievable!
I tried to watch the video, got dizzy after some minutes, fast forwarded it several times. I didn't understand what he was trying to show, very unstructured and random explanations. All I see is a battery which powers something and is at 12.4 V at the beginning of the video with no load and at 12.2 V at the end of the video. I can't believe why the Youtube comments to the video are so positive :palm:

Of course, the Indiegogo campaign is rubbish, even formal: They have already a working prototype ("output of voltage ranging from 60-80 the entire 30 days"), so why do they need money to build a prototype? He should become a politician with statements at the end like "Our method of problem solving is by having a plan of action and then putting the plan into action.", but he doesn't show the plan, like for what the money is used, or at least a simple diagram of the generator construction.

Indiegogo should not allow such projects, it is bad publicity for the crowdfunding idea and hurts many other good crowdfunding projects.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bored@Work on July 07, 2014, 04:22:19 am
He should become a politician with statements at the end like "Our method of problem solving is by having a plan of action and then putting the plan into action."

Sounds like a plan.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jippie on July 07, 2014, 06:23:24 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter)
Unbelievable that already 700 people fell for the Tesla Tower "test setup".

I believe there is a separate thread on the topic: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/lets-power-the-world-with-a-tesla-coil/ (http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/lets-power-the-world-with-a-tesla-coil/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: zeb on July 07, 2014, 06:45:07 am
I tried to watch the video, got dizzy after some minutes, fast forwarded it several times. I didn't understand what he was trying to show, very unstructured and random explanations. All I see is a battery which powers something and is at 12.4 V at the beginning of the video with no load and at 12.2 V at the end of the video. I can't believe why the Youtube comments to the video are so positive :palm:

It's completely bizarre.  There are three batteries but no real explanation of what each one is for except one is running the inverter.

Then there is the auxiliary motor - why does it need one?  What does it actually do apart from start the thing which it seemed to do perfectly well without it to start with!

There are huge losses in the system - the drag of the auxiliary motor when it's running, the fact that the auxiliary motor is powered by a bench power supply, which is powered by an inverter...  why not just use a 12V motor?

Then there's the statement about how you should always let it run down on his own, followed by him stopping it once by hand and another time when he removed the rubber band for the auxiliary motor!

And then there's the quantity of completely different switches and them being switched for no apparent reason!

Just noticed that at 5:37 he calls it a 'four-way bridge rectifier' - what's one of those?  Full-wave rectification or bridge rectifier, isn't it?

The 'unbalanced battery bank charging circuit' looks like a bit of terminal strip with a handwritten label!

I will believe it when I see it in a Faraday cage whilst in a glass box, running for 30 days with no external inputs.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: zeb on July 07, 2014, 06:56:49 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter)
Unbelievable that already 700 people fell for the Tesla Tower "test setup".

I believe there is a separate thread on the topic: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/lets-power-the-world-with-a-tesla-coil/ (http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/lets-power-the-world-with-a-tesla-coil/)

If indeed Tesla did write whatever they've been studying, it was probably a practical joke, published on April 1st  somewhere between 1900 and 1917:-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bud on July 07, 2014, 12:43:51 pm
Tesla's name is getting abused these days... There is a show called Teslamania coming to Toronto next week. Wanted to go but did a research and a closer look revealed the whole thing is organized by some doctor who will be pushing for sale his medical gadgets under the cover of Tesla name. Of course the guy said in the interview that he and his wife (and I guess his dog, too) use  that device every day on themselves and that it does miracle.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Tranan on July 09, 2014, 07:27:58 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-build-a-planetary-energy-transmitter)

OMG on an hotdag bum. I cant belive this garbage. They are just taking all the cash they can and running away. I am in this moment working on power distribution and that is not a easy thing.  Doing it wireless over the world! pure fantasy!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: uwezi on July 10, 2014, 07:39:19 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype)

I watched all of the 33 minute video and found it unbelievable... utterly unbelievable!
I tried to watch the video, got dizzy after some minutes

I just tuned in - in parallel to the semi-final game...  :scared:

Isn't it amazing. I have to agree with Einstein about the infinity of human stupidity...  :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: AmmoJammo on July 10, 2014, 08:50:56 am
I tried to watch the video, got dizzy after some minutes, fast forwarded it several times. I didn't understand what he was trying to show, very unstructured and random explanations. All I see is a battery which powers something and is at 12.4 V at the beginning of the video with no load and at 12.2 V at the end of the video. I can't believe why the Youtube comments to the video are so positive :palm:

It's completely bizarre.  There are three batteries but no real explanation of what each one is for except one is running the inverter.

Then there is the auxiliary motor - why does it need one?  What does it actually do apart from start the thing which it seemed to do perfectly well without it to start with!

There are huge losses in the system - the drag of the auxiliary motor when it's running, the fact that the auxiliary motor is powered by a bench power supply, which is powered by an inverter...  why not just use a 12V motor?

Then there's the statement about how you should always let it run down on his own, followed by him stopping it once by hand and another time when he removed the rubber band for the auxiliary motor!

And then there's the quantity of completely different switches and them being switched for no apparent reason!

Just noticed that at 5:37 he calls it a 'four-way bridge rectifier' - what's one of those?  Full-wave rectification or bridge rectifier, isn't it?

The 'unbalanced battery bank charging circuit' looks like a bit of terminal strip with a handwritten label!

I will believe it when I see it in a Faraday cage whilst in a glass box, running for 30 days with no external inputs.

I don't know whats going on?!?

He has three batteries, one one of which appears to be connected to the inverter, which, of course, discharges when the inverter is on...

The other two seem to be connected to nothing, as they don't react to the load being applied...

His "star of David?" motor is apparently outputting 60volts.... where does this go? lol
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: tsmith35 on July 11, 2014, 10:14:18 am
Probably the dodgiest of the dodgy: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad)

Yes, he's making potato salad, but he hasn't even decided which kind he will make yet. Given the variety of potato salad recipes out there, contributors really have no idea what to expect. And yet, he's being funded. ;D
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on July 11, 2014, 11:04:53 am
Probably the dodgiest of the dodgy: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad)

Yes, he's making potato salad, but he hasn't even decided which kind he will make yet. Given the variety of potato salad recipes out there, contributors really have no idea what to expect. And yet, he's being funded. ;D

i think that  was intended to be a  fun project ;) he's goal was only $10 !   that's definitely not a scam , definitely looks like "let's make some fun dude" and apparently it went viral :D i guess the guy will make a hell of a party ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bored@Work on July 11, 2014, 02:58:41 pm
Probably the dodgiest of the dodgy: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad)

Yes, he's making potato salad, but he hasn't even decided which kind he will make yet. Given the variety of potato salad recipes out there, contributors really have no idea what to expect. And yet, he's being funded. ;D

Well, he was honest up-front. E.g. telling potential sponsors he hasn't even decided what kind. I think he will have a fulfillment problem, sending a thousand or more bites of potato salad to backers. Uhm, a thousand bites of rotting potato salad in the mail ... Is that even legal? Or 500 backers each allowed to chose one ingredient. That potato salad will taste shit. Or a few hundred backers supposed to join him in the kitchen.

If he is clever he will cancel the campaign before the official deadline, say sorry and thanks for the fun, and give the people the money back.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on July 11, 2014, 03:48:41 pm
but mainly it's a windows problem - most of the drivers (all of them ?  :-//) allow the 100mA (low power) without identification on windows. on linux systems (with the same hardware) the drivers usually allows you to draw 500mA without identification. all of the controllers have power management, and it's the job of the driver (OS specific) to setup the controller and and control the power schemes.

But the hardware controller for a 500mA capable port usually does not physically limit the current to 100mA. I have never found a single one that does that. So any device is free to ignore any and all standards for negotiation and simply draw 500mA on 500mA capable port. The "negotiation" part is simply a software thing so that the O/S can keep track of total power max consumption on a port.
For those who don't believe this, go stick a suitable resistor on your USB port you'll see.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bored@Work on July 11, 2014, 04:09:24 pm
But the hardware controller for a 500mA capable port usually does not physically limit the current to 100mA. I have never found a single one that does that.
You have. In one of your old videos you complained that an oscilloscope's USB host port didn't deliver enough current.

The fault, of course, was not the port, but the device not properly asking for more current.

Quote
For those who don't believe this, go stick a suitable resistor on your USB port you'll see.

I recommend eBay auction: #131214096046 or a similar gadget to measure the voltage and current.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: EEVblog on July 11, 2014, 04:32:47 pm
But the hardware controller for a 500mA capable port usually does not physically limit the current to 100mA. I have never found a single one that does that.
You have. In one of your old videos you complained that an oscilloscope's USB host port didn't deliver enough current.

No. That was a dev board that needed >500mA. Had nothing to do with any 100mA limit.

Quote
The fault, of course, was not the port, but the device not properly asking for more current.

No.
The fault was me not reading the instructions and not using the supplied USB doubler cable and plugging the device into a two USB ports to give >500mA capability.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: andtfoot on July 11, 2014, 07:50:08 pm
This one looks a bit dodgy to me:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mikey-usb-connector-charger-cable-booster-battery-bluetooth-locator-tools (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mikey-usb-connector-charger-cable-booster-battery-bluetooth-locator-tools)
Having flash memory, bluetooth locating, and a battery to run a phone for 3 hours in that case seems to be... unrealistic (especially once you factor in the fold-away USB connectors and the support structure needed for the metal thingie).
Also, I don't know about 'travel safe'...  :-\
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on July 11, 2014, 08:01:38 pm
This one looks a bit dodgy to me:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mikey-usb-connector-charger-cable-booster-battery-bluetooth-locator-tools (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/mikey-usb-connector-charger-cable-booster-battery-bluetooth-locator-tools)
Having flash memory, bluetooth locating, and a battery to run a phone for 3 hours in that case seems to be... unrealistic (especially once you factor in the fold-away USB connectors and the support structure needed for the metal thingie).
Also, I don't know about 'travel safe'...  :-\

agree - but except the phone charger it's pretty doable and could be handy as well ;) i doubt they could fit a battery bigger than 100-150 mAh (single cell). another point is the claimed 3 hours for the phone - if they promise 3hrs of standby for the phone... well... actually...  the 100mAh might be enough for that.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Bassman59 on July 12, 2014, 09:47:19 am
but mainly it's a windows problem - most of the drivers (all of them ?  :-//) allow the 100mA (low power) without identification on windows. on linux systems (with the same hardware) the drivers usually allows you to draw 500mA without identification. all of the controllers have power management, and it's the job of the driver (OS specific) to setup the controller and and control the power schemes.

But the hardware controller for a 500mA capable port usually does not physically limit the current to 100mA. I have never found a single one that does that. So any device is free to ignore any and all standards for negotiation and simply draw 500mA on 500mA capable port. The "negotiation" part is simply a software thing so that the O/S can keep track of total power max consumption on a port.
For those who don't believe this, go stick a suitable resistor on your USB port you'll see.

A proper implementation doesn't limit the current to 100 mA. Nor does it limit the current to whatever value is specified in the device enumeration (which is how the device tells the host that it's a "high-power" guy). Rather, if the power-control hardware in the hub (either in the computer or external) detects an overcurrent condition, it'll shut down that port. Hopefully, the operating system will throw up a warning about exceeding current limits.

I ran into this doing a bus-powered USB audio project. The device enumeration indicated that it used all of the 500 mA available after enumeration. The device did things the right way: it used power switching to stage power bring-up. Before enumeration, all of the analog power rails were disabled so current draw was much less than the allowed 100 mA. After enumeration, the processor would enable the analog power rail and the device would be fully functional. The product has two mic preamps with available individually-switched phantom power, which the user could enable as needed.

I built up the first prototype, it all worked and passed audio. Then I switched on the phantom, and HELLO! OS X threw up a "USB device uses too much power!" warning dialog and shut off the port. But what was actually interesting is that Windows XP (this was awhile ago) on a standard Dell box also detected the overcurrent condition and shut off the port (which is the correct response), BUT neglected to throw up the overcurrent warning. The over-current condition was logged somewhere; I don't remember how I found the log.

(The problem was that I had a largish filter cap hanging on the phantom supply; the inrush to that cap was sufficient to trip the overcurrent sensor in the hub. I removed the cap and there was no impact on noise performance and the power issue went away.)

I never did a test to see what would happen if I had the device enumerate indicating that it needed less than 100 mA and then turn on the analog rails. I should do that ...

-a
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Hardcorefs on July 12, 2014, 06:01:00 pm
But the hardware controller for a 500mA capable port usually does not physically limit the current to 100mA. I have never found a single one that does that.
You have. In one of your old videos you complained that an oscilloscope's USB host port didn't deliver enough current.

No. That was a dev board that needed >500mA. Had nothing to do with any 100mA limit.

Quote
The fault, of course, was not the port, but the device not properly asking for more current.

No.
The fault was me not reading the instructions and not using the supplied USB doubler cable and plugging the device into a two USB ports to give >500mA capability.


One other issue frequently overlooked , is that many of the Cheap USB cables from China are actually just cellophane or plastic sheeting coated in an aluminum film, these are interwoven to provide the internal cables, rather than the more expensive copper.
In some cases you can be dropping over 0v5 of power on a 0.5-1.0m cable, in many cases it is enough to take the USB device WAY out of spec.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nickds1 on July 23, 2014, 06:37:27 pm
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype)

I watched all of the 33 minute video and found it unbelievable... utterly unbelievable!

It looks very like a Bedini Motor, which some highly misguided types believe is an over-unity device. Sigh.

See http://bedinimotors.blogspot.co.uk/ (http://bedinimotors.blogspot.co.uk/)

Nick
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on July 23, 2014, 07:17:17 pm
It looks very like a Bedini Motor, which some highly misguided types believe is an over-unity device. Sigh.

See http://bedinimotors.blogspot.co.uk/ (http://bedinimotors.blogspot.co.uk/)
But this website is a bit esoteric, too. Quote: "method of capturing radiant energy and get the world to understand that it is the high potential, almost currentless pulses that the different variations of energizer put out, that causes what happens within the charged batteries.". So they re-invented a pulse charger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_charger#Pulse_chargers), probably of very bad quality because of the mechanical setup, described it as some mysterious "radiant energy capturing" device and sell it for only $4200. Seems legit.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dumle29 on July 29, 2014, 02:01:52 pm
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juicer-battery-the-best-smartphone-battery-ever--3 (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juicer-battery-the-best-smartphone-battery-ever--3)

Fiber optic usb 3.1 cable for faster charging. Oh and that fiber optic cable is also more durable and more bendable than regular cables. Oh wait the main product is their amazing battery -.-

I'm surprised they got the usb 3.1 power specs right.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mzzj on July 29, 2014, 05:55:16 pm
It looks very like a Bedini Motor, which some highly misguided types believe is an over-unity device. Sigh.

See http://bedinimotors.blogspot.co.uk/ (http://bedinimotors.blogspot.co.uk/)
But this website is a bit esoteric, too. Quote: "method of capturing radiant energy and get the world to understand that it is the high potential, almost currentless pulses that the different variations of energizer put out, that causes what happens within the charged batteries.". So they re-invented a pulse charger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_charger#Pulse_chargers), probably of very bad quality because of the mechanical setup, described it as some mysterious "radiant energy capturing" device and sell it for only $4200. Seems legit.
You call it "a bit esoteric", I would simply classify that as a "total bullshit"  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on July 29, 2014, 06:57:56 pm
You call it "a bit esoteric", I would simply classify that as a "total bullshit"  :-DD

"a bit esoteric" is a politically correct description of "total bullshit" ;) we who work for big corporations know how important is to use politically correct words :D
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on July 30, 2014, 08:37:04 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juicer-battery-the-best-smartphone-battery-ever--3 (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juicer-battery-the-best-smartphone-battery-ever--3)

Fiber optic usb 3.1 cable for faster charging. Oh and that fiber optic cable is also more durable and more bendable than regular cables. Oh wait the main product is their amazing battery -.-

I'm surprised they got the usb 3.1 power specs right.

Ehm, why does a *battery* need a USB 3.1 interface? And with fiber optic cable!? (Which nothing supports, btw ...)

Wtf ...  :palm:

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on July 30, 2014, 09:48:32 pm
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juicer-battery-the-best-smartphone-battery-ever--3 (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/juicer-battery-the-best-smartphone-battery-ever--3)

Fiber optic usb 3.1 cable for faster charging. Oh and that fiber optic cable is also more durable and more bendable than regular cables. Oh wait the main product is their amazing battery -.-
It's interesting that you can identify most scams just by their inconsistencies. First "power density that is 1900 times greater than other lithium ion batteries". Later "The world's highest capacity battery @ 13440mAh. More than 4 times than the original capacity & slimmer than other extended battery". And then "this would make our battery the best out there allowing it to last an estimated 25-70 percent longer than your generic smart phone battery". But then in the FAQs: "We estimate up to 50-75 percent increase to your phones battery power compared with the stock battery."

But forget the battery, I want the solar cells! Needs one hour to charge in the light. Maximum sun power is 1120 W/m^2. Their battery is 13440 mAh. The Galaxy S4 size is 137 mm x 70 mm = 0.00959 m^2. So sun power to their aluminum frame is 11 W max. Ignoring the loss when charging a battery, they invented a solar cell with at least 120 % efficiency. Nice, another over unity perpetuum mobile. And they defeated mathematics with nanotechnology, because it works at any angle :)

And of course, nobody is named "Vandal Schnizel" in Germany. "Vandal" is an insect repellent (http://www.produkt.at/uploads/tx_chiliprodukte/vandal_01.jpg), and "Schnizel" is wrongly spelled Schnitzel (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnitzel).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on July 31, 2014, 11:32:38 pm
It's interesting that you can identify most scams just by their inconsistencies.

Fortunately, the scammers are usually not the smartest people, otherwise they could likely do something else for living ... I had my  :bullshit: detector going off scale the moment he started to talk about the fiber optics USB cables which are completely irrelevant for charging.

But forget the battery, I want the solar cells! Needs one hour to charge in the light. Maximum sun power is 1120 W/m^2. Their battery is 13440 mAh. The Galaxy S4 size is 137 mm x 70 mm = 0.00959 m^2. So sun power to their aluminum frame is 11 W max. Ignoring the loss when charging a battery, they invented a solar cell with at least 120 % efficiency. Nice, another over unity perpetuum mobile. And they defeated mathematics with nanotechnology, because it works at any angle :)

Good catch

And of course, nobody is named "Vandal Schnizel" in Germany. "Vandal" is an insect repellent (http://www.produkt.at/uploads/tx_chiliprodukte/vandal_01.jpg), and "Schnizel" is wrongly spelled Schnitzel (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schnitzel).

Well, I wouldn't underestimate the creativity of someone's parents (or just bad luck - you don't get to pick your name) when naming their offspring. I had to work with a lady with a last name "Titsworth" and another time my contact at a publisher was "Sharon Stone". So "Vandal Schnizel" could be possible :-p

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: bitwelder on August 03, 2014, 03:44:46 am
Clicking on the 'CEO' profile, it comes out that he has 3 campaigns running, all for this Juicer Battery, closing at one week of distance from each other, the later ones with higher goals. Delivery times for each of the campaigns varies.
https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/8096989/campaigns (https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/8096989/campaigns)

:wtf:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 03, 2014, 04:24:20 am
Clicking on the 'CEO' profile, it comes out that he has 3 campaigns running, all for this Juicer Battery, closing at one week of distance from each other, the later ones with higher goals. Delivery times for each of the campaigns varies.
https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/8096989/campaigns (https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/8096989/campaigns)
And one campaign has flexible funding. I guess he figured that's the way to get at least some money from this scam, if there are not enough fools who funds it. I reported it to Indiegogo.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: andtfoot on August 03, 2014, 04:14:30 pm
Not to mention the comments seem to be shills or fake accounts or something.

e.g.
Quote
I was skeptical about donating for the early bird, but im glad I did. With one day shipping i received the battery the next day, and it works just as expected for my galaxy S5. I have up to a week of battery life, THIS PRODUCT IS AMAZING.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: CanadianAvenger on August 04, 2014, 12:51:40 am
Clicking on the 'CEO' profile, it comes out that he has 3 campaigns running, all for this Juicer Battery, closing at one week of distance from each other, the later ones with higher goals. Delivery times for each of the campaigns varies.
https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/8096989/campaigns (https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/8096989/campaigns)
And one campaign has flexible funding. I guess he figured that's the way to get at least some money from this scam, if there are not enough fools who funds it. I reported it to Indiegogo.

All 3 are flex funding.. and if you look at the naming in the URL, he tried at least one more.  My guess is that it's an attempt to get around IGG's fee structure for when goals are not met. By using multiple campaigns with lower goals [of his overall higher goal] assuming some of them are met, only a smaller portion of the overall total is hit with the higher fee structure for mt reaching the target.  This of course also works against him, by diluting the funds he is getting, possibly making it that none of his targets are met. Given that I don't see much take up on any, I don't think this guy is going to walk away with much.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on August 27, 2014, 06:13:13 am
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/252587878/the-worlds-smallest-tiny-breadboard-power-supply-u (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/252587878/the-worlds-smallest-tiny-breadboard-power-supply-u)

A resistor/led to show there is power, two pins to the breadboard, pcb connector & case $23. No case $20, kit form no case $16

Of course it probably will fail after a 100 inserts and if you wiggle the cable it might loose power if the dimensions are not just right.

Plus I have no clue why they are calling it a power supply.... well... it does supply power to the breadboard I guess  :-//

And of course they will get funded.

At least it's free shipping worldwide from Japan.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 27, 2014, 12:19:23 pm
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/252587878/the-worlds-smallest-tiny-breadboard-power-supply-u (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/252587878/the-worlds-smallest-tiny-breadboard-power-supply-u)

A resistor/led to show there is power, two pins to the breadboard, pcb connector & case $23. No case $20, kit form no case $16
They sell the kit with no case already in their shop, for $4.90:
http://frentrep.com/shop/breadboardmaniac/bbm-muc-k.html (http://frentrep.com/shop/breadboardmaniac/bbm-muc-k.html)
When I add it to the cart, shipping costs are $16.66 to Germany, so it's a bargain for $16 free shipping at kickstarter :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on August 27, 2014, 06:02:08 pm
They sell the kit with no case already in their shop, for $4.90:
http://frentrep.com/shop/breadboardmaniac/bbm-muc-k.html (http://frentrep.com/shop/breadboardmaniac/bbm-muc-k.html)
When I add it to the cart, shipping costs are $16.66 to Germany, so it's a bargain for $16 free shipping at kickstarter :)

You could probably whip the same thing up in a 10 minutes in Eagle or whatever. 3 boards of that size would cost about 2-3 EUR to Europe from OSHPark (shipping included), the parts maybe 1EUR and soldering takes 2 minutes ...

Certainly more reasonable than paying almost $17 shipping for a $5 kit ...

However, I would rather make it a bit larger so that I could have at least two pins for each rail for more sturdiness. Breadboarding things can be sufficient pain even without having to fight dodgy connectors already.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: sunnyhighway on August 27, 2014, 07:52:35 pm
However, I would rather make it a bit larger so that I could have at least two pins for each rail for more sturdiness. Breadboarding things can be sufficient pain even without having to fight dodgy connectors already.

Did just that. Had an unused USB extension cable lying around where I made it for.

BOM:
1 Leftover piece of prototype board.
2 Leftover 2 pin pin-headers.
1 Cutout from a blister package to make the pcb thicker.

Works like a charm and the USB connector won't fall off.
A breadboard with a transformer can dangle from the USB cable without coming loose.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 28, 2014, 12:15:58 am
Did just that. Had an unused USB extension cable lying around where I made it for.

BOM:
1 Leftover piece of prototype board.
2 Leftover 2 pin pin-headers.
1 Cutout from a blister package to make the pcb thicker.
But no LED. If you combine "LED" and "USB", you could sell it for a lot of money:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thingm/blink1-the-usb-rgb-led (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thingm/blink1-the-usb-rgb-led)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on August 28, 2014, 01:14:45 am
To be fair, that's a little bit more than a USB plug and LED soldered together :)

Not to mention that it's free as well if you can be arsed to build your own.

Edit: In fact, I'm annoyed that I missed that! I have an application that is pretty much tailor made for this Blink(1)  - no, Blink(1) is ideal for my application, I mean.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Simon P on September 17, 2014, 05:59:07 pm
Hi All,

While watching the MU-Opic TIC fiasco, I came across this one as soon as their campaign started;

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thumbtrack-the-world-s-smallest-wearable-mouse--2#comments (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thumbtrack-the-world-s-smallest-wearable-mouse--2#comments)

I mean these guys were going to Prototype, Produce and bring to market a brand new type of Wearable "Mouse" for $500.  Sounded fishy from the getgo.

They ended up raising >$31K and have now stated they are creating an additional campaign to raise MORE money.  I knew $500 wouldn't do it :)

Simon
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on September 17, 2014, 07:47:03 pm
There have been attempts to build these "finger mice" before, there are even some products like that on the market already. E.g. the Genius Ring mouse (http://www.geniusnet.com/Genius/wSite/ct?xItem=47711&ctNode=105 (http://www.geniusnet.com/Genius/wSite/ct?xItem=47711&ctNode=105)) or http://www.techisdom.com/tag/finger-based-mouse/ (http://www.techisdom.com/tag/finger-based-mouse/)

There are others, but apart from the novelty value, these gadgets universally suck because of the poor ergonomics. Those Indiegogo folks really had to be smoking something very strong thinking they could sell it for $500.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: coppice on September 17, 2014, 07:59:01 pm
Does anyone remember the HP notebook from the 90s with a tiny mouse that pulled out from the side in a little arm?  :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on September 17, 2014, 09:19:31 pm
Quote
HP notebook from the 90s with a tiny mouse

Yes, my partner had one. I thought it was brilliant :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on September 17, 2014, 09:59:59 pm
Hi All,

While watching the MU-Opic TIC fiasco, I came across this one as soon as their campaign started;

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thumbtrack-the-world-s-smallest-wearable-mouse--2#comments (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thumbtrack-the-world-s-smallest-wearable-mouse--2#comments)

I mean these guys were going to Prototype, Produce and bring to market a brand new type of Wearable "Mouse" for $500.  Sounded fishy from the getgo.

They ended up raising >$31K and have now stated they are creating an additional campaign to raise MORE money.  I knew $500 wouldn't do it :)

Simon

mmm so innovative

http://www.gizmag.com/genius-wireless-ring-mouse-release/18639/ (http://www.gizmag.com/genius-wireless-ring-mouse-release/18639/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Simon P on September 18, 2014, 12:05:36 am
There have been attempts to build these "finger mice" before, there are even some products like that on the market already. E.g. the Genius Ring mouse (http://www.geniusnet.com/Genius/wSite/ct?xItem=47711&ctNode=105 (http://www.geniusnet.com/Genius/wSite/ct?xItem=47711&ctNode=105)) or http://www.techisdom.com/tag/finger-based-mouse/ (http://www.techisdom.com/tag/finger-based-mouse/)

There are others, but apart from the novelty value, these gadgets universally suck because of the poor ergonomics. Those Indiegogo folks really had to be smoking something very strong thinking they could sell it for $500.

Hi Janoc,

No, I didn't mean it will sell for $500.  What I meant is on their original funding goal, they set the amount at $500.  They ended up with $31K.  This smelt of BS the first time I saw how much they were trying to raise.  They say the retail will be $145.

I mean who in their right mind could think realistically they could even think about endeavoring on a project like this for $500 start up ?  Now they mention that they are starting a Second IDGG campaign.  Quote;

"b) We are thrilled that our last campaign raised a little more than $30,000. However, to be able to visit potential manufacturing partners in China and to bring ThumbTrack™ into production, additional funds are needed"

I think they are trying to lead more lambs to the slaughter. 

I also foresee backers leaving similar comments with this mob as the MU-Opics backers left MU-Optics i.e. Pleading for their money back.  I reckon that pretty soon, when the deadline comes and goes, there will be a few BS updates and slowly but surely there will be few and far between answers from them until they disappear................. Not that I am sceptical or anything.

I CANNOT believe how many suckers there are out there  :phew:

Simon
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: andtfoot on September 18, 2014, 01:07:03 pm
I can't believe Indiegogo or whoever allows a single person to start multiple campaigns for the same project...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: coppice on September 18, 2014, 01:37:59 pm
I can't believe Indiegogo or whoever allows a single person to start multiple campaigns for the same project...
I can't believe Indiegogo cares one way or the other, as long as their site gets traffic.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Simon P on October 06, 2014, 06:01:21 pm
I can't believe Indiegogo or whoever allows a single person to start multiple campaigns for the same project...
I can't believe Indiegogo cares one way or the other, as long as their site gets traffic.

The next "Scam", sorry meant "Campaign" is underway at a HIGHER price per unit.  Already over $5K.  I cannot believe how stupid and gullable people can be |O

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thumbtrack-wearable-mouse-better-than-ever (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/thumbtrack-wearable-mouse-better-than-ever)

Simon
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on October 08, 2014, 01:33:39 am
Hi Janoc,

No, I didn't mean it will sell for $500.  What I meant is on their original funding goal, they set the amount at $500.  They ended up with $31K.  This smelt of BS the first time I saw how much they were trying to raise.  They say the retail will be $145.


Sorry, I have misunderstood, I thought they were trying to sell it for that price. However, flex funding campaign with a $500 target trying to raise money for things like FCC/CE certification, injection molding and whatever (according to the latest campaign he has posted linked few posts above), that's just off-scale  :bullshit:  That's actually even worse than trying to sell this thing for $500 as it is obvious the guy cannot be actually trying to produce this.


Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dustout on October 22, 2014, 06:49:59 am
Supposedly a hoverboard has been invented. Sure. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/142464853/hendo-hoverboards-worlds-first-real-hoverboard (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/142464853/hendo-hoverboards-worlds-first-real-hoverboard)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on October 22, 2014, 07:31:11 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/3d-pocketcopter-the-flying-camera (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/3d-pocketcopter-the-flying-camera)

I'm still not 100% sure if this is a simple scam or just the project of complete idiots.
When they started it, they didn't even understand how a coax heli works or what a swashplate is for. They didn't get that a few mm parallax for a stereo camera just doesn't make any sense.
They still don't grasp that the camera picture will look like filmed by a drunk sailor and they think that using a "12V battery" in a flying gadget is a good idea. Well, I could continue endlessly.

I doesn't really matter anyway that they still don't have a prototype or any experience in creating helis or designing a project for production because if you look at their price point (89€) for a coax heli with 3D camera on a pan and tilt gimbal, 3axis gyro and magnetometer, Bluetooth/Wifi app control for which nothing is developed at this point, you just can't take this project seriously.

Still people threw their money on them, all the gadget side reported about the thing being "pen size" (though the current "specs" say 400g and 16x5cm) and praising the "creator" while everything they created at this point (and up to now) wss a lousy rendering of a thing that could not remotely fly and a video where they used other people's footage.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on October 22, 2014, 10:05:22 am
Supposedly a hoverboard has been invented. Sure. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/142464853/hendo-hoverboards-worlds-first-real-hoverboard (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/142464853/hendo-hoverboards-worlds-first-real-hoverboard)
Looks real. Some people tested it:
http://recode.net/2014/10/20/its-not-quite-marty-mcfly-but-the-hoverboard-is-here-video/ (http://recode.net/2014/10/20/its-not-quite-marty-mcfly-but-the-hoverboard-is-here-video/)
If they are using some the eddy currents in some clever way it might work. You can do some amazing things even with static magnets:
Neodymium magnet in FAT copper pipe (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keMpUaoA3Tg#ws)
But I wonder how long the battery lasts. It might need a lot of power for the induction, or a clever combination of static and dynamic magnets.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Marco on October 22, 2014, 10:40:08 am
But I wonder how long the battery lasts. It might need a lot of power for the induction, or a clever combination of static and dynamic magnets.

It uses rotating permanent magnets, the energy goes electromagnetic drag. That said, it would be much cooler with electromagnets ... because that way at least there would be a chance you could do tricks with it (with a couple of kg of rotating magnets in the thing you're not going to flip it).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Hade on November 03, 2014, 11:15:08 pm
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1602632816/qeg-for-everyone?ref=category (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1602632816/qeg-for-everyone?ref=category)

I wouldn't even class this one as dodgy. It's just plain fraud.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on December 23, 2014, 06:43:06 am
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1602632816/qeg-for-everyone?ref=category (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1602632816/qeg-for-everyone?ref=category)

I wouldn't even class this one as dodgy. It's just plain fraud.

This makes you just one of the ppl that try to hide the truth form the current establishemnt :P

I just find it sad how basic physics skill are overshadowed by conspiracy theories
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on December 27, 2014, 11:37:14 pm
Something i came across today when being bored.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mglintzer/adicon-analog-to-digital-converter-for-hifi-enthus?ref=category (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mglintzer/adicon-analog-to-digital-converter-for-hifi-enthus?ref=category)

I like it how the stress out all the external features. they are so much more important then what DAC they used or other components. But hey it has a high tech made front panel in two colors and some nice flashy LEDs
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Jeddychan on December 28, 2014, 05:54:02 am
this showed up on my facebook newsfeed today.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rayton-solar-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/rayton-solar-cheaper-than-fossil-fuels)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: electr_peter on December 28, 2014, 08:22:28 am
Something i came across today when being bored.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mglintzer/adicon-analog-to-digital-converter-for-hifi-enthus?ref=category (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mglintzer/adicon-analog-to-digital-converter-for-hifi-enthus?ref=category)
I like it how the stress out all the external features. they are so much more important then what DAC they used or other components. But hey it has a high tech made front panel in two colors and some nice flashy LEDs
What is so dodgy about this project?
It seems they have a production ready(?) prototype and know what they are doing. Product claims are reasonable. There is whitepaper available showing at first glance nice looking internal construction, schematic and some measurements.
If I was looking for such item, I would consider backing this project. Good luck to them.

They want to have a nice case and front panel - what is wrong with that? Product otherwise would just be black box with audio in/out and power cables.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on December 29, 2014, 03:22:48 am
Well might have been a bit to hastly to call it dodgy, but the marketing on it makes it seem... weird, If you have a product like that and you want to sell it to ppl that know stuff about audio you should work with technical stuff not showing off a set of flashing LEDs and the front panel.

I do hope this thing works as they make it look like, since that is a useful thing, but the hipster audiophile marketing makes it look like a toy rather the audio product they claim it to be
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on December 29, 2014, 04:08:47 am
Not many good ADCs out there but for $400 you can get this if your computer still has firewire:
http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/731/features/ (http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/731/features/)

4-in/4-out 24-bit/192kHz

Of course they have more current devices:
http://www.rolandus.com/products/category/498 (http://www.rolandus.com/products/category/498)

For around $1000 you can get:
http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1268/498 (http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1268/498)

And for around $200 you can get:
http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1166/498 (http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1166/498)
but only 2 channels at 192KHz

On the $600 range this is a nice one as well:
http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1127/498 (http://www.rolandus.com/products/details/1127/498)

But I do wish them well, maybe their equipment is better.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on December 31, 2014, 09:43:03 pm
Yeh true, despite the weird (at least form my prespective) marketing I do hope this will live up to expetation.

Also i came accross this
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/neo-neurophone-n-neural-e-efficiency-o-optimizer (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/neo-neurophone-n-neural-e-efficiency-o-optimizer)

Can someone tell me what the hell is a Pink Fibonacci Frequency ? This looks like some new age bs... founded at 300%
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on December 31, 2014, 10:34:04 pm
Quote
Can someone tell me what the hell is a Pink Fibonacci Frequency ? This looks like some new age bs... founded at 300%
Google around for pink noise and Fibonacci Phi and Binaural beats.. I think it's related. 

Yeah, it's definitely some new age bs. :)

I tried to listen to the Fibonacci binaural beats you can find on youtube and I just wanted to vomit.


Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on January 01, 2015, 01:24:57 am
Quote
Can someone tell me what the hell is a Pink Fibonacci Frequency ? This looks like some new age bs... founded at 300%
Google around for pink noise and Fibonacci Phi and Binaural beats.. I think it's related. 

Yeah, it's definitely some new age bs. :)

I tried to listen to the Fibonacci binaural beats you can find on youtube and I just wanted to vomit.

I tryed... but when I did google for it and read it... i felt like i saw listen to pink noise and it didn't make much sense. How do ppl buy in to this ?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on January 01, 2015, 01:31:52 am
I think I found the patent mentioned in the campaign, at least looks like it is the only patent from Gillis P Flanagan: https://www.google.com/patents/US3647970 (https://www.google.com/patents/US3647970) . It was cited at the bottom of this page: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/supressed_inventions/suppressed_inventions23.htm (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/supressed_inventions/suppressed_inventions23.htm) where Flanagan wrote about a conspiracy regarding NSA who forbid his patent, which is strange, because you can clearly see it on Google patents :)

This is the Youtube video of the pink fibonacci frequency:

Fibonacci Low by Dr. Patrick Flanagan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vBBJ0fUj3M#)

Looks like just a few low frequency sine waves and very quiet at -47 dBFS, which doesn't make sense, because you have to turn up the volume and then later other audio is too loud. Original spectrum:

(http://i.imgur.com/UH5AvSU.png)

37 dB amplified waveform:

(http://i.imgur.com/ebQ7Pvw.png)

And of course the device works, no matter what sound it produces, because of the placebo effect. Production cost would be much less than $50, nice profit. Works best with his Megahydrate snake oil (the $33 pledge on the same Indiegogo campaign), which is described here: http://www.megahydrate.eu (http://www.megahydrate.eu) :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on January 13, 2015, 05:13:53 am
Maybe dodgy is the wrong term, it's more of a future candidate for the Darwin Awards:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/omo-one-man-octo-copter-flying-machine (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/omo-one-man-octo-copter-flying-machine)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Howardlong on January 14, 2015, 07:39:18 am
Not crowd funded, but this product implements negative time domain techniques.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/08/auroratek-tried-to-pitch-us-a-gadget-that-breaks-the-laws-of-physics-at-ces/ (http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/08/auroratek-tried-to-pitch-us-a-gadget-that-breaks-the-laws-of-physics-at-ces/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on January 16, 2015, 10:45:45 pm
Cancer diagnosis at home. It's all there: cryptic description, questionable function, some off-the-shelf model picture for the female team member.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-first-at-home-cancer-diagnostic-test (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-first-at-home-cancer-diagnostic-test)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on January 16, 2015, 11:03:15 pm
Cancer diagnosis at home. It's all there: cryptic description, questionable function, some off-the-shelf model picture for the female team member.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-first-at-home-cancer-diagnostic-test (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-first-at-home-cancer-diagnostic-test)

that's not even dodgy... that's a SCAM...  they claim it's more accurate than MRI in diagnosing cancer  :palm:  :bullshit: :bullshit: :bullshit: their device claims to spit out a warning "high risk of cancer", while MRI will show you the tissue with cancer... how the hell could their device be more accurate then ?

btw... where did the doctors go from their team ? i see only engineers and a CEO.... who the hell did the medical R&D ? where are the links to publications ?

fortunately, it looks they will not make it in 6 days and they have fixed funding.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on January 17, 2015, 02:46:57 am
Well, yeah, we agree that this device will be either completely dysfunctional or have a toy like functionality not even close to the promised features.
It is especially disgusting since it plays with people's fears and could induce tragic consequences for users trusting in the device's verdict.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mux on January 21, 2015, 12:41:57 am
This would be illegal in most European countries, it would never get past certification. Don't you yanks have similar laws?

You can't say something diagnoses, treats or improves any medical condition without validated literature to go with it.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on January 23, 2015, 09:19:14 pm
How can ANYONE in his right mind believe this would work... Like we are talking about something that is life and death, Would you honestly trust that to a plastic toy that connects to your smarphone over a trained medical professional with a MRI ? 

I know its the dream to have a auto-doc in your house. but this is a scam, good they did not claim that it will also cure it, might have as well
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on January 23, 2015, 10:14:17 pm
How can ANYONE in his right mind believe this would work...
People who are ill or fear to be believe in much more stupid stuff. Like MMS  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_Mineral_Supplement)or that all diseases are caused by intestinal flukes you can kill with 2kHz 9V signal created with a 555.
Never forget that science and technology is like magic for most people and human stupidity is infinite.
Title: Shitty Kickstarters Subreddit
Post by: Jope on February 10, 2015, 01:15:46 am
There is a whole subreddit dedicated to dodgy kickstarter projects (not restricted to electronics-related ones): shittykickstarters (http://www.reddit.com/r/shittykickstarters)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Derresh on February 16, 2015, 10:48:23 pm
Ok... I think i see double

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/charge-your-phone-twice-as-fast-chargetech (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/charge-your-phone-twice-as-fast-chargetech)

http://www.amazon.com/Aukey-Motorola-Batteries-Bluetooth-USB-Powered/dp/B00Q873I3K/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1424087212&sr=8-1&keywords=aukey+pa-u32 (http://www.amazon.com/Aukey-Motorola-Batteries-Bluetooth-USB-Powered/dp/B00Q873I3K/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1424087212&sr=8-1&keywords=aukey+pa-u32)

If you scroll down you see the exact same picture just has a silk screen on it

The car charger is the same deal, I even have one of them in my junk heap... Don't recall the brand of the top of my head
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on March 03, 2015, 10:29:28 pm
Cloak of invisibility is finally there...
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-cloak-of-invisibility (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-cloak-of-invisibility)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on March 03, 2015, 10:38:33 pm
Cloak of invisibility is finally there...
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-cloak-of-invisibility (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-cloak-of-invisibility)

You did watch the video, right ? :)
Title: Plugaway: All money spent, another Kickstarter bites the dust...
Post by: Towger on March 03, 2015, 11:48:22 pm
Plugaway was an internet connected plug and bulb. The Kickstarter was supposed to be a marketing/customer feedback (fine-tuning) exercise, with a goal of $50,000 AUD and all R&D costs paid for by the project creators.
Yet,  despite raising 3 times the initial goal, the coffers have run dry and the backers who stuck with them given the finger: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/plugaway/plugaway-your-smart-home-on-your-smart-phone/posts/1149647 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/plugaway/plugaway-your-smart-home-on-your-smart-phone/posts/1149647)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on March 03, 2015, 11:55:08 pm
Plugaway was an internet connected plug and bulb. The Kickstarter was supposed to be a marketing/customer feedback (fine-tuning) exercise, with a goal of $50,000 AUD and all R&D costs paid for by the project creators.
Yet,  despite raising 3 times the initial goal, the coffers have run dry and the backers who stuck with them given the finger: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/plugaway/plugaway-your-smart-home-on-your-smart-phone/posts/1149647 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/plugaway/plugaway-your-smart-home-on-your-smart-phone/posts/1149647)

I didn't back it, but I thought the Plugaway project was a pretty good idea.  I wish it had succeeded.  The funny part is reading the comments.. people don't seem to realize that kickstarter is not a store, it's an investment in an idea that might not work.  Anyone who gives money to any kickstarter campaign should realize it's like the stock market, and could fail at any time, leaving you with nothing.  No one should invest in a kickstarter campaign if they can't afford the risk.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on March 04, 2015, 01:00:04 am
Quote
kickstarter is not a store, it's an investment in an idea that might not work

And yet project creators are "responsible for completing the project and fulfilling each reward. Their fundamental obligation to backers is to finish all the work that was promised." Backing a project for a reward that is a tangible item is indeed rather like shopping, with the only real difference being that the product doesn't yet exist (in most cases).

Kickstarter goes on: "If a creator is absolutely unable to complete the project and fulfill rewards, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to a satisfying conclusion for their backers."

When you buy something from a pukka shop, the deal may still fall through and you won't get what you're promised. The main difference between that and kickstarter is that the deal isn't on until the funding period ends. Between your 'shopping' and the end of funding, enough money may not be raised so nothing happens. In a real shop, you pay and the item is basically already yours regardless of bank loans, other shoppers, etc.

Of course backers are investing. They are investing in the rewards, which have been promised and which should be delivered.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Galenbo on March 05, 2015, 06:29:44 am
...
I didn't back it, but I thought the Plugaway project was a pretty good idea.  I wish it had succeeded...

I am always amazed about the video quality of the publicity they make. What's the price of their movie?
Must be +30K euro, no? Who's in the professional video editing business?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: eas on March 05, 2015, 08:57:53 am
Quote
kickstarter is not a store, it's an investment in an idea that might not work

And yet project creators are "responsible for completing the project and fulfilling each reward. Their fundamental obligation to backers is to finish all the work that was promised." Backing a project for a reward that is a tangible item is indeed rather like shopping, with the only real difference being that the product doesn't yet exist (in most cases).

Kickstarter goes on: "If a creator is absolutely unable to complete the project and fulfill rewards, they must make every reasonable effort to find another way of bringing the project to a satisfying conclusion for their backers."

When you buy something from a pukka shop, the deal may still fall through and you won't get what you're promised. The main difference between that and kickstarter is that the deal isn't on until the funding period ends. Between your 'shopping' and the end of funding, enough money may not be raised so nothing happens. In a real shop, you pay and the item is basically already yours regardless of bank loans, other shoppers, etc.

Of course backers are investing. They are investing in the rewards, which have been promised and which should be delivered.

If Kickstarter is an investment, it isn't a very good one, since a contributor puts the whole of their contribution at risk, and in exchange may, at best, get a discounted price on a product they want and can't otherwise get. I actually think this is a good thing, because if it offered the potential of significant upside, it would promote more degenerate gambling behavior amongst contributors.

The text you've omitted between the two quotes you took from the kickstarter FAQ is:

Quote
Once a creator has done so, they’ve fulfilled their obligation to their backers. At the same time, backers must understand that Kickstarter is not a store. When you back a project, you’re helping to create something new — not ordering something that already exists. There’s a chance something could happen that prevents the creator from being able to finish the project as promised.

Or putting it another way, this may seem like shopping, its not. I'd suggest a better analogy is buying season tickets (or viewing rights) for a sports team - they may win, they may loose.

Quote
Many backers are rallying around their friends' projects. Some are supporting a new effort from someone they've long admired. Some are just inspired by a new idea, while others are motivated to pledge by a project's rewards — a copy of what's being produced, a limited edition, or a custom experience related to the project.

Backing a project is more than just pledging funds to a creator. It's pledging your support to a creative idea that you want to see exist in the world.

Over and over, Kickstarter talks about creativity, creating, creators. Creativity always includes failures along the way. Engineers (and lawyers) put a lot of emphasis on managing risk, but there is also a risk of mediocrity in not taking a big enough risk, and when taking bigger risks, the risk that money will run out before the project is "done."

Kickstarter projects should strive to be realistic in their plans and promises, and finish what they start, but backers should know, that won't always happen, or if it does, it may be late, or fall short of initial promises.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on March 05, 2015, 09:04:58 am
Quote
The text you've omitted ...

I didn't think relevant to the point I was making there, and I addressed it anyway earlier (although rereading that now I see it may not be obvious).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on March 05, 2015, 10:09:31 am
Kickstarter projects should strive to be realistic in their plans and promises, and finish what they start, but backers should know, that won't always happen, or if it does, it may be late, or fall short of initial promises.

This is the key take-away here.  For most kickstarter projects I've seen, the "creators" legitimately want to bring something good into the world, something they want to see happen and they believe in it. What they are selling is that belief, to gain backers and financial support. They don't want to fail, and they do want to deliver on their rewards and products.   I think most projects start with good intentions but fail due to lack of experience and poor estimates of actual time and costs. 
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on March 06, 2015, 10:26:38 pm
Kickstarter to Save Earth from Aliens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjhZSPNIur0#ws)

I don't know if it is dodgy, because usually it didn't turn out well when the USA was engaged in a war, as you can see in Vietnam or Iraq (maybe with the positive exception of WW2), but it has already 19 backers, $483.56 of the T$100 goal. I'll support the campaing with the G$10 pledge as soon as I manage to break the Bitcoin encryption: "Inclusion in the ruling class when the New World Order is established in the aftermath of the Battle for Earth"
Title: Re: Plugaway: All money spent, another Kickstarter bites the dust...
Post by: bartek on March 07, 2015, 08:30:35 pm
Plugaway was an internet connected plug and bulb. The Kickstarter was supposed to be a marketing/customer feedback (fine-tuning) exercise, with a goal of $50,000 AUD and all R&D costs paid for by the project creators.
Yet,  despite raising 3 times the initial goal, the coffers have run dry and the backers who stuck with them given the finger: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/plugaway/plugaway-your-smart-home-on-your-smart-phone/posts/1149647 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/plugaway/plugaway-your-smart-home-on-your-smart-phone/posts/1149647)

According to their financials they payed $58K for molding and $25K for office rental, I realise getting plastics right is expensive but this just doesn't seem right. Especially if they put $50K for their minimum goal. Maybe getting it certified was too much of a hassle...


...
I didn't back it, but I thought the Plugaway project was a pretty good idea.  I wish it had succeeded...

I am always amazed about the video quality of the publicity they make. What's the price of their movie?
Must be +30K euro, no? Who's in the professional video editing business?

There are a few studios around the world that specialise in Kickstarter campaigns, for example the studio that did http://kck.st/IfPkIA (http://kck.st/IfPkIA) charges $20K USD plus 5% of the campaign total.

This makes it hard for the little guys who genuinely need to Kickstart their project and don't have a spare $30K USD to spend on marketing!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on March 07, 2015, 09:04:23 pm
Quote
the studio that did http://kck.st/IfPkIA (http://kck.st/IfPkIA) charges $20K USD plus 5%

Gotta say they are worth every penny - despite going there from this thread I absolutely wanted one of those, and even found myself on the store page about to click the PayPal link  :-+
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on March 07, 2015, 10:08:16 pm
The paper airplane project is very cool, but I guess people would have bought it even with a home video. See for example the video of HackRF (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mossmann/hackrf-an-open-source-sdr-platform) (which I backed). No PR bullshit like the shampoo or Mentos Cola in the airplane video, just pure information. It was funded with 750% of the goal. Ok, target audience requirements might be different, but I still think if you have a good product, you don't need to spend tons of money for a video. That's only what the advertisment industry tries to tell you.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on March 07, 2015, 10:56:52 pm
The HackRF video is still pretty decent. I think it is, in some ways, much like having an ace programmer design the user interface: some are quite capable of that, but IME the two are separate arts and you might be really good at one yet spectacularly bad at the other. If you just can't create videos then paying someone else to do it, and have it really slick, is worth it.

The issue with stuff like Kickstarter is that you get more than one type of punter. In the case of HackRF I suspect that the video is mere wallpaper: either you know what this is about and you really want one, or it is so meh and your eyes glaze over. It would take quite a lot of persuasion to get you to shift from one position to the other.

OTOH, the paper plane thing needs to catch your inner child in the first few seconds and not let go, otherwise it's just another paper plane and you gave those up two decades ago. The video is entertaining enough that you'll watch it regardless of what it's selling, and by the end its message will have got across to a pretty captive audience who didn't realise at the outset that they wanted the make paper planes still.

Worked on me, anyway :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Galenbo on March 07, 2015, 11:00:12 pm
If Kickstarter is an investment, it isn't a very good one, since a contributor puts the whole of their contribution at risk, and in exchange may, at best, get a discounted price on a product...

Indeed. People are confused when talking about investing.
They never should have bought an Apple product, but for the same price bought an action, it has the value of a house now.

But whinewhine I want the product now, and share the expierience and be seen and...
Consumerism.
Title: Re: Plugaway: All money spent, another Kickstarter bites the dust...
Post by: Galenbo on March 08, 2015, 08:02:47 pm

There are a few studios around the world that specialise in Kickstarter campaigns, for example the studio that did http://kck.st/IfPkIA (http://kck.st/IfPkIA) charges $20K USD plus 5% of the campaign total.

This makes it hard for the little guys who genuinely need to Kickstart their project and don't have a spare $30K USD to spend on marketing!

+20K (and if some fancy CGI, +40K I guess) for a video must be a shocking number for those naive backers.

"With this kickstart campaign we hope to raise enough money to market another Kickstart campaign to..."
I wouldn't be surprised if those studios bought actions in Kickstart inc.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on March 08, 2015, 08:15:14 pm
It's mildly confusing when you call shares/stocks "actions".
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Galenbo on March 08, 2015, 09:13:44 pm
It's mildly confusing when you call shares/stocks "actions".

I use too many languages to be accurate in this. Such errors will happen again.

Aandeel(Nl) -> Action(Fr) -> Action(En) -> Wrong
Aandeel(Nl) -> Aktie(De) -> Action(En) -> Wrong

Aandeel(Nl) -> Action(Fr) -> Share(En) -> Right
Aandeel(Nl) -> Aktie(De) -> Share(En) -> Right
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mgf897 on March 12, 2015, 03:37:18 pm
Just stumbled across this
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/description)

I was most concerned about the autorouting until I discovered the relays are supposedly rated for 250V 7A!    :palm:

EDIT: board layouts here
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/posts (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/posts)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on March 12, 2015, 09:29:57 pm
Just stumbled across this
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/description)

I was most concerned about the autorouting until I discovered the relays are supposedly rated for 250V 7A!    :palm:

EDIT: board layouts here
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/posts (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1915118535/piio-a-gpio-board-for-raspberry-pi/posts)

The product may still work as claimed, but the routing , and even the component placement choices, is just awful.

The relays may be rated at 7A (maybe that's what fit the area and budget) but I hope somewhere on the page it says no more than 1 - 2 Amps max.
The traces look like about 50 mils or so.  They will get warm at 2A, and too hot to touch at 3A.


Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: SeanB on March 13, 2015, 04:16:14 am
7A, though at 7.1A the traces act like fuses for a safe disconnect.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: katzohki on March 21, 2015, 06:17:38 am
Free energy inverter:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1338118691/free-energy-inverter?ref=category_newest (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1338118691/free-energy-inverter?ref=category_newest)

Quote
The project involves the assembly of high voltage electronic components and control circuits, but unfortunately I am no electric engineer, although a good handyman and excellent self learner.
OK...
Quote
A certain amount of X ray and other exotic electromagnetic effects will be present when the machine is in operation, so I hope not to die in the process of getting it to work.

Apart from that it should be a piece of cake...
:wtf: People who fuck around with X-Rays piss me off. I don't need one of these nutjobs living next door to me.

Quote
I look forward to receive your feedback so that we might rewrite Maxwells Equation together in a more complete and accurate form.
Well he did say he's not an "electric engineer"...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on March 21, 2015, 06:38:42 am
Free energy inverter:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1338118691/free-energy-inverter?ref=category_newest (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1338118691/free-energy-inverter?ref=category_newest)

I hate it when people use pictures from patents, but don't cite the patent number. This is the patent (http://www.google.com/patents/US4595975) from where the pictures where stolen. Doesn't looks very useful. And of course, the whole campaign is bullshit. Probably he copied the 120 PDF file from some other crackpot "free energy" website. At least he could have done one of these silly videos with lots of motors, batteries and multimeters which proves nothing.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: katzohki on March 21, 2015, 06:42:14 am
Yeah forgot to mention that it looks like a ripped off patent.

Quote
Efficient power supply suitable for inductive loads
Slow clap...  :clap:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jarrodhroberson on March 25, 2015, 03:13:54 am
What kind of audio-phoolery is this?

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/vero-revolutionary-headphone-cable/x/6609972 (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/vero-revolutionary-headphone-cable/x/6609972)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: katzohki on March 25, 2015, 03:30:49 am
What kind of audio-phoolery is this?

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/vero-revolutionary-headphone-cable/x/6609972 (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/vero-revolutionary-headphone-cable/x/6609972)

Cables... the worst kind...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: SaabFAN on March 31, 2015, 02:21:11 pm
The only time I noticed a difference in sound was when I switched from small signal-wires (about 1,5mm in diameter) to proper loudspeaker-cables (about 5mm diameter just for the copper). The music was louder and the bass was more powerful. And the new cables don't get warm when I turn up the volume :D
Everything else is a surprisingly successful marketing-scheme... Maybe I should try it sometime: "Audiophile WiFi-Antenna for the best MP3 Download-Quality!"  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MadModder on April 13, 2015, 02:20:54 am
Omg... "Multipole technology inside"   :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: valley_nomad on May 02, 2015, 11:06:02 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanoplug-the-world-s-first-invisible-hearing-aid (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/nanoplug-the-world-s-first-invisible-hearing-aid)

The creator claimed that they couldn't get the CE mark for their amazing product because its battery is too small. So they instead sent the backers some existing hearing aids worth about 10 times less :o
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on May 02, 2015, 09:53:16 pm
Well, that doesn't look dubious but like a scam that was planned as such from the beginning.

I can offer a really dubious one though:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/295213551/xeos-3d-printer/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/295213551/xeos-3d-printer/)

Indeed a guy of this name designed (!) this concept during his bachelor thesis in 2012 at a German university. We're talking industrial design here, not engineering!
Now he seems to have moved to Kansas City, presents only old renderings from 2012 and wants to collect a sum as low as $15,500 in only a few days.
Indeed this must be the shortest campaign I ever saw on Kickstarter. Hit and run tactics? And what can you do with $15k?
Prices start at $99 for the single-head version, which is kinda ridiculous. Also no information whatsoever about resolution, speed etc.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: bitwelder on May 03, 2015, 02:09:46 am
I can offer a really dubious one though:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/295213551/xeos-3d-printer/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/295213551/xeos-3d-printer/)

Funding Suspended
Funding for this project was suspended by Kickstarter 5 minutes ago.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: valley_nomad on May 03, 2015, 09:55:33 am

Since the end of successful Tiko campaign there have been two episodes of 3D printer drama unfolded on Kickstarter. The first one was Nea (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1920177285/nea (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1920177285/nea)). Now this one  :o
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on May 03, 2015, 09:00:19 pm
Both seem to come from the same person though. At least both (fake) accounts were verified by the same person "Dale Groth" who has another canceled project in his history:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2009151012/rgm-crate-rube-goldberg-machine-crate (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2009151012/rgm-crate-rube-goldberg-machine-crate)
Guess this fake profile was just created to verify other fake profiles.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: redshift on May 05, 2015, 06:00:23 am
Apparently "launching soon on kickstarter": http://www.nikolalabs.co/ (http://www.nikolalabs.co/)   :palm:

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Richard Crowley on May 05, 2015, 06:04:29 am
Apparently "launching soon on kickstarter": http://www.nikolalabs.co/ (http://www.nikolalabs.co/)   :palm:
Does Nikola Tesla have a Kickstarter account?  I thought he was dead.

Can you imagine how much (if any?) usable RF spectrum would remain for communication if Nick's idea of wireless power transmission had succeeded?   :scared:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: redshift on May 05, 2015, 06:22:33 am
They're at TechCrunch Disrupt in NY today: http://startupalleyny15.techcrunch.com/index.php?day=1&comp=556 (http://startupalleyny15.techcrunch.com/index.php?day=1&comp=556)

With a team of real people: https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/nikola-labs-llc (https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/nikola-labs-llc)

I wish I could be there to watch this  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: matseng on May 06, 2015, 12:18:52 am
They're at TechCrunch Disrupt in NY today: http://startupalleyny15.techcrunch.com/index.php?day=1&comp=556 (http://startupalleyny15.techcrunch.com/index.php?day=1&comp=556)

With a team of real people: https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/nikola-labs-llc (https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/nikola-labs-llc)

I wish I could be there to watch this  :-DD
You can now look at the pitch at http://techcrunch.com/video/pull-battery-power-out-of-thin-air-with-nikola-labs/518805768/ (http://techcrunch.com/video/pull-battery-power-out-of-thin-air-with-nikola-labs/518805768/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: redshift on May 06, 2015, 01:27:21 am
That was interesting to watch. Thanks for the link!

I'm very confused about how a reputable university like Ohio State got involved with all of this. I tried looking up the patent filings they mentioned but I couldn't find them.

As soon as I saw that there were industry judges, I was sure someone was going to call them out. But this never happened. In fact the first question was "Could you tell me a bit more about why you started with an iPhone case?"  |O

On their twitter you can see what the disassembled cases look like: https://twitter.com/NikolaLabs/status/594248353308774400 (https://twitter.com/NikolaLabs/status/594248353308774400).

They'll probably reach their goal and confirmation bias will be enough to convince people that they're getting 30% extra power  :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: valley_nomad on May 06, 2015, 02:50:47 pm
Rob Lee claimed that their trick is to collect the energy transmitted from the phone. However, the statistics shows that the power consumed by those communications (e.g. GSM Wi-Fi) is less than 50% of total smartphone power consumption. How can they save 30% in total by harvesting those energy without affecting the communication performance?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on May 08, 2015, 11:00:52 pm
Rob Lee claimed that their trick is to collect the energy transmitted from the phone. However, the statistics shows that the power consumed by those communications (e.g. GSM Wi-Fi) is less than 50% of total smartphone power consumption. How can they save 30% in total by harvesting those energy without affecting the communication performance?
Magic?
Must be Magic.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ruffy91 on May 09, 2015, 12:19:23 am
Not everyone is falling for them: http://hackaday.com/2015/05/05/techcrunch-disrupt-charging-a-phone-with-its-own-transmitter/
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on May 09, 2015, 06:52:05 am
Not everyone is falling for them: http://hackaday.com/2015/05/05/techcrunch-disrupt-charging-a-phone-with-its-own-transmitter/ (http://hackaday.com/2015/05/05/techcrunch-disrupt-charging-a-phone-with-its-own-transmitter/)

this might have something to do with HaD previously endorsing Soap scam, they learned their lesson
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: valley_nomad on May 09, 2015, 10:49:50 am
.....

They'll probably reach their goal and confirmation bias will be enough to convince people that they're getting 30% extra power  :palm:

Remember that iFind campaign? I think that the same thing will happen to this campaign as well ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MadModder on May 26, 2015, 12:52:14 am
If that antenna really is harvesting  RF emitted from the phone itself, isn't that going to reduce the phone's connectivity to some degree?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Richard Crowley on May 26, 2015, 02:12:47 am
If that antenna really is harvesting  RF emitted from the phone itself, isn't that going to reduce the phone's connectivity to some degree?
Spoil-sport!  Never let technical facts get in the way of a good scam!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Twonius on May 27, 2015, 05:02:07 am
Energy harvesting from footsteps. Looks a bit dodgy compared to other forms of green energy Maybe they should put a solar panel on top   :bullshit: and boost the efficiency of your solar-freaking-roadway.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/25/pavegen-kicks-off-crowdcube-campaign-to-power-up-its-kinetic-flooring-business/ (http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/25/pavegen-kicks-off-crowdcube-campaign-to-power-up-its-kinetic-flooring-business/)

Then again they have crowdfunded $0.5M from investors at a $25M valuation so what do I know.
https://www.crowdcube.com/company-details/pavegen-19189 (https://www.crowdcube.com/company-details/pavegen-19189)

Looks like their market is people who want publicity for being green, not actually improving energy generation / consumption. Sort of like an art installation.

Here's a TED talk by the founder. At least from his presentation it seems like a solution in search of a problem
https://vimeo.com/44078683 (https://vimeo.com/44078683)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on May 27, 2015, 07:02:28 am
If that antenna really is harvesting  RF emitted from the phone itself, isn't that going to reduce the phone's connectivity to some degree?
Spoil-sport!  Never let technical facts get in the way of a good scam!

Unfortunately, web sites like Gizmag don't have issues with it neither:
https://www.gizmag.com/smartphone-radio-wave-scavenging/37702/ (https://www.gizmag.com/smartphone-radio-wave-scavenging/37702/)

If you want a reliable news about the latest Kickstarter scams and physically impossible gizmos, Gizmag is the place to go - they will reliably present it as a done deal, ready to go tomorrow ...  |O
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Richard Crowley on May 27, 2015, 07:39:14 am
Yeah, while "Gizmag" is just another dodgy internet source, and the USPTO have long ago shown that they are unable to detect a "Perpetual Motion Machine" when they see one.

What I am most surprised at is Ohio State University where you would think that there are knowledgeable professors who know better.

By that method, I can connect some alternators to the wheels of my car and generate "free" electricity, right?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on May 27, 2015, 08:05:43 am
Yeah, while "Gizmag" is just another dodgy internet source, and the USPTO have long ago shown that they are unable to detect a "Perpetual Motion Machine" when they see one.

What I am most surprised at is Ohio State University where you would think that there are knowledgeable professors who know better.

By that method, I can connect some alternators to the wheels of my car and generate "free" electricity, right?

Well, it wouldn't be the first time that a university researcher got roped into supporting a dodgy project. The "cold fusion" stories involved some professors from a reputable Italian university supposedly verifying the claims of one of the "inventors". And sometimes they are just mislead and exploited to lend the project more credence than it would otherwise have. Researchers are only humans, they aren't infallible.

I did dig a little and this perhaps explains the link to Ohio State U:
http://fisher.osu.edu/centers/tec/ohio-state-business-plan-competition (http://fisher.osu.edu/centers/tec/ohio-state-business-plan-competition)

Nikola Labs has won a "business plan" competition (Fisher College is business school). I guess their marketing and business plan were better than their engineering. And I am quite sure that the actual viability of the gizmo was never a criteria of the competition  :palm:

The researcher involved is I think this fellow: https://electroscience.osu.edu/people/chen.118 (https://electroscience.osu.edu/people/chen.118) (He appeared in a radio interview with the cofounder of the Nikola Labs)

The interview is here: http://radio.wosu.org/post/tech-tuesday-steady-income-app-radio-wave-energy-and-reviews (http://radio.wosu.org/post/tech-tuesday-steady-income-app-radio-wave-energy-and-reviews) (starts around 15:20)

He has a lot of work in UWB antennas, RFID and such. My guess is that they took an idea of his (perhaps the design of the harvesting antenna?) and invented this "save up to 30% of your battery power by harvesting the radio signal" as a way to commercialize it. Strictly speaking, they could get some energy out of it, but nowhere near the "up to 30%" claim.

The way it often works is that an Uni licenses (or even gives away) a technology/invention to a company and they then try to do something with it. However, the Uni has little to do with it anymore beyond that point. Whether the company is building a square wheel or a perpetuum mobile with it is not really their problem.


Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Howardlong on May 27, 2015, 03:46:22 pm
Energy harvesting from footsteps. Looks a bit dodgy compared to other forms of green energy Maybe they should put a solar panel on top   :bullshit: and boost the efficiency of your solar-freaking-roadway.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/25/pavegen-kicks-off-crowdcube-campaign-to-power-up-its-kinetic-flooring-business/ (http://techcrunch.com/2015/05/25/pavegen-kicks-off-crowdcube-campaign-to-power-up-its-kinetic-flooring-business/)

Then again they have crowdfunded $0.5M from investors at a $25M valuation so what do I know.
https://www.crowdcube.com/company-details/pavegen-19189 (https://www.crowdcube.com/company-details/pavegen-19189)

Looks like their market is people who want publicity for being green, not actually improving energy generation / consumption. Sort of like an art installation.

Here's a TED talk by the founder. At least from his presentation it seems like a solution in search of a problem
https://vimeo.com/44078683 (https://vimeo.com/44078683)

Thankfully El Reg has well and truly seen through it http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/26/pavegen_the_company_that_cant_make_energy_out_of_crowds_tries_to_make_money_out_of_them/ (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/05/26/pavegen_the_company_that_cant_make_energy_out_of_crowds_tries_to_make_money_out_of_them/) but not before a bunch of other news outlets that should know better fell for it.

That Ted talk was probably the worst one I've ever seen, very amateurish.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Delta on May 27, 2015, 10:45:20 pm
He claims 7 watts per pedestrian, does that sound reasonable?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Twonius on May 28, 2015, 12:30:23 am
Intuitively it feels right. 7 watts on my bike trainer is impreceptable.

But since whatever energy caputure device they're using probably has a short stroke, the amount of energy captured is a more reasonable measure. It seems like a somewhat stiff system, so perhaps 7watts for a fraction of a second, and a very low duty cycle.

He mentions that the one at the festival loaded 1000 phones. At about 2000mAh per phone battery (full charge) that means 2000 AH @ 5V. It looks like at least 6 blocks there so let's say 0.33AH x 5V per block = 1.65kWH or about 0.55 kWH per day. And that's with people being recruited to dance on it. So lets say it's active 12 hours per day, 550wH/12 hours = 45 watts. 

My guess is the difference between this and the 7 watts quoted is that they didn't chage all these battiers 100%. So they counted every time someone plugged a phone in and got > 1% charge. Having used a pedal  charger in the Brussels airport I doubt someone would wait around for a full charge either. Also I over estimated the battery capacity by a lot (iphone 5 is about 1440 mAH).

BTW they've almost raised 500k GBP now.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Mechanical Menace on May 28, 2015, 03:01:42 am
Intuitively it feels right. 7 watts on my bike trainer is impreceptable.

But none of that energy is actually moving you, most of it will be going to the trainer. And bikes are like 5 times more efficient than walking, so these floors only have one fifth of the power available to them. Without making walking on them much harder (in which case most will walk around them) I can't see this claim panning out at all.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on May 28, 2015, 03:11:06 am
Innovation would be a system that treats a solar panel as a square matrix LCD.
Analysing each pixel continuously and taking panels that are resistive (ie in shadow) offline...
This would boost panel efficiency if the processing can be done in the very low energy domain.
Furthermore, panels could be installed in places not normally worthwhile etc.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on May 28, 2015, 03:43:02 am
Quote
bikes are like 5 times more efficient than walking

For going somewhere, but you don't actually want that efficiency here, do you? I mean, you don't want to roll across this floor imparting zero energy because it's all retained as horizontal kinetic energy; instead you want it to be really inefficient, so you take many up/down steps and impart lots of otherwise wasted energy to be soaked up by the floor.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Mechanical Menace on May 28, 2015, 03:50:18 am
Quote
bikes are like 5 times more efficient than walking

For going somewhere, but you don't actually want that efficiency here, do you?

For getting from A to B I don't want to decrease the efficiency of walking, like I won't walk through mud when there's a perfectly good pavement available. I can't see this generating a reasonable amount of energy without making walking across it much harder than a normal floor.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: electr_peter on May 28, 2015, 03:58:57 am
Everyone who likes to drive bicycle with brakes partialy on all the way (or flat tires) raise hands. Anyone?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Twonius on May 28, 2015, 05:46:09 am
I think we're getting off track a bit here.

Whether it's 1 watt or 10 my point was that even at basically walking intensity on a bike I'm measuring 70 watts a the wheel. So if they think they can grab a few watts out of that it seems like we're in the real of possibility. You can imagine these things sort of like very small stroke stair machines, they're robbing you of gravitational potential energy.

Considering the weight of a person it seems plausible you could generate 7 watts of power for a very short period of time. let's assume the stroke is 0.01m and a 60kg person steps on it. The potential energy lost is 60*0.01*9.81 = 5.89 J. If that displacement happens in 1 second that's 5.89 watts. So we seem to be in the range of possibility, for very short periods of time. Of course if you add in friction the time has to get shorter, so less total energy.     


Even if this is possible though the thing is still a hideously inefficient way of generating power. On average the system will spend a fraction of it's life in the downstroke phase. Most of it will be rebounding or waiting for the next footfall so even in a high traffic area, at a choke point like a subway turnstile, you're probably talking 1/3 to 1/4th of the time. And that's if you just line people up and have them march over it. In reality the effective steady state power you could get from it would be a small fraction of that peak 7 watts even under ideal conditions
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on May 28, 2015, 06:15:57 am
I think we're getting off track a bit here.

Whether it's 1 watt or 10 my point was that even at basically walking intensity on a bike I'm measuring 70 watts a the wheel. So if they think they can grab a few watts out of that it seems like we're in the real of possibility. You can imagine these things sort of like very small stroke stair machines, they're robbing you of gravitational potential energy.

Considering the weight of a person it seems plausible you could generate 7 watts of power for a very short period of time. let's assume the stroke is 0.01m and a 60kg person steps on it. The potential energy lost is 60*0.01*9.81 = 5.89 J. If that displacement happens in 1 second that's 5.89 watts. So we seem to be in the range of possibility, for very short periods of time. Of course if you add in friction the time has to get shorter, so less total energy.     


Even if this is possible though the thing is still a hideously inefficient way of generating power. On average the system will spend a fraction of it's life in the downstroke phase. Most of it will be rebounding or waiting for the next footfall so even in a high traffic area, at a choke point like a subway turnstile, you're probably talking 1/3 to 1/4th of the time. And that's if you just line people up and have them march over it. In reality the effective steady state power you could get from it would be a small fraction of that peak 7 watts even under ideal conditions
It was done by MAVIC for their electric shift system.
But it might be an idea to do a brake regen system, as many city bikes already have a magneto in the front hub for the lights...
Just a potentiometer on the front brake lever that's active on the 1 to 2cm of slack on needs to pull to overcome cable stickage.
This would be great, because 90% o braking is light, so the brake pads would last for ever.

In any case, the walking charging thing is basically putting wires, a few caps and a charging circuit on the funky led shoes that small children have.
I don't see any innovation there...
I think I saw a hight school science project that did just that a few years back on Youtube.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on May 28, 2015, 06:59:39 am
Quote
hideously inefficient way of generating power. On average the system will spend a fraction of it's life in the downstroke phase.

Does that matter? I mean, if the choice is generate no power or generate some power now and then, surely some power is infinitely better :)

Quote
rebounding or waiting for the next footfall so even in a high traffic area

That could be bad news: you might get footfalls faster than the time needed for the actuators to recover, so instead of getting more energy you end up with little to none. If the actuating panel is larger than about half a foot, you could imagine someone's foot landing just as the previous person is leaving, thus holding the panel down.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: matseng on May 28, 2015, 01:14:14 pm
Does that matter? I mean, if the choice is generate no power or generate some power now and then, surely some power is infinitely better :)

Yes, it does matter. I'd guess that the all the power required to mine & refine the minerals, ship, manufacture parts, ship, manufacture devices, ship, install & maintain would be vastly dwarf the power output of the device  during its lifetime if it only produced a few millijoules for every proper footstep on it.

So if all gained energy is less than the energy required for the entire production cycle from raw material sourcing all the way to disposal of the end-of-lifed units then it would just be silly to install such devices.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on May 28, 2015, 08:10:50 pm
That's a good argument. Just a teeny weeny thing you left out, though:

How do you propose to store and ship the energy, otherwise used to make these things, all the way from China? And then distribute it to wherever the output from these would be used, at the time they would be used?
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Twonius on May 28, 2015, 08:26:35 pm
Quote
Does that matter? I mean, if the choice is generate no power or generate some power now and then, surely some power is infinitely better :)

Well this also falls into the placebo fallacy.

If there's already an existing drug on the market and you want to run a trial and to see how good your new drug is, you shouldn't compare it to a placebo, you should compare it to the existing standard treatment. Otherwise even though your drug has some effect compared to placebo, it may still be worse than the existing treatment.

In this case we already have solar panels and turbines, so unless this is somehow potentially cheaper at scale or better in some other way it's not worth investing the money in it compered to the alternatives.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: matseng on May 28, 2015, 09:01:28 pm
That's a good argument. Just a teeny weeny thing you left out, though:

How do you propose to store and ship the energy, otherwise used to make these things, all the way from China? And then distribute it to wherever the output from these would be used, at the time they would be used?

No need to ship the energy itself.  But that energy could be used to produce some devices that actually generates significant amount of power instead, and then ship those devices to the destination.

Put another way -  if it costs (money and energy wise) as much to produce a boatload of Tesla batteries and a boatload of very shiny and polished cubes of granite (very pretty and nice to look at) I think that the Tesla batteries would be of better use (for the world economy and environment)  than the stones. :-)

Or.... don't spend money to produce shite products, make something real that have a real impact.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on May 28, 2015, 09:09:29 pm
Quote
or better in some other way

Ever gone tap-dancing on your roof panels? I think the 'some better way' is just tapping (sorry!) into a currently unused resource that is basically there for the taking. The fallacy is in thinking this is instead of all the existing or other things, but it is as well so not displacing anything, not competing, etc.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Mechanical Menace on May 28, 2015, 09:37:12 pm
Quote
or better in some other way

Ever gone tap-dancing on your roof panels? I think the 'some better way' is just tapping (sorry!) into a currently unused resource that is basically there for the taking. The fallacy is in thinking this is instead of all the existing or other things, but it is as well so not displacing anything, not competing, etc.

No, the problem is it can't produce enough energy to make up for it's cost in energy.

And it's not an unused resource there for the taking. To get more energy out of people you have to put more energy in. The human digestive system is hardly efficient. Producing and transporting food is energy intensive. It takes energy to produce, transport, maintain, and then dispose or replace these things. When they can get at most 7wh per day per person you're just wasting energy to feel like you're been green when the reality is the complete opposite.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on June 01, 2015, 07:50:22 pm
Yeah, while "Gizmag" is just another dodgy internet source, and the USPTO have long ago shown that they are unable to detect a "Perpetual Motion Machine" when they see one.
I don't think it is the fault of USPTO. This page (http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2014/02/15/protecting-ideas-can-ideas-be-protected-or-patented/id=48009/) says: "United States patent laws do not require you to have a prototype in order to apply for a patent". https://www.indiegogo.com (https://www.indiegogo.com) doesn't require a prototype either. The conclusion is obvious :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kjelt on June 01, 2015, 11:09:18 pm
Here's a TED talk by the founder. At least from his presentation it seems like a solution in search of a problem 
:palm: next development step: turn gates everywhere on every street with a generator attached  :D .
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: riccardo.pittini on July 22, 2015, 06:49:56 am
poll: who copied who? :D:D:D

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1041610927/znaps-the-9-magnetic-adapter-for-your-mobile-devic?ref=popular (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1041610927/znaps-the-9-magnetic-adapter-for-your-mobile-devic?ref=popular)

http://www.aliexpress.com/item/1M-Free-shipping-Wsken-Magnectic-Cable-USB-Connector-for-Samsung-Xiaomi-Meizu-Huawei-OPPO-Google-Digital/32349184602.html (http://www.aliexpress.com/item/1M-Free-shipping-Wsken-Magnectic-Cable-USB-Connector-for-Samsung-Xiaomi-Meizu-Huawei-OPPO-Google-Digital/32349184602.html)

ok i mist say that the design is slightly different... ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: meeder on August 04, 2015, 07:36:52 pm
More wireless energy bullshit, only 7 days left ;)
Take a look at his circuitboard, looks like he scavenged a board out of some ancient device and jammed it in the box.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitenergy-smart-battery#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitenergy-smart-battery#/story)

The inventor is also a naturopath which in itself is enough to get my alarm bells going BTW... ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: meeder on August 04, 2015, 07:40:05 pm
He even stole an image from another product...
http://www.popsci.com/article/gadgets/bracelet-could-shrink-your-energy-bill (http://www.popsci.com/article/gadgets/bracelet-could-shrink-your-energy-bill)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on August 04, 2015, 10:12:21 pm
More wireless energy bullshit, only 7 days left ;)
Take a look at his circuitboard, looks like he scavenged a board out of some ancient device and jammed it in the box.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitenergy-smart-battery#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitenergy-smart-battery#/story)

The inventor is also a naturopath which in itself is enough to get my alarm bells going BTW... ;)

I donated &A0 to him that I found spare in an old EPROM, but then I erased the EPROM and it was suddenly full of &FF again!! Free energy!! (8x 256bits to be exact) .Now how do I get all these bits into my phone battery??

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 04, 2015, 11:13:07 pm
Information can be converted to energy, see this article (http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/nov/19/information-converted-to-energy). The problem is the energy requirement of Maxwell's demon, but still a neat experiment. Of course, the Indiegogo is bullshit, but some parts are funny, like when they write "Eventually after experimenting with the (GAN) transistors, we were able to produce up to 1000 volts.  This was enough voltage to recharge conventional mobile device batteries. "
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on August 05, 2015, 05:42:35 am
Interesting read, but not what our Indiegogo expert was waffling on about.

1000V !! I didn't realise I'd need a High Voltage phone for it to work!

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: DarkStar on August 11, 2015, 09:27:39 am
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required)

Looking at the comments, people believe somehow that they'll magically get solar power with this plug adapter... What a scam!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Rasz on August 11, 2015, 09:32:13 am
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required)

Looking at the comments, people believe somehow that they'll magically get solar power with this plug adapter... What a scam!

hehe, its not a hardware scam tho, its the same type of scam TESLA does, this KS is for a non profit that will spend your money buying up renevable credits so you can sleep better :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: codeboy2k on August 11, 2015, 01:08:01 pm
Re: SunPort Solar Plug

The only one "making money" here is the non-profit ... those two sound like they don't fit well together "making money" and "non-profit", but non-profit is just a tax break, if they get any donations or any income from t-shirt sales or whatever else, and they have expenses (salaries, building rent, marketing, etc).. then they will have an income or a loss and they just don't pay federal taxes on that income (or in some countries may have reduced taxes).

What I see these guys doing is breaking up the S-RECS into tiny chunks and selling them at a premium, so they will be making money on the resale of S-RECs to the consumers (who think they are doing something good). What the consumer is actually doing is donating $3-$5 per month (let's say) to a charity that wants to build more solar (so they can buy more S-RECs to sell back to you for your monthly donation !)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: meeder on August 11, 2015, 04:10:31 pm
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required)

Looking at the comments, people believe somehow that they'll magically get solar power with this plug adapter... What a scam!

hehe, its not a hardware scam tho, its the same type of scam TESLA does, this KS is for a non profit that will spend your money buying up renevable credits so you can sleep better :)

Exactly, the electricity itself will still come from a coal powered plant ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MagicSmoker on August 11, 2015, 10:36:03 pm
...Exactly, the electricity itself will still come from a coal powered plant ;)

Yes, but...

The average thermal efficiency of an internal combustion engine in a vehicle is 15-20%, whereas the average thermal efficiency of a coal-fired power plant is 33-40% and combined cycle natural gas power plants have reached a thermal efficiency of 60%.

Furthermore, it is possible to use much more effective pollution reducing technologies on a large fossil fuel power plant than it is on a vehicle, so that there may be a net reduction in pollution over and above that predicted by the difference in efficiency alone even when the fuel itself is considerably more dirty (e.g. - coal vs. gasoline). For example, it's totally impractical (and likely ineffective, anyway) to put an electrostatic precipitator in the tailpipe of a vehicle but relatively trivial to put one in the tall vertical smokestack of a power plant.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 12, 2015, 12:32:42 am
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1275963200/sunport-plug-into-solar-power-no-panels-required)

Looking at the comments, people believe somehow that they'll magically get solar power with this plug adapter... What a scam!
So what is it? An overpriced power meter with bluetooth, and then you have to pay twice for the energy you use? I don't know how the energy markets is regulated in other countries, but in Germany you can order from any supplier of electric energy, regardless which company provides the physical energy, and there are some solar power companies. Then you have to pay only once for the solar power. Of course, works only for your house or flat, but if you are in a hotel and use your laptop, the energy is only a fraction compared to what you need at home.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on August 12, 2015, 05:50:41 am
...Exactly, the electricity itself will still come from a coal powered plant ;)

Yes, but...

The average thermal efficiency of an internal combustion engine in a vehicle is 15-20%, whereas the average thermal efficiency of a coal-fired power plant is 33-40% and combined cycle natural gas power plants have reached a thermal efficiency of 60%.

Furthermore, it is possible to use much more effective pollution reducing technologies on a large fossil fuel power plant than it is on a vehicle, so that there may be a net reduction in pollution over and above that predicted by the difference in efficiency alone even when the fuel itself is considerably more dirty (e.g. - coal vs. gasoline). For example, it's totally impractical (and likely ineffective, anyway) to put an electrostatic precipitator in the tailpipe of a vehicle but relatively trivial to put one in the tall vertical smokestack of a power plant.
Not forgetting that a plant can use dust scrubbers that use curtains of water and the associated filtering...
Still the worst kind of generation around, but much better than a car engine.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mos6502 on September 15, 2015, 12:48:01 pm
More wireless energy bullshit, only 7 days left ;)
Take a look at his circuitboard, looks like he scavenged a board out of some ancient device and jammed it in the box.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitenergy-smart-battery#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bitenergy-smart-battery#/story)

The inventor is also a naturopath which in itself is enough to get my alarm bells going BTW... ;)

LOL! Are you freaking kidding me?

(http://res.cloudinary.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1432402589/t9xbbgkfbbyawnzqndc4.jpg)

This is their "Quantum Energy Generator"! They just cut up a PCB out of an old alarm clock or something and stuffed in a homemade box!  :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Richard Crowley on September 15, 2015, 01:43:53 pm
Wow. That is just breath-takingly absurd.
In fact, it is so ridiculous that in two months, they raised only $10 USD, and that was probably one of the principals testing the page to see if it was really live.

It closed with the $10. Probably less than it cost them to put it online. 
It somewhat restores my faith in the general public to spot a flaming con when they see one.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kjelt on September 16, 2015, 07:06:48 am
More good news, some court in the USA ordered money restitution for a delayed kickstarter project, this will be the beginning of the end for the not serious "dodgy" projects.

http://www.polygon.com/2015/9/11/9310945/kickstarter-court-victory-attorney-general-washington-asylum-playing-cards (http://www.polygon.com/2015/9/11/9310945/kickstarter-court-victory-attorney-general-washington-asylum-playing-cards)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: sunnyhighway on September 16, 2015, 03:01:04 pm
More good news, some court in the USA ordered money restitution for a delayed kickstarter project, this will be the beginning of the end for the not serious "dodgy" projects.

http://www.polygon.com/2015/9/11/9310945/kickstarter-court-victory-attorney-general-washington-asylum-playing-cards (http://www.polygon.com/2015/9/11/9310945/kickstarter-court-victory-attorney-general-washington-asylum-playing-cards)

Not sure if all the motivations of the judge are sound.

I have a lot of trouble understanding this part of the ruling:
Quote
Additionally, Polchlopek and Altius Management must pay $31,000 in civil penalties for violating the state Consumer Protection Act — $1,000 per backer.

The backers are investors, not consumers...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on September 16, 2015, 03:47:57 pm
The backers are investors, not consumers...
Well, investors would be able to make a profit. Backers only have the chance to get the product for a "reduced" price and some overpriced perks.
Actually, the price reduction is also not existant most of the time. In the end, backing makes only sense to support a project which would not make it without backing or to get a product which is not available elsewhere.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: matseng on September 16, 2015, 04:36:40 pm
Right.
Quote
Invest - to put money to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
This is clearly not happening in crowd sourcing.   The closest action is actually a purchase. People (pre)pay money with the promise to receive some goods of some kind.  Just as any mail order, but with the difference that the products on KS/IGG doesn't exist yet, but it's still a purchase.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: sunnyhighway on September 17, 2015, 05:39:51 am
The backers are investors, not consumers...
Well, investors would be able to make a profit. Backers only have the chance to get the product for a "reduced" price and some overpriced perks.
Actually, the price reduction is also not existant most of the time. In the end, backing makes only sense to support a project which would not make it without backing or to get a product which is not available elsewhere.

You convinced me that backers aren not investors.
But backers are not consumers either.
 
For all I know a backer could also be an organisation that is willing to support a good project the creator of the Kickstarter wants to do.
But "supporter" is not the correct term either, because supporting something does not need to involve giving money.

Right.
Quote
Invest - to put money to use, by purchase or expenditure, in something offering potential profitable returns, as interest, income, or appreciation in value.
This is clearly not happening in crowd sourcing.   The closest action is actually a purchase. People (pre)pay money with the promise to receive some goods of some kind.  Just as any mail order, but with the difference that the products on KS/IGG doesn't exist yet, but it's still a purchase.

Your argument seem to fail here because the backer doesn't have to choose a perk that involves receiving a physical item (or even a service for that matter).
In that case you often get the right get your name on a website or some poster. Sometimes you only get the right to read the "for backers only" updates.
Wouldn't call that purchasing.

You can opt to receive some perk when you put in the minimum amount of money for that type of perk
The perk does doe not even have to be a tangible thing or service. You could be in for that "good feeling" that gives you.
There is no obligation to claim that perk. In that case I would call it a donation.

I also have a lot of trouble to see where buying fits in with the following possibilities you could have as a backer.
 - Have some saying in the properties of the product
 - Motivating the creator to change their approach or product.
 - Having the option to have your name listed as a backer on their website.
 - etc. etc.

I think the term sponsor would be more appropriate. You actually sponsoring the creator to pursue their project. I used the word pursue, because there is no guarantee their project will be finalized as predicted.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: manoumanou on September 24, 2015, 11:43:55 pm
Can someone check this project : https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station)

It's a portable wind turbine... I have no doubt it would generate electricity but in how much time ? There is no specification of how much it generate under what conditions and I have hard time visualizing what a 2 m/s wind is ?

Thanks !  :P
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on September 25, 2015, 12:09:42 am
2m/s is about 4mph, aka a fast walk.

The Trinity 50 is rated at 50W, or 7.5Ah (or 7.5mAh - it's not clear if they use European thousand separators or the proper English ones). The graph indicates that 100% is generated at about 6.5m/s and at 2m/s you'd be lucky to see 5% of capacity. Charging a modern phone in 2m/s wind is going to take a while!

OTOH, you don't have to watch it - leave it charging all day and it doesn't matter what rate it took so long as the built-in battery has enough to charge your phone when you plug it in.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rollatorwieltje on September 26, 2015, 08:58:47 pm
It's a battery with decorative turbine shaped object attached to it. No way it's going to generate any serious amount of power. Certainly not at 2m/s wind.

Just for comparison, the Xzeres Skystream is one of the better "small" wind turbines, it can deliver 2.5kW. I has a 3.7 meter rotor and requires about 12m/s wind to do it. It needs at least 4m/s wind before it even starts moving (like pretty much any commercial wind turbine) . Even over here in the Netherlands where there's always wind that's already quite a lot (4m/s is 4 Beufort). At typical wind speeds that Skytream barely does anything, good luck charging your "300000mAh" (what does that even mean? 300Ah worth of paralleled li-ion cells?) with maybe 100W at best.

Also those turbines pretty much only work well in non-turbulent air. So forget putting that thing on the ground or on your roof, you'll want a pole at least about 20 meters high at minimum.

For wind turbines there's a simple rule: go big or go home. Small turbines aren't worth it.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rob77 on September 27, 2015, 07:54:26 pm
Can someone check this project : https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station)

It's a portable wind turbine... I have no doubt it would generate electricity but in how much time ? There is no specification of how much it generate under what conditions and I have hard time visualizing what a 2 m/s wind is ?

Thanks !  :P

the smalles turbine with r=30cm has a swept area of 0,28 square meters, in a 2m/s wind it will produce approx 0.55W of mechanical energy (yes half a watt)....  so make your own conclusions ;)
in 10m/s wind it would have approx 6.8W output (mechanical) so converting to electrical - it might yield enough to charge your phone.
and don't forget - at ground level the wind is slower and turbulent (rocks, plants in it's way) so the output might be even lower.

but anyways.. i think it's a highly impractical design... it will tip over and damage it's blades in no time... so you'll have to carry some equipment to anchor the turbine (much more weight than the turbine itself).
and also you might get some broken fingers/arms as a bonus... airplane propeller tips are painted with a contrast color for a reason - you can see the rotating blades as a circle with a different color.... their turbine blades are plain while - so harder to see while spinning.

it's definitely doable - with much much lower outputs than they declare , but highly impractical and even dangerous...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on September 28, 2015, 06:36:11 am
The large one weighs 19kg !! Who's going to lug 19kg of unnecessary weight up a mountain? A months worth of iPhone external batteries would weigh less.

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MerseyViking on November 12, 2015, 03:09:54 am
A friend posted on FB a link to this article (well, fluff-piece really): http://anonhq.com/60-minutes-on-this-bicycle-can-power-your-home-for-24-hours/ (http://anonhq.com/60-minutes-on-this-bicycle-can-power-your-home-for-24-hours/)
Which led me to this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cgb9lfKW_d4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cgb9lfKW_d4)
And this crowd-funding page: http://billionsinchange.com/solutions/free-electric (http://billionsinchange.com/solutions/free-electric)

Thoughts? The default values from this site: http://www.tribology-abc.com/calculators/cycling.htm (http://www.tribology-abc.com/calculators/cycling.htm) give us a useful output of 84W for an hour's cycling. Some of the inputs could no doubt be upped but that really doesn't seem like it'll power a rural household for 24 hours. A couple of LED bulbs overnight perhaps.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on November 12, 2015, 03:33:41 am
I wouldn't call it crowd funding:

From their FAQ:
Quote
Can I donate or volunteer?
We do not accept donations, but we need your help. Please encourage your friends to watch and share our trailer and film, and follow us at Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram If you would like to volunteer, please join us. This movement is in its early stage, so it may take us a little while to respond back, but as we grow our communication will improve.

Plus on the video they claim power overnight, not sure about the 24 hours that is in that article.

In the FAQ they also mention powering 24 light bulbs, a fan and two chargers for a phone and a tablet, but there is no claim of 24 hours, then again, maybe I did miss it.

The person doing it, is the guy that came up with the 5-hour Energy and he is giving 99% of his billion net worth on projects to help humanity.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Richard Crowley on November 12, 2015, 08:56:16 am
So what is so "innovative" about that human-powered gadget? 

To be sure, I think it is great that Mr. Bhargava is spending his millions on such worthy causes to improve life on the planet.
Kudos to him. He is in the 1% of the 1% for philanthropy, IMHO.

But the gadget shown in the video looked like nothing more than a flywheel attached to an industrial-strength alternator.
And it looked like there were 8 wires coming out of the alternator in two phases,
And connected to two rather modest bridge rectifiers bolted to the frame (@1:34)

The meters showed ~12V @ ~10A = 120W   (@0:32) 
Although the dialog (@ 1:55) said "we're able to power 1050 equivalent watts of lighting..."
Perhaps by using more efficient CFL or LED, they are citing the "equivalent" of what traditional incandescent lamps would produce?
At 2:09 there is a close-up of the bulbs on the wall, and the nomenclature around the base says "12V" although they looked incandescent.

The whole video was about the stationary bicycle-alternator, which doesn't look particularly "innovative" to me.
Or am I missing something here?  No mention of the storage necessary for practical use.
Big capacity cells would probably be MUCH more expensive than a pedal-powered alternator.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on November 12, 2015, 09:15:17 am
Somewhere in that site it states that they are not doing anything really new.

Their focus is for them to be simple and affordable. But I think the weight on a chain that someone else did is a better solution for lighting.

Gravitational storage seems a better solution than kinetic storage and less parts to go wrong. But the gravitational one was per bulb, this is for about 30 low power devices.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 0xdeadbeef on November 16, 2015, 10:32:47 pm
Ok, boring free energy once again but it seems like people just don't learn...
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-u-plug-green-generator#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-u-plug-green-generator#/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Delta on November 17, 2015, 01:57:51 am
Ok, boring free energy once again but it seems like people just don't learn...
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-u-plug-green-generator#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-u-plug-green-generator#/)

FFS.  I thought even IGG didn't allow blatant laws-of-physics defy shite like that...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: AmbientSix on November 19, 2015, 12:19:10 am
It's hilarious that they expect us to believe magnets that can lift 2500lbs each can be safely contained in a gutter pipe...  I might make an account just to report it...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on November 19, 2015, 12:43:44 am
It's hilarious that they expect us to believe magnets that can lift 2500lbs each can be safely contained in a gutter pipe...  I might make an account just to report it...

So when you accidentally leave it on a metal shelf you need 10 friends to get it back off? :D

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on November 19, 2015, 01:00:42 am
These neodymium magnets can be very strong. A 2500 lbs magnets is expensive: http://cgi.ebay.de/250456488560 (http://cgi.ebay.de/250456488560) I wonder if they have more than one of it in it, then it would be profitable to buy the generator and sell the magnets :)

Of course, too dangerous to buy it, because I doubt they will ship anything at all and if they do, it will be a fake, like something they wrote they didn't use, a battery and an inverter, and no money back guarantee. I guess that's why they emphasize it is a device for emergeny usage for power outages etc. If it would work as described, they wouldn't sell it, but make money by building a power plant, which is a prove that it doesn't work.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on November 19, 2015, 01:12:29 am
Cool. So when I order one on ebay and they send it via DHL. How does the delivery guy remove it from the metal floor of his delivery van?

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on November 19, 2015, 03:23:59 am
Cool. So when I order one on ebay and they send it via DHL. How does the delivery guy remove it from the metal floor of his delivery van?
The magnetic field strength is a function of 1/r^2 and I guess they are using lots of bubble wrap for a good distance to the packet outside, so should be no problem.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: SeanB on November 19, 2015, 04:23:45 am
IIRC those magnets above a certain strength are not shippable by air, as the stray field will interfere with the fluxgate backup compass and the standby magnetic compass in the navigation system.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: electr_peter on November 19, 2015, 05:43:03 am
IGG campaign is pure scam about magnets. It is not even new in any way.

This video shows how big magnet is packaged for shipping. Extra padding and metal plates/mesh on all sides help to reduce intensity of magnetic field somewhat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zO9nWgI_LY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zO9nWgI_LY)

Channel brainiac75 (http://www.youtube.com/user/brainiac75/videos) is pretty interesting - checkout some videos about separating/handling/storing strong magnets.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Brutte on November 19, 2015, 09:55:07 pm
Quote
These neodymium magnets can be very strong.
And expensive. They should have used electromagnets in that u-plug. That would cut the goal of the IGG campaign from 250k to 25k or below. With same effect as electromagnets have no (theoretical) bounds on how "very strong" these are.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on November 19, 2015, 11:07:21 pm
Quote
These neodymium magnets can be very strong.
And expensive. They should have used electromagnets in that u-plug. That would cut the goal of the IGG campaign from 250k to 25k or below. With same effect as electromagnets have no (theoretical) bounds on how "very strong" these are.

And the power required for the electromagnets come from where exactly??  :palm:

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: crispy_tofu on November 19, 2015, 11:10:03 pm
Batterisers, of course.  :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on November 20, 2015, 02:33:59 am
The generator produces "115 volts at 17.3 amps of power" says the campaign. You could use some percentage of it for the electromagnet. It would only need an extra wheel to start it.

I wonder how the current device starts. All the scientific free energy reference videos on Youtube demonstrate that even with rare earth magnets you need some big battery or start the motor by hand. Does it already run when it is shipped? A 2000 watt spinning motor would be interesting to ship, because you can't easily rotate it around some axis.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Ryano on November 20, 2015, 03:57:30 am
The whole video was about the stationary bicycle-alternator, which doesn't look particularly "innovative" to me.
Or am I missing something here?  No mention of the storage necessary for practical use.
Big capacity cells would probably be MUCH more expensive than a pedal-powered alternator.

Hell.... we were rocking a setup that blows this thing out of the water back in 2010! Made with nothing that can't be found in the average garage.

https://seattlebmp.wordpress.com/ (https://seattlebmp.wordpress.com/)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfITm07BNY4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfITm07BNY4)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on November 20, 2015, 04:50:15 am
That's pretty cool, the only thing that surprises me is that they were still using myspace in 2010.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Delta on November 21, 2015, 11:24:59 am
That bicycle powered gig is really cool!  I bet the cyclists really feel it when they hit a loud bit of a song!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Delta on November 21, 2015, 11:27:07 am
A 2000 watt spinning motor would be interesting to ship, because you can't easily rotate it around some axis.

I once saw a colleague pull an Inertial Navigation unit out of a rack without waiting for the three gyros to wind down from 27000rpm.  Most amusing!  It took him ages to put it down...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Brutte on November 23, 2015, 10:22:09 am
And the power required for the electromagnets come from where exactly??  :palm:
McBryce.
It is supposed to be a 2kW device, isn't it?

As long as electromagnet does not perform work (which is a standard property of a permanent magnet) the consumed power is zero (apart of ohmic losses that can be made arbitrarily small by design).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on November 23, 2015, 08:13:26 pm
And the power required for the electromagnets come from where exactly??  :palm:
McBryce.
It is supposed to be a 2kW device, isn't it?

As long as electromagnet does not perform work (which is a standard property of a permanent magnet) the consumed power is zero (apart of ohmic losses that can be made arbitrarily small by design).

If the magnet wasn't performing any work, why would it be needed in the first place?

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: kalleboo on December 02, 2015, 04:49:17 pm
"Battery with Unlimited Power for your mobile Phone": 1,500,000 mAh mobile battery https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/battery-with-unlimited-power-for-your-mobile-phone#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/battery-with-unlimited-power-for-your-mobile-phone#/story)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: v8dave on December 02, 2015, 06:33:47 pm
"Battery with Unlimited Power for your mobile Phone": 1,500,000 mAh mobile battery https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/battery-with-unlimited-power-for-your-mobile-phone#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/battery-with-unlimited-power-for-your-mobile-phone#/story)

This uses alien technology. Dave should don his metal foil hat and do a teardown of this one.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: anujdeshpande on December 02, 2015, 09:02:06 pm
"Battery with Unlimited Power for your mobile Phone": 1,500,000 mAh mobile battery https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/battery-with-unlimited-power-for-your-mobile-phone#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/battery-with-unlimited-power-for-your-mobile-phone#/story)

1000Ah.
Yeah we just need a small 'm' in there somewhere.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on December 02, 2015, 09:04:03 pm
If they've packed that much energy into a package that size (which they haven't), they should be targeting the electric car market and not mobile phones.

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: crispy_tofu on December 02, 2015, 09:22:46 pm
Similarity?  :-DD

Copied and edited off a Mophie 2100mAh battery pack...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: AmbientSix on December 05, 2015, 01:50:13 pm
The schematic has a bunch of nonsense in it.  I got a belly laugh out of the "clock" in the circuit...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Marcel_X on December 07, 2015, 12:49:34 am
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...

 |O
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Howardlong on December 07, 2015, 04:40:27 am
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...

 |O

Their company, SciCorn Technology, was dissolved on 24 November 2015. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search/companies?q=Scicorn (https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search/companies?q=Scicorn)

You can buy companies off the shelf for a few quid in the UK. There are over 1,000 companies listed at the registered address, which is a small townhouse converted into offices.

There's no doubt this is a scam, and they know it, they're not even deluded. The $30k might just about pay for CE and FCC certifications, but as there was never going to be any product anyway, wondering what 30 grand will get you is perhaps rather irrelevant.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on December 07, 2015, 06:01:38 am
They are flexible funding - surely  it would make more sense to go for a really high figure to ensure it's not met, then they can just say they didn't raise enough funds and walk off with the rest. As it is, they might achieve funding and then be actually in the poo.

Thought maybe if the figure is too high it will scare punters off, but a good PR would explain all about the costs of FCC etc and make it sound reasonable and workable :). I wonder if there is something around $30K which turns them into serious criminals where a lower figure just makes them naughty boys.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on December 07, 2015, 07:13:36 pm
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...
They should have at least faked the research papers. The first paper they linked, "Design and Construction of Wireless Power Transfer System Using Magnetic Resonant Coupling", shows a graph on page 4 where transfered power goes to zero for distances greater than 20 cm. The second paper has no experimental data at all, and I stopped reading the 3rd paper, which is an article of Tesla with his experiments where he claimed it is possible to distribute energy all over the world without wires. So why does the campaign limit it at 30 feet? It could charge your mobile phone within miles radius of the charger :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Marcel_X on December 07, 2015, 11:30:33 pm
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...

 |O

Their company, SciCorn Technology, was dissolved on 24 November 2015. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search/companies?q=Scicorn (https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search/companies?q=Scicorn)

You can buy companies off the shelf for a few quid in the UK. There are over 1,000 companies listed at the registered address, which is a small townhouse converted into offices.

There's no doubt this is a scam, and they know it, they're not even deluded. The $30k might just about pay for CE and FCC certifications, but as there was never going to be any product anyway, wondering what 30 grand will get you is perhaps rather irrelevant.

I didn't know that. According to one of his posts, he also has an office in San Fransisco...
But yes, the $30K should be enough for a new car...

Anyway, I got my $1,- pledge back today. Even without asking ;-)
I guess they don't want me to post anything anymore...  >:D
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Yansi on December 07, 2015, 11:33:50 pm
yeah... typical group of high-end engineers for the job...

https://c1.iggcdn.com/indiegogo-media-prod-cld/image/upload/c_limit,w_620/v1442409412/rqke1qbcrwz7fclvlyke.png

 :-DD :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Marcel_X on December 07, 2015, 11:45:48 pm
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...
They should have at least faked the research papers. The first paper they linked, "Design and Construction of Wireless Power Transfer System Using Magnetic Resonant Coupling", shows a graph on page 4 where transfered power goes to zero for distances greater than 20 cm. The second paper has no experimental data at all, and I stopped reading the 3rd paper, which is an article of Tesla with his experiments where he claimed it is possible to distribute energy all over the world without wires. So why does the campaign limit it at 30 feet? It could charge your mobile phone within miles radius of the charger :-DD

Haha, indeed :-) And if you search for the word 'distance' in the other documents, you'll find roughly the same value.
Unless you use a 1m diameter coil...
And there's no mention at all on how to position the receiver coil towards the transmitter coil.
Perpendicular? Parallel? It all seems to work ;-)

Bogus...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: cenar on December 10, 2015, 11:26:40 am
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...
They should have at least faked the research papers. The first paper they linked, "Design and Construction of Wireless Power Transfer System Using Magnetic Resonant Coupling", shows a graph on page 4 where transfered power goes to zero for distances greater than 20 cm. The second paper has no experimental data at all, and I stopped reading the 3rd paper, which is an article of Tesla with his experiments where he claimed it is possible to distribute energy all over the world without wires. So why does the campaign limit it at 30 feet? It could charge your mobile phone within miles radius of the charger :-DD

Haha, indeed :-) And if you search for the word 'distance' in the other documents, you'll find roughly the same value.
Unless you use a 1m diameter coil...
And there's no mention at all on how to position the receiver coil towards the transmitter coil.
Perpendicular? Parallel? It all seems to work ;-)

Bogus...

They recently posted an image where you can see a simple solenoid inside the transmitter :) Way to make it work at each angle.  Also I wonder how could you prevent 100 cellphones harvesting energy from the system?

Uh there are so many hilarious details but I want to share something different with you. If you scroll down the comments section, you will see a guy named 'Evgene Ilchenko' commented on the project. Also, if you look up for scicorn ltd. from this site:

http://www.checkcompany.co.uk/company/08894073/SCICORN-TECHNOLOGY-LTD (http://www.checkcompany.co.uk/company/08894073/SCICORN-TECHNOLOGY-LTD)

You will see that Evgeny Ilchenko is the manager of this company. What a coincidence. If you go to the Evgene's indiegogo profile:

https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/10543643/campaigns (https://www.indiegogo.com/individuals/10543643/campaigns)

you will see another bogus project named smart cardio, with the campaigner name 'Ravel Banshin'. Tesla Charger's campaigner is 'Pavel Yashin'. Wow this is just shameful. Also Scicorn ltd shows a connection with Impasto ltd on the same site, which has office in seychelles. Seychelles? They use this islands for money laundering.

I emailed indiegogo about this, nothing but copy-paste response.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: meeder on December 20, 2015, 07:46:47 pm
And to counteract the wireless chargers we have this :-)

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/shieldapparel/shield-the-world-s-first-signal-proof-headwear.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dmwahl on December 23, 2015, 04:26:22 am
And to counteract the wireless chargers we have this :-)

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/shieldapparel/shield-the-world-s-first-signal-proof-headwear. (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/shieldapparel/shield-the-world-s-first-signal-proof-headwear.)
At least it looks better than a tin foil hat.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Howardlong on December 30, 2015, 01:59:15 am
Found another one:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger#/story)
Wireless charging over 30 feet at 2Amps...

 |O

Their company, SciCorn Technology, was dissolved on 24 November 2015. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search/companies?q=Scicorn (https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/search/companies?q=Scicorn)

You can buy companies off the shelf for a few quid in the UK. There are over 1,000 companies listed at the registered address, which is a small townhouse converted into offices.

There's no doubt this is a scam, and they know it, they're not even deluded. The $30k might just about pay for CE and FCC certifications, but as there was never going to be any product anyway, wondering what 30 grand will get you is perhaps rather irrelevant.

I didn't know that. According to one of his posts, he also has an office in San Fransisco...
But yes, the $30K should be enough for a new car...

Anyway, I got my $1,- pledge back today. Even without asking ;-)
I guess they don't want me to post anything anymore...  >:D

Another hit and run. I doubt anyone will hear another word from "Pavel" now he has his money. Flexible Funding == Scam.

(http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d123/photobucket391/A82CB189-6797-4A64-8F15-34D0053FA7BA_zpsxu7gqepy.png) (http://s34.photobucket.com/user/photobucket391/media/A82CB189-6797-4A64-8F15-34D0053FA7BA_zpsxu7gqepy.png.html)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: snoopy on December 31, 2015, 09:11:13 pm
As soon as they mention Nikola Tesla it's another case of PT Barnum - a sucker born every minute ;)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: station240 on January 02, 2016, 08:58:54 pm
Can someone check this project : https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station)

It's a portable wind turbine... I have no doubt it would generate electricity but in how much time ? There is no specification of how much it generate under what conditions and I have hard time visualizing what a 2 m/s wind is ?

Thanks !  :P

Quote
Funding for this project was suspended by Kickstarter on October 27

1 Day after the project finished, Kickstarter shoot it in the head.
Looks like it fell foul of the basic rule that you cannot have multiple Kickstarter projects for the same product.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kean on January 06, 2016, 03:00:17 am
Quote
Funding for this project was suspended by Kickstarter on October 27

1 Day after the project finished, Kickstarter shoot it in the head.
Looks like it fell foul of the basic rule that you cannot have multiple Kickstarter projects for the same product.

That's the first time I've seen a KS project suspended *after* funding.  At least with the 2 week period before KS would normally disburse the funds to the creator, they have the ability to process refunds.  Hard to tell if that happened as there are no recent comments - but it could be assumed that lack of recent comments points to refunds having gone through.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Howardlong on January 10, 2016, 10:01:33 am
Yeah, really. He's taken your money and pissed it up a wall already mate.

(http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d123/photobucket391/501dc4f4478f5d466a597528d8d03e07_zpsectn7cph.jpg)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: sk2593 on January 28, 2016, 07:28:20 am
How about this one ?
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/the-top-10-crowd-funded-projects-people-have-been-duped-by/msg852326/#msg852326 (http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/the-top-10-crowd-funded-projects-people-have-been-duped-by/msg852326/#msg852326)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on February 04, 2016, 05:55:21 pm
Hi there!

look at this!

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/zero-illuminate-without-consuming-energy#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/zero-illuminate-without-consuming-energy#/)

"Without consuming energy". Yep, but you have to leave on a 100-W lamp to light up a led string of maybe 100 mW (total) ...

Cheers!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on February 04, 2016, 07:27:45 pm
Looks to me like it taps into energy that would otherwise be wasted. In effect it makes the 100W lamp a tiny bit more efficient since a tiny bit more light is usable. There is a huge imbalance between the cost of the energy you re-purpose and the cost of the kit, but often the weights on the scales are not solely financial ones.

It is far far less dodgy than perpetual motion and other free energy scams :)

I think they've missed a trick, though - it would be much cooler and possibly more effective if they could use fibre optics to provide smaller but brighter bauble lights.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on February 04, 2016, 09:15:35 pm
Sometimes a Kickstarter project is pretty good, but then the "catering" gets out of hand...
http://www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/gaming/ant-simulator-programmer-forced-to-cancel-game-after-partners-blow-cash-on-booze-and-strippers/news-story/f9ebda0bc09246fccd5387945cf7e317#itm=newscomau|technology|nca-tech-plmnt-trending|1|section-technology-science-space|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219755#itm=newscomau|technology|right-now-in-|4|Ant%20Simulator%20game%20developers%20waste%20Kickstarter%20money%20on%20str...|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219756 (http://www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/gaming/ant-simulator-programmer-forced-to-cancel-game-after-partners-blow-cash-on-booze-and-strippers/news-story/f9ebda0bc09246fccd5387945cf7e317#itm=newscomau|technology|nca-tech-plmnt-trending|1|section-technology-science-space|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219755#itm=newscomau|technology|right-now-in-|4|Ant%20Simulator%20game%20developers%20waste%20Kickstarter%20money%20on%20str...|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219756)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: miguelvp on February 04, 2016, 09:20:02 pm
Sometimes a Kickstarter project is pretty good, but then the "catering" gets out of hand...
http://www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/gaming/ant-simulator-programmer-forced-to-cancel-game-after-partners-blow-cash-on-booze-and-strippers/news-story/f9ebda0bc09246fccd5387945cf7e317#itm=newscomau|technology|nca-tech-plmnt-trending|1|section-technology-science-space|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219755#itm=newscomau|technology|right-now-in-|4|Ant%20Simulator%20game%20developers%20waste%20Kickstarter%20money%20on%20str...|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219756 (http://www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/gaming/ant-simulator-programmer-forced-to-cancel-game-after-partners-blow-cash-on-booze-and-strippers/news-story/f9ebda0bc09246fccd5387945cf7e317#itm=newscomau|technology|nca-tech-plmnt-trending|1|section-technology-science-space|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219755#itm=newscomau|technology|right-now-in-|4|Ant%20Simulator%20game%20developers%20waste%20Kickstarter%20money%20on%20str...|story|The%20CIA%E2%80%99s%20real-life%20X-Files&itmt=1454431219756)

Already covered here:
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/they-spent-the-money-on-booze-and-strippers/ (http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/they-spent-the-money-on-booze-and-strippers/)

And before that here:
http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/re-eevblog-751-how-to-debunk-a-product-(the-batteriser)/ (http://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/re-eevblog-751-how-to-debunk-a-product-(the-batteriser)/)

Of course it's not all true and you are talking about game budgets of maybe $15K?

Edit: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2016/02/01/ant-simulator-business-partners-respond-devs-claims-100-percent-bull.aspx (http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2016/02/01/ant-simulator-business-partners-respond-devs-claims-100-percent-bull.aspx)

Nah, he made a cool demo but to make a game is more than just making a demo or pseudo teaching game programming. Sure you can teach some principles but it's way more complicated than that.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on February 07, 2016, 07:52:22 am
Looks to me like it taps into energy that would otherwise be wasted. In effect it makes the 100W lamp a tiny bit more efficient since a tiny bit more light is usable.

Sorry but I disagree.

He is not suggesting to use something like a "solar wall" or a "carpet". In this way you would really use energy that would be otherwise wasted (still you must consider the energy payback time, which would be infinite, because to manufacture those devices you will need far more energy than you will possibly achieve during that device - and ours!- lifetime!). He is suggesting something much like surrounding a lamp with solar panels. You are therefore using a considerable amount of light (which would be instead use d to illuminate your room) to generate (with a very low efficiency, 30% with a monocrystalline silicon solar cell. Much worse in case of low level illumination) energy to light some LEDs. THerefore you're not using energy that would be otherwise wasted! You're wasting energy (tens of Watts!) to achieve something like 100mW, which you could draw directly from the mains with "100%" efficiency... There is no energy saving  at all (which is instead advertised in the description)! A much better idea would be, instead, using a LED based lamp (instead of the 100W incadescent light) and power instead your LED Christmas lights from the mains!

Cheers
 
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on February 07, 2016, 09:48:52 pm
Quote
because to manufacture those devices you will need far more energy than

Completely spurious argument. The energy that did go into making the kit would have been wasted had the kit not been made anyway - none of it would or could have gone into lighting the pretty baubles. The only argument you could legitimately make along those lines is that the money spent on buying this could go towards a wallwart to power the baubles directly.

Even then, it's a spurious argument. Sometimes we seem to pay far more than is returned because of convenience. Or art. Or because we think whatever it is is cool. All you can say is that whoever buys this thinks the money spent on it is worth it to them.

Quote
You are therefore using a considerable amount of light (which would be instead use d to illuminate your room)

Another spurious argument, I'm afraid. The way I see this is that the pickups are inside the lampshade and the light thus collected would otherwise go into heating the shade a miniscule amount. It would make little difference to the room since the light wouldn't be going directly into the room anyway. Even if you suggest it would bounce off the shade, think about what fraction of the lamp output that would be, and then spread the loss of it over the entire room. No-one would noticed. Instead, that otherwise unnoticed light gets focused onto pinpoints in the baubles that you do notice. Surely you can see that looking at an LED is far more noticeable than trying to see the difference that LED would make to an already illuminated room!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on February 11, 2016, 01:42:52 am
The energy that did go into making the kit would have been wasted had the kit not been made anyway

Under which assumptions are you saying that “the energy to make the device would have been wasted in any case?”

Yes, if you don’t make the Zero device, you will waste some hundreds of mW of optical power, but you (the world) will save much more energy because you actually are not going to make that device! (In particular you won’t need the solar panels for it).
Therefore it’s totally untrue that the energy required to manufacture Zero would have been wasted in any case! Because if you decide to buy some conventional mains-powered LED lamps, you will still consume (considering the whole device life time) much less energy than that required to manufacture Zero, in particular, its solar panels.

You might argue: “yes, but in this way you won’t light up THAT particular pretty lights”. Of course, but you can still buy similar mains-powered LED lamps!
And the main aims of that project are not those “pretty lights” but:
1) To make an eco-sustainable device, which saves energy (not just yours. He is talking about world’s energy consumption due to Christmas lights. Hence you use that device to light your tree, you must include the energy that the manufacturer spent to produce it).
2) To reduce lighting costs.

And the campaign says: (I’m quoting word-by-word what the author wrote in the project page)
1) “Illuminate Without Consuming Energy”.
2) “Humanity has the opportunity to make sustainable development [...] .”
3) “Energy equivalent to 6 bilions euro! That is what the planet consumes just on Christmas lights in December.”
4) “Hence no electricity consumption”.

Well let’s reply to those claims:
1) No, you ARE consuming energy! Because if 1000 guys buy that device, the factory WILL have to build those 1000. And because the typical energy payback of a silicon solar cell (under optimal SUNLIGHT exposure) is SOME YEARS, it follows that who knows how many Christmases you will need to get back the energy that was invested in making your “Zero”. Considering also that the device might stop working well before you arrive at the energy payback time.
2) Yes, the humanity has the opportunity to make sustainable development. By NOT buying that Zero (see 1), and, possibly, using mains-powered LED lamps instead of incandescent ones, which are still widespread.
3) The reported number has no sense at all, for the following reasons:
a) They are considering also public Christmas illumination (which is on almost only during night time! Therefore solar panels can’t be used, at least without some accumulators).
b) They are also considering the still present incandescent lights, which could be much more easily replaced by LED lamps, instead of thinking of recycling the light...
4) Yes, technically no electricity (in your bill) consumption. However there will be still energy consumption, if you take into account the manufacturer (and this plays against eco-sustainability). This energy is not likely to be compensated by the “zero energy” illumination.

Beside, a side effect of that gadget is that you need to keep on that 100-W desk lamp to light up less than 1W Christmas tree! (for instance I typically do not turn on a desk light if I don’t use, while I always keep on my Christmas lights in Christmas time). So is this power saving?

Other things that really stink:
1) There is no real picture at all, showing the device working. No video, no nothing. Just rendering. (I guess Kickstarter rejected its application, as they typically require a picture of a working prototype...).
2) The solar panels seem too small. Can they provide enough power?  Let’s do the some ballpark calculations. Assuming a VERY GENEROUS 5% incandescent lamp efficiency, assuming a VERY GENEROUS 30% cell efficiency (as if the cells were better than top-quality monocrystalline silicon under 1-Sun constant exposure. And 30% is very close to the theoretical maximum for a single junction silicon cell), and assuming 100-W desktop lamp (indeed, what we need here is the optical power – i.e. efficiency*consumption – so you might also use a much more energy efficient lamp, with smaller power. Still it must emit light also on the sides, limiting the choices), you’ll get 1.5 W MAXIMUM (if the cells were arranged so that they gather all the incoming light. That is, the desk lamp is ) electric power. Still, you will not be able to get 100% of the light, but let’s say (see latter part of this post) a very generous 70%, i.e. 1W. Assume also a 100% DC-DC converter efficiency, so 1W might seem adequate for 48 LEDs (maybe they are arranged so that only 24 or 12 are on at the same time).
Still, as you could evaluate from the project image (that one which shows the Zero installed in the yellow desk lamp), you are getting only something like 25% of the light (and here I’m over calculating. As you can see I tried to draw some lines with similar length to estimate what is the coverage). Therefore, you haven’t 1W, but only 250mW. That is too close to the minimum, there is no margin (and too much generosity in my assumptions)! 250mW are barely enough to light up 12 20mW LEDs... And who uses a 100-W (or 10-W equivalent filament-led lamp, which has a similar 1200 lumen output?) in a desk lamp?!?

In conclusion: this project is definitely similar to the infamous Batteriser, and it is worthy to stay in this thread: they both promise a lot, which, under wrong assumptions (100% efficiency of the batteriser, and the fact that battery powered devices stop working at 1.3 V), could be achieved, at least in principle.  However, in the real life they are likely to give you only a very limited gain (much less than that advertized) or even possibly they can worsen the problem.

As a last remark, I have now performed some measurements using a desk lamp and an integration sphere (see pictures below. The setup is not optimized for this lamp, so you must only take the results only as a ballpark starting point). I have to admit that you were partially right about the amount of light that can be reflected by the lampshade, even if I used much larger “fake” solar cells (those blue cardboards), and a much smaller desk lamp. With this configuration, in fact, you lose only 55 lumens out of the 199 that came out of that 60-W lamp (that lamp, alone, mounted on an Edison 27 socket, yielded about 640 lm – a bit lower than I expected, but I think because it was quite aged). Therefore the lampshade blocks a generous 69% of light (and that is the light that you can use for “Zero”. Still not enough, I’m afraid).

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on February 11, 2016, 10:19:19 pm
I applaud your running actual experiments to get real figures  :-+

However, I still think you are missing some important aspects. For instance:

Quote
Beside, a side effect of that gadget is that you need to keep on that 100-W desk lamp to light up less than 1W Christmas tree!

That's one way of looking at it. But the way I was looking at it is that the tree lights simply follow the desk lamp. If the desk lamp is off the tree is too, vice versa. So,  no, I wouldn't dream of turning on the desk lamp in order to have the tree lights on. But it would be  neat to have the tree lights whenever the desk lamp is on with no effort required. I mean, you don't turn on your phone constantly to view the animated wall paper. But when you want to use the phone and turn it on... wow! look at the animated wallpaper!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on February 12, 2016, 12:23:09 am
Or how about just using standard LED lights on the Christmas tree and swap the 100W bulb in the desk lamp for a 60W bulb. That way you'd save even more and eliminate the "wastage" of the desk lamp for the entire year and not just Christmas?

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: 97hilfel on February 13, 2016, 10:18:26 am
I would add the iRBeacon Indiegogo Projct, just because the products are not close to the thing that they claim to have... and they are pretty expensive!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: MadModder on April 18, 2016, 04:13:51 am
Haha, I have seen that "magnetic motor" POS too many times on youtube.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/new-energy/x/10829146#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/new-energy/x/10829146#/)

The video is stolen from here, with music and everything.  It's 10 years old BS. Still is today. :-DD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFGiWiXMHn0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFGiWiXMHn0)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on June 23, 2016, 04:45:59 pm
I would also add this:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bioring-the-personal-trainer-on-your-finger#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bioring-the-personal-trainer-on-your-finger#/)

Of course indegogo, of course flexible goal.
Of course only rendered images (besides, as if the uC, the "thin-super-magic-battery", and the three sensors were enough to implement what they want!). No real photos of real working hardware. The only photos are a milled piece of plastic (I bet there is nothing inside! Beside plastic.)

Cheers!

PS: and this is between the best startup in the atmel blog!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: System Error Message on June 23, 2016, 05:23:29 pm
regarding how much power something uses, my PC when turned off uses 20W or more because of the PSU and that the motherboard is EATX. standby uses 1W more.

I have a chinese LED lamp that isnt particularly good quality, it uses 12W regardless when plugged in whether it is charging or not. The light itself is rated 1W but the whole unit uses 12W all the time even on a fully charged battery with the lights turned off. Routers and modems will use lots of watts regardless of load whether the CPU is fully loaded or not which is why i complain about consumer routers lacking SFP and other modular features in order to eliminate the need for a modem.

Good quality items will always use very little power.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: zhenning on August 01, 2016, 12:32:04 pm
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fabtotum-prism#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/fabtotum-prism#/)

We are still active and running but still we need more time. We apologies and hope to have news soon, "we are eager as well to see results popping up". Regards, FABteam
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 01, 2016, 05:33:51 pm
Some updates of previously posted projects here:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger)
Last update: 7 months ago, 155 angry comments :-DD

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/janulus/trinity-portable-wind-turbine-power-station)
Last update: october 2, 2015
Funding suspended, but looks like some credit cards were still charged?

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/self-sustaining-electric-generator-prototype)
Project page in "draft mode" now? Wasn't this funded? Reading the backers comments would be very funny :)

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/beta-bioled-the-first-hand-held-blood-analyzer (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/beta-bioled-the-first-hand-held-blood-analyzer)
Last update: 2 years ago
Only 43 comments, last 2 years ago, did they delete all comments?
But they are still active on their Facebook page, posting angry birds figures: https://www.facebook.com/ArchimejTechnology/ (https://www.facebook.com/ArchimejTechnology/) Maybe bought from the backers money  :P And looks like they recently got more money from an award. Last Youtube video from 2014, can't find any information on a working prototype. I don't know, this project looks at least physically possible.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: maiakaat on August 25, 2016, 09:59:44 pm
Is this plausible given the power requirements, and typical size of "portable" aircon units

Seems a bit unlikely to me

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1253665084/zero-breeze-the-worlds-coolest-portable-air-condit (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1253665084/zero-breeze-the-worlds-coolest-portable-air-condit)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rollatorwieltje on August 26, 2016, 08:28:10 pm
Is this plausible given the power requirements, and typical size of "portable" aircon units

Seems a bit unlikely to me

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1253665084/zero-breeze-the-worlds-coolest-portable-air-condit (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1253665084/zero-breeze-the-worlds-coolest-portable-air-condit)
Same BS as that Noria window unit.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kurt/noria-cool-redefined (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/kurt/noria-cool-redefined)

A compressor AC that can run 5 hours on a battery, yeah right.

They claim they use 64 18650 cells... That would be about 640Wh. If it can run for 5 hours it would draw only 120W or so, about the same as a fridge. That's supposed to cool a room? It's only just enough to keep a small isolated box cool, something tells me it doesn't do anything significant when placed in a room.

According to Wikipedia a car AC consumes about 3kW. My small split unit about 500 to 600W.

Look at that claim, a 50sqft room down to 44 def F (7 deg C). LOL.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jfktrey on August 28, 2016, 11:38:18 am
Behold, the 100% unlicensed Pokemon Go accessory: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/)
Do a quick Ctrl+F for the words "Pokemon", "Pokeball", or "Nintendo".

My favorite part is how they claim to do image recognition to find the ball using the phone's camera.

Be sure to watch the "Tech update" video featuring their super secret hardware, which I'm pretty sure is just an Arduino: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/posts/1662245 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/posts/1662245)

EDIT Holy shit. I just looked closer, and it really is just an arduino. Check it out: http://imgur.com/a/m0S5C (http://imgur.com/a/m0S5C)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on August 28, 2016, 04:07:29 pm
What's wrong with using an Arduino? In fact, wouldn't they like it to be a secret (as in secret hardware) if they did? They wouldn't want world+dog replicating it, after all.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Delta on August 28, 2016, 07:59:58 pm
Behold, the 100% unlicensed Pokemon Go accessory: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/)
Do a quick Ctrl+F for the words "Pokemon", "Pokeball", or "Nintendo".

My favorite part is how they claim to do image recognition to find the ball using the phone's camera.

Be sure to watch the "Tech update" video featuring their super secret hardware, which I'm pretty sure is just an Arduino: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/posts/1662245 (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1193114899/revolutionary-game-controller-for-the-1-app-in-the/posts/1662245)

EDIT Holy shit. I just looked closer, and it really is just an arduino. Check it out: http://imgur.com/a/m0S5C (http://imgur.com/a/m0S5C)

Having never played that (or indeed, nearly any) tragically pathetic little game, nor ever messed with Arduinos, I have no idea what this product actually does, nor if it is likely to work as advertised.

Are you saying it can't work and is therefore a scam?

Or just that someone has made an Arduino-based device to sell to saddos?  If so, that's not "dodgy", just good business.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on August 28, 2016, 08:36:34 pm
It would require the game creators to buy into the idea and develop support for the thing into the game, which you can presume there is nearly no chance it would happen since the whole thing makes no sense in the first place.

They say they'd refund "minus fees" if it didn't work out, but of course you've got no guarantee they'll do it.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on September 21, 2016, 04:07:30 pm
I would also add this:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1280803647/muzo-your-personal-zone-creator-with-noise-blockin/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1280803647/muzo-your-personal-zone-creator-with-noise-blockin/description)

Still, almost 3000 people backed this project :O
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: djacobow on September 23, 2016, 04:07:37 am

Sion Solarcar

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/sion-a-solarcar-for-everyone-car-solar#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/sion-a-solarcar-for-everyone-car-solar#/)

Already funded to the dune of EUR 200,000.

Claim is to deliver EUR 16,000 vehicle (I'd swear it was 13,000 last I checked) minus battery. Also claims to be able to go 30 km a day on solar alone.

I can't help but noticed that most of the solar cells appear to be mounted vertically. That means that it will be impossible for more than half of them to ever been in the sun at once. Figure in that cities tend to have buildings which cast shade, I think getting more than a couple kWh daily would be hard, which will not take any of the currently available EVs 30 km. (Current EVs get about 30kWh/100 miles or 5.3 km / kWh https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&path=1&year1=2014&year2=2016&vtype=Electric (https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/PowerSearch.do?action=noform&path=1&year1=2014&year2=2016&vtype=Electric))

So to get more range, this startup is unlikely to have lighter motors, batteries, controls, power electronics, or passengers. So their plan is carbon fiber. But how much lighter could they possibly make it? And if they got that kind of range, could it possibly still be street legal?)

I don't know if it's a scam or naivatee, but this thing does not seem possible.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on September 23, 2016, 05:39:18 pm
Forget the technical impossibilities, for €200K he won't even have the cash for a single crashtest, let alone the certification, homologation etc he would need to put it on the road.  :palm:

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: djacobow on September 24, 2016, 03:36:07 am
Forget the technical impossibilities, for €200K he won't even have the cash for a single crashtest, let alone the certification, homologation etc he would need to put it on the road.  :palm:

McBryce.

Right, which makes me wonder what they will do with their EUR 200k. They could waste it on noodling with solar cars (which, admittedly, sounds like fun) or they could pocket it. But what they cannot do is build a car company.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on September 29, 2016, 06:15:17 pm
Anyone has seen this one?

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1556758830/aten-the-worlds-first-interstellar-space-vehicle/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1556758830/aten-the-worlds-first-interstellar-space-vehicle/)

There is even the obligatory reference of all nutjobs there - Nicola Tesla! He apparently invented antigravity too, who knew!

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on September 29, 2016, 06:23:54 pm
Wow, and they're going to do all that with $25K !! (not enough to pay a small team of engineers for 24 hours). They've really thought this one through.

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: DJohn on September 29, 2016, 08:50:20 pm
The Aten Kickstarter was cancelled, but they're still going on Indiegogo: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/aten-the-world-s-only-interstellar-space-vehicle-technology--2#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/aten-the-world-s-only-interstellar-space-vehicle-technology--2#/).  This time they only want $10,000 (flexible funding, of course).  That money isn't for the space vehicle, but for astronaut training.

Top of the list of risks and challenges is "NASA approval to conduct test flights".  I think they've got a few other challenges to overcome first.

It's worth reading the campaign.  They're planning to build a warp drive.  "Warping or distorting space-time is achieved by accessing and amplifying gravity waves, thus using zero-point energy as its propulsion system."  But these aren't ordinary gravity waves.  They're using the other kind of gravity, "also known as the 'strong force' in mainstream physics."  You know, "the gravity holding the protons and electrons to the nucleus of an atom."  That gravity.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on September 29, 2016, 09:15:38 pm
Top of the list of risks and challenges is "NASA approval to conduct test flights".  I think they've got a few other challenges to overcome first.

I don't think you need NASA approval if your device doesn't leave the ground :)
Gravity Type B will probably look after that.

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on September 30, 2016, 09:22:50 am
Wow, and they're going to do all that with $25K !! (not enough to pay a small team of engineers for 24 hours). They've really thought this one through.

McBryce.

Well, if you read the project in detail, towards the end it says that the money was to spent on speakers and renting space, not for actually producing anything. One can only guess why ...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 10, 2016, 07:02:24 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/cable-plus-the-next-generation-hi-fi-audio-cable-laptop-tablet#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/cable-plus-the-next-generation-hi-fi-audio-cable-laptop-tablet#/)

EDIT: I'll keep throwing whatever I find into this post until someone else posts or it gets too long.
Another one of these...
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/megamini-by-hifiman-battery#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/megamini-by-hifiman-battery#/)
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/carbon-emissions-reduction-technology#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/carbon-emissions-reduction-technology#/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on October 19, 2016, 06:02:35 pm
Another complete bullshit https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description)

I'm not saying they won't manage to actually produce this "thing". I'm saying that they are selling shit as gold... What they promise is just bullshit.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 21, 2016, 05:40:20 am
Another complete bullshit https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description)

I'm not saying they won't manage to actually produce this "thing". I'm saying that they are selling shit as gold... What they promise is just bullshit.

What they will produce is a small inline amplifier thing. Whether it will be at least decent or full of chinese horse shit scam electronics is unknown. But their claims are absolute :bullshit:

Spherical Sound Feild Expansion Technology - :bullshit:

Dynamic Equalizer - um, that graph is :bullshit: (frequency vs time? :-DD)

Real-Time Detail Boosting - :-+ It is possible to amplify only certain frequencies to enhance sound, whether this will actually lead to any improvement depends on the source.

Psychoacoustic Bass Enhancement - Um...What? :palm: :bullshit:





Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: matseng on October 21, 2016, 10:18:29 pm
Psychoacoustic Bass Enhancement - Um...What? :palm: :bullshit:
Sounds like mumbo-jumbo crap but it seems to be a "real" thing... Lot's of hits at google https://www.google.com/search?q=Psychoacoustic+Bass+Enhancement (https://www.google.com/search?q=Psychoacoustic+Bass+Enhancement) even a bunch of stuff from IEEE and such places. https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Psychoacoustic+Bass+Enhancement (https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Psychoacoustic+Bass+Enhancement)

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on October 25, 2016, 03:58:04 am
Another complete bullshit https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description)

I'm not saying they won't manage to actually produce this "thing". I'm saying that they are selling shit as gold... What they promise is just bullshit.

What they will produce is a small inline amplifier thing. Whether it will be at least decent or full of chinese horse shit scam electronics is unknown. But their claims are absolute :bullshit:

Spherical Sound Feild Expansion Technology - :bullshit:

Dynamic Equalizer - um, that graph is :bullshit: (frequency vs time? :-DD)

Real-Time Detail Boosting - :-+ It is possible to amplify only certain frequencies to enhance sound, whether this will actually lead to any improvement depends on the source.

Psychoacoustic Bass Enhancement - Um...What? :palm: :bullshit:

By the way, from the comments of the authors, it seems to me that they want to migrate the project to indiegogo (despite it has been successfully funded) !
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: jonovid on October 25, 2016, 04:23:53 am
Quote
What they will produce is a small inline amplifier thing. Whether it will be at least decent or full of chinese horse shit scam electronics is unknown. But their claims are absolute :bullshit:
adding depth to an audio signal =delayed audio data , so thats a TPA5050 + a Compandor . but why try to add too today's audio? its has good dynamic range,  not like old analog tape systems.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 26, 2016, 04:48:29 am
Quote
What they will produce is a small inline amplifier thing. Whether it will be at least decent or full of chinese horse shit scam electronics is unknown. But their claims are absolute :bullshit:
adding depth to an audio signal =delayed audio data , so thats a TPA5050 + a Compandor . but why try to add too today's audio? its has good dynamic range,  not like old analog tape systems.

They want to try to "revitalize" their shitty low resolution 128kbps MP3 files they are playing through small computer speakers they bought at Walmart, or worse...cardboard speaker donuts. :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ez24 on December 15, 2016, 07:30:15 am
 :popcorn:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: slicendice on December 23, 2016, 12:44:59 am
I see the XPUMP project as similar to what Bose does to improve listening experience (which is awesome by the way when using proper speakers). A lot of complicated pragmatic algorithms involved in such tech. Nothing new tech though...

What could make it interesting is the price tag for the commercialized product. But we have to wait and see if it's going to be cheap or overpriced like Bose stuff is. :-)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: kalleboo on December 23, 2016, 10:18:29 pm
Another complete bullshit https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description)

I'm not saying they won't manage to actually produce this "thing". I'm saying that they are selling shit as gold... What they promise is just bullshit.
Reminds me of the good old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_Retrieval_System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_Retrieval_System)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on December 24, 2016, 12:27:37 am
Home Cinema.
Battery powered.
WTF :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on December 24, 2016, 12:42:15 am
The demos sound good. Certainly it is possible to enhance audio in some ways. But difficult to judge, because they didn't use the same sequence, one time without and one time with the effect, but turned on the effect in the middle of the movie :-//
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: slicendice on December 24, 2016, 12:50:57 am
Home Cinema.
Battery powered.
WTF :palm:

LOL! They want you to use it with your mobile too. It can be charged and I think it can be used while charger attached ( I hope ;-) ). Audio processing at low power levels does not consume much power if implemented properly. If it was an amplifier then it would be a completely different story. I like the idea, but in my opinion, the device is still too bulky to be portable.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: madires on December 24, 2016, 01:20:15 am
I see the XPUMP project as similar to what Bose does to improve listening experience (which is awesome by the way when using proper speakers). A lot of complicated pragmatic algorithms involved in such tech. Nothing new tech though...

Exactly! My old DSP equipped Yamaha amp does that for about 25 years now.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: TechnicalBen on December 29, 2016, 09:07:38 am
Anyone has seen this one?

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1556758830/aten-the-worlds-first-interstellar-space-vehicle/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1556758830/aten-the-worlds-first-interstellar-space-vehicle/)

There is even the obligatory reference of all nutjobs there - Nicola Tesla! He apparently invented antigravity too, who knew!

You do know these are all laundering schemes? They are looking to fund their dirty sock washing business... if you catch my drift. ;)

Another complete bullshit https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/819767230/xpump-turn-any-sound-source-into-a-home-theater-ex/description)

I'm not saying they won't manage to actually produce this "thing". I'm saying that they are selling shit as gold... What they promise is just bullshit.
Reminds me of the good old https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_Retrieval_System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_Retrieval_System)

Companies like Sonos are currently using speaker+mic systems to adjust audio dependent on the room etc. Though I doubt that is what the device on the kickstarter is doing, plus I doubt all systems have the fidelity/range for such adjustments or that any changes would be noticed with or without room echo, plus they are probably better by default from the factory.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: carloscuev on January 06, 2017, 05:27:12 pm
raboo SMART Charger: Enjoy Risk Free Charging with raboo SC

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rabootec/raboo-smart-mobile-charger/comments (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rabootec/raboo-smart-mobile-charger/comments)

So now your charger needs and app to do what your phone already does: stop charging when battery is full. Brilliant!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: boffin on January 30, 2017, 08:47:16 am
Got a new one...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEfPgx51cas&ab_channel=OssiaInc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEfPgx51cas&ab_channel=OssiaInc)

Looks like another "lets beam power through the air"


Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: wire67 on February 04, 2017, 03:16:36 pm
It's very sad that I have to add this one in the thread, it looked very promising, they said there is no risk as it was supposed to be ready for development. Seekios is a true GPS tracker without monthly fee (but ads).
https://www.facebook.com/seekios/ (https://www.facebook.com/seekios/)

It was supposed to be delivered in November 2016.
Now they say they did manufacture the 3500 gadgets but it didn't get the approval from "the laboratory", fault to "external contractors".
They have to "redesign the hardware" and "it's going to take months", at least that last sentence is true.
They want to communicate "weekly" after almost nothing since September, just 1 bad news each month, and now they still don't give an exact reason or details.

So my Question to avoid doing the same mistake, what approval could that be? FCC15b?

If I use an already FCC certified BLE module, is there anything more than FCC15b (unintentional radiation) to be checked in a laboratory? (Not just self claimed like CE marking)

Thx
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on February 04, 2017, 03:58:29 pm
It was supposed to be delivered in November 2016.
Now they say they did manufacture the 3500 gadgets but it didn't get the approval from "the laboratory", fault to "external contractors".
They have to "redesign the hardware" and "it's going to take months", at least that last sentence is true.

Not a good idea to manufacture 3500 devices, and then do the certification tests.

Quote
If I use an already FCC certified BLE module, is there anything more than FCC15b (unintentional radiation) to be checked in a laboratory? (Not just self claimed like CE marking)

It depends on your customers. For consumer devices, there are also safety regulations, to make sure your device doesn't burn down a house because you forgot a fuse etc. And using FCC certified components is a good start, but you still have to certify your whole device. There are less hard rules, if you create a device intended for use in labs only (at least in Europe).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: f4eru on March 04, 2017, 09:41:17 am
A good one also :
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1280803647/muzo-your-personal-zone-creator-with-noise-blockin (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1280803647/muzo-your-personal-zone-creator-with-noise-blockin)

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Marco on March 10, 2017, 02:48:30 pm
The Vega+ seems to be crashing and burning. (http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39191064)

Hearing rumours that David Levy made out like a bandit in salary, glad I'm not British so I can repeat them :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on March 11, 2017, 07:17:30 pm
It's very sad that I have to add this one in the thread, it looked very promising, they said there is no risk as it was supposed to be ready for development. Seekios is a true GPS tracker without monthly fee (but ads).
https://www.facebook.com/seekios/ (https://www.facebook.com/seekios/)

It was supposed to be delivered in November 2016.
Now they say they did manufacture the 3500 gadgets but it didn't get the approval from "the laboratory", fault to "external contractors".
They have to "redesign the hardware" and "it's going to take months", at least that last sentence is true.

It's weird because some were sold here in Switzerland last December, and customers have received them (http://www.qoqa.ch/fr/offer/12623, (http://www.qoqa.ch/fr/offer/12623,) in French). Our requirements are CE just the same as for Europe...  :-//

Lots of complaints about major bugs and most people seem to have returned them.

Maybe they tried to get rid of their batch while not being ready at all for it...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: rollatorwieltje on March 21, 2017, 08:38:11 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/starsailor-live-brings-the-skies-into-your-bedroom-technology (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/starsailor-live-brings-the-skies-into-your-bedroom-technology)

Another darkness projector. Granted, most of the other demonstrations are in a dark room, which may be plausible, but still they show this:

(http://i.imgur.com/b1TWiCx.png)

 :palm:

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on March 21, 2017, 09:00:40 am
Why do people buy an overpriced projector, which looks tiny and probably doesn't have much light output? Didn't read all of it, did they post some hard facts, like lumens light output? Looks like all 3D rendered, no prototype. And the sleep monitoring is useless, you can do this with your smartphone.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on March 21, 2017, 09:23:19 am
A small projector is useful for professional illustrators.
Once the client decides on a rough, it's scanned and projected on the final paper/cloth at the right format, allowing to start painting right away.
Traditionally this was done with a grid yadidada etc. For an A3 portrait, this would save me around 8 hours...

But we are talking of a world market of a couple thousand units worldwide. A market that is cornered by cheap second hand units...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on March 21, 2017, 09:26:50 am
But we are talking of a world market of a couple thousand units worldwide. A market that is cornered by cheap second hand units...

Plus there are tons of small projectors available, for years now.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: gildasd on March 22, 2017, 07:39:26 am
But we are talking of a world market of a couple thousand units worldwide. A market that is cornered by cheap second hand units...

Plus there are tons of small projectors available, for years now.
The small protectors are typically a bit lacking in Lumens... and are typically in the same price range...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: janoc on March 22, 2017, 08:17:48 pm
The small protectors are typically a bit lacking in Lumens... and are typically in the same price range...

Yes, around 100lm is common. On the other hand you don't need 1000lm+ to power a drawing table type of application, 100lm from close range is plenty even in daylight for that.

However, I thought the idea was to get a small projector? If you want more than about 200 lumens, it will need substantially more cooling even with LED light. That is not possible to cram into a very small package without going with a high speed fan that sounds like a jet taking off. Also the lifetime of such projector will be short.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on March 30, 2017, 11:52:34 pm
Hi there!

I'm following this https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/brentmorgan/superscreen/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/brentmorgan/superscreen/) since few days ago, and there are a lot of things that just smell fishy.

1) The prototype they are using in their videos strangely resembles a Samsung tablet (Samsung Galaxy Tab2 9.7").
2) There is no video showing the prototype and another cell phone (except Samsung) working TOGETHER. When they show the screen, to actually hightlight the responsiveness, they do not show any cell phone: this is very suspicious.
3) They are very detailed in describing the well known technology, but they cover themsevles under the intellecual property protection fog, when they explain how they manage to transmit a 2560x1600 video - at 60fps I guess (by the way, that would be an impressive amount of raw data to be transmitted, 5.9Gbps. You might argue that they encode the screen image, before actually transmitting it. Right, such realtime encoding would still be very hardware-demanding, plus your cell phone would still have to play the video you're remotely watching or play the 3D game! And I don't believe they "copy" the application to the tablet so that all the video data is generated locally, they also stated that they cannot work in standalone mode).
4) They slowly extended their early bid slots from 1000 to 8000 (for instance, some days ago, there were 7500 early bid slots. Now 8000). Update! at the moment of writing, they increased the limit to 9000!
5) The creators aren't answering to questions since a huge amount of time.

I would bet this will end like Zano or the Coolest Cooler.

Cheers!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on March 31, 2017, 04:45:28 am
I'm not believing it either, since the whole appeal (and which they show when only the tablet is visible, the content is obviously showing a properly laid-out tablet UI) would be for apps to be scaled to the proper resolution, i.e. having them rendered in a virtual screen that is transmitted - but AFAIK neither Android nor iOS provides such a facility, so it would be dead in the water at the OS level.

And it's also directly incompatible with what they say (and show when both phone and tablet are visible) in the video that "superscreen will display exactly what you see on your smartphone" - Can't simultaneously be displaying both "exactly the same in sync" and "an adapted UI" which they both show  |O

If what they plan to do is display "exactly the same" then they didn't invent anything, Samsung's Side Sync feature has provided that for a few years between a Samsung phone and either a PC or Samsung tablet. This could be why they used Samsung devices for the demo  ::)
Now this requires deep OS integration though so good luck making it compatible with all devices.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on March 31, 2017, 05:51:28 am
I'm not believing it either, since the whole appeal (and which they show when only the tablet is visible, the content is obviously showing a properly laid-out tablet UI) would be for apps to be scaled to the proper resolution, i.e. having them rendered in a virtual screen that is transmitted - but AFAIK neither Android nor iOS provides such a facility, so it would be dead in the water at the OS level.

iOS has a feature to transmit the actual display, too, for example the program Reflector 2 uses it, which I used to record the iPhone display in one of my copter videos, starting at 1:11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crA3yKilunQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crA3yKilunQ)

The resolution with newer iOS devices is insane anyway, so would be not too bad if stretched. But I don't know if it can transmit back touch events, too.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: nwvlab on March 31, 2017, 06:01:37 am
I'm not believing it either, since the whole appeal (and which they show when only the tablet is visible, the content is obviously showing a properly laid-out tablet UI) would be for apps to be scaled to the proper resolution, i.e. having them rendered in a virtual screen that is transmitted - but AFAIK neither Android nor iOS provides such a facility, so it would be dead in the water at the OS level.

iOS has a feature to transmit the actual display, too, for example the program Reflector 2 uses it, which I used to record the iPhone display in one of my copter videos, starting at 1:11:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crA3yKilunQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crA3yKilunQ)

The resolution with newer iOS devices is insane anyway, so would be not too bad if stretched. But I don't know if it can transmit back touch events, too.

How fast is it? I mean, is there any noticeable lag? And what about the image quality?

Anyway, I have also reported this project directly to Samsung (if they actually give a shit about people using their stuff and claiming it's their invention).
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on March 31, 2017, 06:09:22 am
Yes both iOS and android have screencast option, but it's display only, no control.
I don't know of generic remote input methods that don't require root/jailbreak, Samsung's feature is the only example I know of but limited to their devices.

By the way I only found out about that SideSync feature today while looking around that kind of stuff... even when I've been using every Samsung phone since the S3. It's something that I'll be using every day now, but somehow it's always been completely absent from their marketing...  :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on March 31, 2017, 06:52:25 am
Quote
Yes both iOS and android have screencast option, but it's display only, no control.

My car 'radio' has this (for Android) but it's control too. Can't for the life of me think what it's called now :(

The car setup uses only USB, but wireless option works with more reputable kit. It's a real thing and could be that these people are just nicking the made-for-car facility and using it with any old bigger screen.

Edit: http://www.mirrorlink.com/ (http://www.mirrorlink.com/) is the place. Control for Android, just mirror for iOS.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on May 31, 2017, 09:58:00 pm
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/airvolt-charging-smartphones-from-radio-waves-charger--3/x/2125718#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/airvolt-charging-smartphones-from-radio-waves-charger--3/x/2125718#/)

 :scared: :scared:

The broken wording, wrong units, "development of technology" planned for after the campaign, and obviously the fact that said technology will never be able to be "developed" to achieve the advertised functionality... :palm:  |O
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on May 31, 2017, 10:23:59 pm
His choice of words reveal his total lack of physics/electronics knowledge, but hey, with $6K he's going to buy equipment and outsource the engineering to a team that have just 12 weeks to complete the development, so economics, payscales and project management don't seem to be his area of expertise either.

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Howardlong on June 01, 2017, 01:13:35 am
Almost identitcal to the TCharger scam.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger-smartphone-future/x/12944414#/comments (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tcharger-the-next-generation-wireless-charger-smartphone-future/x/12944414#/comments)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on June 01, 2017, 07:35:24 am
Wow that's disturbingly similar   :palm: :palm:
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on June 26, 2017, 07:42:11 am
Was this already posted here? https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator#/) I wonder why he no longer works for Honda? :-DD

Not sure about this one, but their photobucket got disabled :-DD https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/robinone-makes-motor-oil-last-longer-car-motorcycle#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/robinone-makes-motor-oil-last-longer-car-motorcycle#/)

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: frozenfrogz on June 27, 2017, 09:04:16 pm
Paqsule the desinfection bag is/was on Kickstarter (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/paqsule/paqsule-the-smart-self-cleaning-bag) and Indiegogo (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/paqsule-cleaning-technology-in-a-stylish-bag-fitness-travel--2#/) and I call BS.

Typical UV-C applications feature at least 70 to 100W of fluorescent lamps for surface sanitation. Also, ozone generators for air cleaning are quite controversial from a health related point of view.

I could not find any tech specs on the campaign site.
Most likely it is just a bag with purple interior lighting and some funny smell generator xD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on June 28, 2017, 03:13:36 am
Paqsule the desinfection bag is/was on Kickstarter (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/paqsule/paqsule-the-smart-self-cleaning-bag) and Indiegogo (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/paqsule-cleaning-technology-in-a-stylish-bag-fitness-travel--2#/) and I call BS.

Typical UV-C applications feature at least 70 to 100W of fluorescent lamps for surface sanitation. Also, ozone generators for air cleaning are quite controversial from a health related point of view.

I could not find any tech specs on the campaign site.
Most likely it is just a bag with purple interior lighting and some funny smell generator xD

I'm pretty sure it's all real, it would be relatively simple to implement all of those features. Whether it would actually work as advertised is unknown, but it seems like wank.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: frozenfrogz on June 28, 2017, 04:09:38 am
Whether it would actually work as advertised is unknown, but it seems like wank.

If it actually incorporates a potent "UV-C photon gun" you could at least dispose vampires you hunted down with a pitch fork in the bag.

Reminds me of the craptacular "Orb"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaFiW45D2rI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaFiW45D2rI)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: IanMacdonald on June 28, 2017, 05:54:36 am
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tribotex-more-hp-mpg-and-reverse-engine-wear-car-engineering#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/tribotex-more-hp-mpg-and-reverse-engine-wear-car-engineering#/)

Another oil additive that's likely just automotive snake oil. Even claims to repair worn engines.

1580% funded on April 7, 2017.  :bullshit:

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on June 29, 2017, 02:41:34 am
If it doesn't use those weak UV LEDs (which it might) it would use mini UV tubes like in real portable sterilizers and on the bottom of robot cleaners. In which case, your bag would be somewhat fragile with glass bulbs inside.

EDIT: That channel seems interesting, I must watch more.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: frozenfrogz on June 29, 2017, 03:41:07 am
EDIT: That channel seems interesting, I must watch more.

Detective Hacc is indeed among the underated youtubers. He seems like a fun guy and I enjoy watching his stuff :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on June 29, 2017, 04:04:17 am
 :scared:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr1TiQ_EGTg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr1TiQ_EGTg)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: mikerj on June 30, 2017, 10:22:59 pm
Not sure about this one, but their photobucket got disabled :-DD https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/robinone-makes-motor-oil-last-longer-car-motorcycle#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/robinone-makes-motor-oil-last-longer-car-motorcycle#/)

Photobucket have very recently stopped any users linking their pics in 3rd party sites unless they pay $400 per year for the privilege.  I doubt Photobucket will be around much longer.

robinOne is the biggest pile of excrement I've seen since someone decided that solar powered roads would be a great idea. 

Quote from: robinOne
Motor oil has to be changed because suspended particles, dust and water get into the oil over time.

100% incorrect.  The oil filter is there to deal with particulate contamination, and water will evaporate provided the oil is operating at a suitable temperature.

Motor oil needs to be changed because of a large number of changes that can not be reversed by passing it through a simple filter, e.g. viscosity degradation due to shearing of long chain polymers, evaporation of the more volatile fractions/additives, oxidation, hydrolysis etc...

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: IanMacdonald on July 03, 2017, 11:39:55 pm
:scared:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr1TiQ_EGTg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr1TiQ_EGTg)

And, another YouTuber who thinks that those two things that wave about to the sound are drumsticks.  :bullshit: :bullshit: WHACK! WHACK! WHACK!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Dave3 on August 29, 2017, 03:17:10 am
==> San Francisco-based Kanoa died (bluetooth earphones for $300)

==> Skully died (motorcycle helmet for $1500)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36Gw3tErUSM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36Gw3tErUSM)
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/08/26/crowdfunding-disaster-silicon-valley-startup-takes-customers-money-shuts-down/ (http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/08/26/crowdfunding-disaster-silicon-valley-startup-takes-customers-money-shuts-down/)
https://getkanoa.com/password (https://getkanoa.com/password)

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/08/22/skully-how-hot-start-up-became-latest-silicon-valley-darling-to-flame-out/ (http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/08/22/skully-how-hot-start-up-became-latest-silicon-valley-darling-to-flame-out/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kilrah on August 30, 2017, 12:00:32 am
That review is golden! The moron at Kanoa he was talkling with (only guy left, or who's ever been there I guess?) obviously did everything wrong that he could from a comms point of view. Crazy.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on August 30, 2017, 02:02:04 am
iTwe4kz is asking for too much. Why would anyone want to connect their ass to their ears? :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Kiwi_frog on September 01, 2017, 01:56:46 pm
"Nope" Webcam cover and sound blocker

Although this item would work, the lie they tell just need to be showen https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bungajungle/nope-sound-blocker-and-webcam-cover/description. (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/bungajungle/nope-sound-blocker-and-webcam-cover/description.)

This line "The micro electronic circuitry in Nope Sound Blocker forces your device to sense an installed mic. This turns off the device's on board microphones which blocks out sound." Nope is about right.

(https://ksr-ugc.imgix.net/assets/017/659/262/3e0556bd56dafc7f3365859fd836217a_original.jpg?w=680&fit=max&v=1501048861&auto=format&q=92&s=521c872bc86d17d6bdf75f7d5639b4a4)

It is a 3.5mm phono on a stick, it would simple switch the microphone of by being installed, worse case a resistor on the end might help(turns out that is what they have 1 2.2k resistor),  no "micro electronics" needed, and all this for $15 or $20 for 2 in a keychain.

What is worse people have been lapping this product up like it is amazing.

Mike.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: FrankBuss on September 01, 2017, 04:25:24 pm
It is a 3.5mm phono on a stick, it would simple switch the microphone of by being installed, worse case a resistor on the end might help(turns out that is what they have 1 2.2k resistor),  no "micro electronics" needed, and all this for $15 or $20 for 2 in a keychain.

It might be an SMD resistor, which is "micro" :)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on September 01, 2017, 08:06:46 pm
It is a 3.5mm phono on a stick, it would simple switch the microphone of by being installed, worse case a resistor on the end might help(turns out that is what they have 1 2.2k resistor),  no "micro electronics" needed, and all this for $15 or $20 for 2 in a keychain.

It might be an SMD resistor, which is "micro" :)

Only if they used an 0402 part. If it's 1206 I'm not buying it. :)

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Deodand2014 on September 01, 2017, 11:12:24 pm
:scared:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr1TiQ_EGTg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mr1TiQ_EGTg)

I know that DetectiveHACC talked about that device possibly producing chlorine gas, but there is another much more obvious danger, if enough current is being passed through the device to cause electrolysis, what's going to happen if someone puts their hand in the water while it's running... After all it's basic operating principle is no different than these Chinese Water heaters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f14nv3uf2ik (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f14nv3uf2ik)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EViyccc2t9w (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EViyccc2t9w)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Deodand2014 on September 02, 2017, 01:26:44 pm
Here's a Indygogo campaign from the early 2010s which actually did fund and was asking for money to build a Quantum Effect Generator. The explanation for how it works is classic:

Quote
In basic terms, our machine reverses the conventions used to build electric motors, i.e., instead of using low voltage/high current construction, which wastes energy, our designs use high voltage/low current construction, which gives us a HUGE surplus of energy. A portion of the surplus energy is fed back to self-power the motor, and the excess energy is collected in capacitors and converted into house current (120 or 240 volt, at 50-200 Amperes, depending on scaling). This is known as over-unity (more output than input) which traditional educational institutions have historically taught us was impossible. It is not at all impossible, and does NOT operate outside the laws of physics.

https://www.indiegogo.com/esi/en/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/esi/en/projects/home-quantum-energy-generator#/)

There is a long discussion (Now locked) on the skeptical Metabunk forum about this one and related overunity projects, there seems to be an entire subculture based around the machine sustained by various crowdfunding efforts.

https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-quantum-energy-generator-qeg-10kw-out-for-1kw-in.t3572/ (https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-quantum-energy-generator-qeg-10kw-out-for-1kw-in.t3572/)

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: BartManInNZ on December 21, 2017, 09:02:37 am
Judging by the comments this one could be one to watch?
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1103525718/morphcooker-the-all-in-one-electric-camp-stove/ (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1103525718/morphcooker-the-all-in-one-electric-camp-stove/)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ikrase on January 02, 2018, 03:38:24 pm
Yeah, that looks pretty bad. The energy density of lithium ion is almost enough to boil a liter of water with that size of battery... if everything is perfectly efficient. Which it certainly isn't since it does not look like they've spent a moment on improving food-to-stove coupling.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Inverted18650 on January 10, 2018, 03:05:45 am
In case you didn’t see Dave’s latelest video, the Indiegogo 121 DMM is a scam as well. Do NOT back the IndieGoGo 121GW!
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on January 12, 2018, 04:10:54 am
Yeah, that looks pretty bad. The energy density of lithium ion is almost enough to boil a liter of water with that size of battery... if everything is perfectly efficient. Which it certainly isn't since it does not look like they've spent a moment on improving food-to-stove coupling.

What if you shorted the battery and it caught fire, that would make it work better right? >:D
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: McBryce on February 23, 2018, 08:54:52 pm
Has this humdinger been mentioned here before?

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/without-fuel-generator-tesla-on-4-kw#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/without-fuel-generator-tesla-on-4-kw#/)

If any Ukrainians here have a moment to spare, it would be nice to know the general basis of his technical explaination  :-DD

McBryce.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Richard Crowley on February 24, 2018, 02:06:41 am
That "without-fuel-generator" has a feature I have never seen in the crowd-source arena before.

For $500K (50% off the original offer of $1M!) they will "close all activities and the spread of technology until 2030."   :-DD
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Cyberdragon on February 24, 2018, 06:16:37 am
Wow, they are REALLY stupid free energy nuts! They don't even know how to use Indiegogo right! The project description is entirely just the template (IE it's really just blank). :-DD

I don't think this will last long before it gets removed.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Godzil on March 03, 2018, 01:17:39 am
That's also show how much IGG check the project before they can run live...
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: beenosam on March 04, 2018, 06:34:18 am
Wow, they are REALLY stupid free energy nuts! They don't even know how to use Indiegogo right! The project description is entirely just the template (IE it's really just blank). :-DD

I don't think this will last long before it gets removed.

I don't know what's with all this weird stupid wrong free energy stuff lately. Why do people keep trying the same failed stupid ideas and deceiving people. People need to do more research into stuff before they buy it.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ikrase on March 05, 2018, 05:26:08 pm
I think that there's been kind of a resurgence of optimistic enthusiasm about both clean energy and general advanced technology. Sadly, this enthusiasm tends to peak much more rapidly than actual research-development-production-deployment.

This also goes together with a few actual recent achievements: the smartphone revolution of the last ten years, SpaceX doing what NASA and the USSR never were able to achieve, electric cars seeming to become a thing, the EMdrive managing to intrigue people enough that non-crackpots will spend money testing it. Plus the appearance of a bunch of consumer products (thermal cameras, etc) that previously were only available at high, even military prices.

I think that this stuff leads to some less-well-educated people believing in amazing, impossible things like smartphone chargers that charge your phone in five seconds (without exploding it), the WashWow, and "without fuel" engines.

Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: dunkemhigh on March 05, 2018, 07:33:56 pm
I agree with most of what you say, except for:

Quote
some less-well-educated people

Do you mean "not educated in physics"? I am sure there are well-educated people around that get sucked in (and, of course, relatively un-educated people see this stuff coming a mile 1.6km off).

Perhaps it's a question of gullibility on the part of one, and the gift of the gab on the part of the other.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: IanMacdonald on May 11, 2018, 04:04:43 am
I think that there's been kind of a resurgence of optimistic enthusiasm about both clean energy and general advanced technology. Sadly, this enthusiasm tends to peak much more rapidly than actual research-development-production-deployment.

More, I think, an intensive propaganda campaign intended to counteract the USA's withdrawal from climate policies. The worrying thing is that propaganda works, and the surprising thing is that people don't seem to be too worried that the propaganda comes from the selfsame corporations selling the 'green energy' products. Or else, from NGOs in their pay. In any other case, people would be suspicious of the motive behind the claims.

There have even been cases of these corporations setting up fake activist websites (https://web.archive.org/web/20120717024233/http://www.actionforrenewables.org:80/) to encourage the public to campaign for their products. Imagine if a soap powder manufacturer did likewise. Suppose they then claimed than their soap was the only kind able to save the planet from pollution, and that therefore laws had to be enacted compelling everyone to buy their product. I don't think that would fool many people. Yet, when it's renewables, it's believed without question. Why?  :-//

A recent EU announcement indicates that EU CO2 emissions increased in 2017, over 2016. That shows just how well this is working, I think.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Dave3 on May 22, 2018, 02:33:26 am
How about some 3D headphones from OSSIC?

Total of $6 million raised from Kickstarter, Indiegogo and others will vaporise per techcrunch. (EDIT -Over $3  million from Kickstatrer and Indegogo total & over $3 million from "investors").

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/248983394/ossic-x-the-first-3d-audio-headphones-calibrated-t (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/248983394/ossic-x-the-first-3d-audio-headphones-calibrated-t)
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ossic-x-immersive-3d-audio-headphones-vr#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ossic-x-immersive-3d-audio-headphones-vr#/)
https://www.ossic.com/ (https://www.ossic.com/)
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/sd-fi-ossic-failure-20180521-story.html (http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/sd-fi-ossic-failure-20180521-story.html)
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/buy-ossic-x-or-not.799484/ (https://www.head-fi.org/threads/buy-ossic-x-or-not.799484/)
https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/20/after-tens-of-thousands-of-pre-orders-high-end-3d-headphones-startup-ossic-disappears/ (https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/20/after-tens-of-thousands-of-pre-orders-high-end-3d-headphones-startup-ossic-disappears/)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsGk_HKhxVY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsGk_HKhxVY)
_________________

A Very Sad goodbye.

Hello Backers,

It is with an extremely heavy heart that we must inform you that OSSIC is shutting down and will be unable to deliver the remaining OSSIC X headphones.

The OSSIC X was an ambitious and expensive product to develop. With funds from the crowdfunding campaign, along with angel investment, we were able to develop the product and ship the initial units. However, the product still requires significantly more capital to ramp to full mass production, and the company is out of money.
Over the last 18 months, we have explored a myriad of financing options, but given VR’s slow start and a number of high profile hardware startup failures, we have been unable to secure the investment required to proceed.
This was obviously not our desired outcome. The team worked exceptionally hard and created a production-ready product that is a technological and performance breakthrough. To fail at the 5 yard-line is a tragedy. We are extremely sorry that we cannot deliver your product and want you to know that the team has done everything possible including investing our own savings and working without salary to exhaust all possibilities.

The OSSIC X was started as a campaign to create immersive and interactive audio. One of the biggest questions was, in a world of small earbuds and phone speakers, do people really care about good audio? Are they truly interested in the next generation of 3D audio? The success of the campaign was a resounding “YES” that has had a ripple in the audio industry.
We will forever be grateful to you and the team members, investors, and business partners who believed in us and helped give our dream a fighting chance. We were able to achieve some amazing things in an industry that was, and still is, ripe for innovation. Your voice of support throughout these past 2 years will continue to bring change to the industry, as bigger players than us refocus their efforts into better, smarter, and more immersive audio.

Thank you for all of your support, and we sincerely apologize that we could not deliver all of the headphones.

- OSSIC Team
 
---------
More information:
What was accomplished on the project and how were the crowdfunding funds used?
After spending over 2 years working on the Research and Development of the OSSIC X we were able to complete the development of the hardware and initial versions of the software.
The headphone went through 5 proof-of-concept level builds, 4 engineering/factory builds, and 1 pilot production build—where we completed 250 units and delivered the first ones to those backers on Kickstarter who pledged for the innovator edition reward.
It took, at times, 20 people with expertise in software, electrical, firmware, mechanical, acoustical, signal processing, and sound engineering, as well as UI/UX, industrial design, and program management to develop and ship those units.
The crowdfunding money we received played a huge role in allowing us to get as far and accomplish as much we did – funding half of the R&D and production costs needed to bring the product to life.
 
Why was this so expensive to develop?
Inventing something new while also developing complex hardware is expensive. The addition of stretch-goals to add mobile support increased the software scope from two operating systems to five, added an incredibly powerful 32-core processor onboard the headphones for processing, and required us to enter into substantial business development with mobile manufacturers to support multi-channel connectivity. It ultimately doubled the size of our development.
The unknowns that come from grounds-up development with so many new features ultimately stacked up to create delays and cost overruns.
What made this project so exciting, and ultimately ended up being its Achilles heel, was the complexity and scope. This project was complex because it had 3 large categories of development, all with new and unique elements: 1.) Hardware, 2.) Software, and 3.) Audio Ecosystem.
Hardware new/unique/different features: A typical headphone would only have 2 playback transducers, but the X has 8 playback transducers, 6 microphones, and multiple sensors. In addition to the complexity of more elements, head-tracking was a new feature, yet the trackers on the market were too slow. Thus we needed to upgrade mid-stream to achieve smooth tracking.
The software was complex because it required new algorithms to dynamically incorporate sensor information and beamform across the playback transducers. Additionally, with the stretch goals, we needed to support 5 different platforms: embedded-DSP, Windows, macOS, iOS, and Android for both UI and custom signal processing. A typical headphone has no software at all. The initial headphone units successfully incorporated custom algorithms and played back over Windows, macOS, and 3.5mm platforms. The iOS and Android app were created and were were on track to be finalized after working through the UI/UX with Beta backers on Windows and macOS.
Additionally, the audio ecosystem itself is complex as 3D audio continues to rapidly changing/developing. VR, gaming, film, and music workflows are different, with tools and formats varying across sectors, and VR/AR workflows were still being defined as we developed. 3D audio information is present in much of the media, but remained inaccessible to the user. Our goal was to ensure compatibility with as many devices as possible, and to give the best experience required ecosystem development and exploration of developer tools. To that end, developer tools including a VST plugin and FMOD Plugin were created, and released in beta to select developers.
 
How have other companies crowdfunding complex hardware projects succeeded?
Most crowdfunded companies working on similar complex hardware such as Oculus, and Doppler labs have raised >$10 Million in other investment before delivering on their projects.
As another reference, Creative labs claims to have spent over $100M working on 3D audio. http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/creative-brings-3d-sound-to-headphones-after-us100m-rd (http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/creative-brings-3d-sound-to-headphones-after-us100m-rd)
 
Why can’t you ship the remaining units?
We were not able to secure additional funding, and are out of money. It would take more than 2 million additional dollars to complete mass production of the remaining backlog.
 
What about other investment?
OSSIC raised substantial Seed Investment from sources other than crowdfunding. Crowdfunding represented about half of total funding.
Initial investment traction was strong, but the slower than expected adoption of VR and the failure of several high-profile crowdfunded hardware companies made it challenging for us to raise subsequent financing.
We explored over 150 investor partnerships in total. While we had some we thought were going to come together, ultimately they did not materialize.
 
What about StartEngine?
In February of this year, OSSIC launched a crowdfunded equity campaign on the StartEngine platform, hoping it could raise the initial funds to start mass production, and be a catalyst for broader investment. While we secured $130k in commitments, it was not enough interest for us to be able to move forward into production and so we ended the campaign without taking the funds.
 
What about OSSIC the company?
The company is shutting down effective immediately. We have a very dedicated team up folks who have remained for the last 6 months, working for free, doing anything they could to try and make the company succeed. Through their efforts we were at least able to ship the innovator units.
 
Can’t someone else build the product?
We engaged with many larger companies who had interest in our technology, but ultimately none of them had both the appetite and ability to make the required investment to bring the product to market.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: krho on May 22, 2018, 03:34:05 am
The kickstarter and other cloud funding platforms should change the rules that if they don't deliver, what they developed MUST be released in the public domain if they managed to get the patents the patent should also be given under public domain.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: ez24 on May 22, 2018, 08:16:29 am
How about some 3D headphones from OSSIC?

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/sd-fi-ossic-failure-20180521-story.html (http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/technology/sd-fi-ossic-failure-20180521-story.html)

Yikes - I have to go outside and get the paper.
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: Dave3 on May 22, 2018, 01:26:29 pm
Recently, Ossic tried to raise capital on "StartEngine", which publishes some dodgy offering memos (OM) which are worth reading.

In the OM financial statements, Ossic claims to have blown through about $4.3 million in 2015 and 2016 combined. Those expenses were divided roughly: 50% marketing (!!!), 25% admin, 25% R&D.

As Ossic raised over $6 million, I suppose the remaining millions were burned in 2017 and 2018 . . .

https://www.startengine.com/ossic (https://www.startengine.com/ossic)
https://d19j0qt0x55bap.cloudfront.net/production/startups/ossic/documents/offering_details/Ossic_Offering_Document_V5.pdf (https://d19j0qt0x55bap.cloudfront.net/production/startups/ossic/documents/offering_details/Ossic_Offering_Document_V5.pdf)
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?CIK=0001731373&owner=exclude&action=getcompany&Find=Search (https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?CIK=0001731373&owner=exclude&action=getcompany&Find=Search)
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: septer012 on July 06, 2018, 05:10:33 pm
Bandito: A Mosquito Blocker You Wear On Your Wrist
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bandito-a-mosquito-blocker-you-wear-on-your-wrist-camping#/ (https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/bandito-a-mosquito-blocker-you-wear-on-your-wrist-camping#/)

The Facebook feed advertisement said "This portable device uses sonic sounds and smells...".
Title: Re: List of Dodgy Crowd Source Funded Projects
Post by: timgiles on July 06, 2018, 06:39:09 pm
Well... its one of hundreds of devices that claim to cause either insects or rodents to flee using a mixture of ultrasonic sound, smell from some form of natural or other perfume and (not in this one) heat and / CO2 (for insects).

I am not sure there is any firm evidence for any of it. It is even still up for debate as to what it is mosquitoes home in on. I believe CO2 is proven and body heat also. Not sure that any of the natural perfumes have been proven to be effective.+