A silent aircraft with rotors enclosed inside its fuselage lifted off in front of an auditorium in downtown Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province, during a public display on February 24.

This leaves me with even more questions.

credo@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 162d (2 replies)

Just the video: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/F_B-bhayfZg

Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io · 18 pts · 162d

Invidious Link: https://inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=F_B-bhayfZg

pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 160d

No true audio just music in the video

rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 162d

Every angle appears to be a different design...

Jyek@sh.itjust.works · 11 pts · 161d

Dang! That's nearly half of your mom!

chasingtheflow@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 162d (13 replies)

Wow that is terribly ad ridden.

atropa@piefed.social · 3 pts · 162d (2 replies)

[ removed ]

chasingtheflow@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 161d (1 reply)

Apparently I touched a nerve with some. But I was just using the built in browser for voyager on iOS. But I also have nextdns and Mullvad in-use which normally provides fairly good coverage for me but evidently not on this site.

atropa@piefed.social · 1 pts · 161d

[ removed ]

Innerworld@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 162d

Get an ad-blocker

M137@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 162d (8 replies)

It never stops being so fucking weird that people choose to not use ad-blockers, and then complain about ads. Do you also not wear seat belts and then complain about neck pain after fender benders, or eat raw meat and then complain about getting sick? It's just as dumb.

porcoesphino@mander.xyz · -2 pts · 162d (7 replies)

It's weird to me that people complain about how long it takes to get to work, why don't they just aggressively speed to get there earlier?

Sites need money to run and many rely on ads. Blocking them is an asshole move (that I admittedly do) but so is dumping them all over a page. It would be nice to have some sort of pay for what you use alternative but until then, bitching isn't half as weird and obnoxious as whatever you're doing in this comment

artyom@piefed.social · 4 pts · 161d (3 replies)

Blocking them is an asshole move

An asshole move is designing a site that bogs down your computer so that they can try and sell you garbage while simultaneously collecting and feeding data about the sites you visit to a corporate surveillance network in order to more effectively sell you more garbage.

porcoesphino@mander.xyz · -1 pts · 161d (2 replies)

An asshole move is consuming other people's work without giving them something in return and then bitching at anyone that accurately points out you're a leech

But yes, the current ads based system is mighty broken. I did touch on that, so did the comment before me, and I'm surprised an expansion felt needed

Sims@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 160d (1 reply)

Then they should lock their 'property' up behind logins and shit. Nobody owes anything to some random person that share on the internet. It is not my job or responsibility to support some rich Unt's ideology and belief that people should horde 'property' and force others to pay them, instead of open source sharing.

Ads are 'enshittification' - the hallmark of capitalist/psycho attitudes.

Oh, and please remember that Ads are pure manipulation - not a 'service' !

porcoesphino@mander.xyz · 0 pts · 160d

Never said ads are good nor that adblockers shouldn't be used

Most of your arguments hold for stealing from a baby "they should protect it better, I don't owe them shit"

This one "why shit allover someone saying a website has more ads than usual" comment I made seems to have found a lot of selfish assholes that can't not force their views on other people and tell them how they should live their lives

Sims@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 160d

'Ads' are pure manipulation and is not welcome on any page, or any where - at all. Site owners will have to find another way to make money, than to deliberately scam their readers on behalf of some sh*tty Corp.

pishadoot@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 160d (1 reply)

Until ads are responsible and don't carry risks of injecting malware and trackers, I will block them without prejudice.

Even back in the day they would try to hijack your browser, redirect you to some random page, destroy ability of your back button to take you out, and throw up a ton of popups.

I don't think blocking them is an asshole move until ads are served responsibly, without threatening my security or privacy. When, and if, that day ever arrives I will stop blocking them because I understand that most sites subsist solely off ad revenue, at least in this current Internet model we live with.

porcoesphino@mander.xyz · 1 pts · 160d

Just a reminder that this thread, and my comments, are in the context of someone saying the OP had linked a particularly bad website for ads, and this person being attacked

If your position is what you've actually written here then I don't think there is a real disagreement but I am surprised by the effort. There's only a disagreement if you think it's reasonable to call out someone for making a comment about the ads on a website being excessive and telling that person they don't get that privilege because they don't use the internet your way. Everything that follows is just a retaliatory mirror on the issues with "your way" (yeah it's another poster not you)

Agent641@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 160d

"Silent"

floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 161d (7 replies)

Does the definition of VTOL not include the ability to transition to forward thrust? Looks cool but I'd just call it a multicopter

winkerjadams@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 161d (6 replies)

It stands for Vertical Take Off and Landing

PumaStoleMyBluff@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 160d (1 reply)

The implied part of VTOL is that it's only vertical for takeoff and landing, and otherwise primarily a horizontally propelled craft.

0x0@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 160d

What do you mean a hot air balloon isnt vtol???

floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 160d (3 replies)

Yes I do know that, but I am not aware of any aircraft that is "a VTOL" but only does vertical take off and landing

ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 160d

It does have some surfaces that look like they could produce lift.

Traveling fast enough it could probably lose thrust and "land" horizontally... Until the legs grab and it tumbles.

winkerjadams@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 160d (1 reply)

If it only did up and down then it wouldn't be very practical or useful in most applications. There must be some sort of propulsion

floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 160d

Tilting like helicopters and multicopters, you don't need a dedicated directional thrust, just vectoring

Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus · 3 pts · 161d (4 replies)

[ removed ]

ebolapie@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 161d (3 replies)

Can they make it look MORE like a 1950s movie version of a UFO?

ftfy

Luminous5481@anarchist.nexus · 2 pts · 161d (1 reply)

[ removed ]

ebolapie@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 161d

it does look very retrofuture though I'll give you that. I think I'm just glad it's not a UTV with shit glued on the side like some of the other passenger quadcopters I've seen

Hadriscus@jlai.lu · 2 pts · 161d

yea agree it looks gorgeous

HubertManne@piefed.social · 2 pts · 161d

reminds me a bit of the moller.

FaceDeer@fedia.io · 2 pts · 162d (1 reply)

Nice. I take it the paired rotors means it can manage if one fails.

neidu3@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 162d

I certainly hope so. But I doubt it.

It doesn't take many flight hours to realize how many backups and contingencies there are in a normal SEP aircraft in case something fails.

And the common denominator for all these techbroesque personal air transport vehicles is the obvious lack of any of those.

sem@piefed.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 160d

Ducted?