Yeah okay cortana.

An artificial intelligence designed to the task could, but

You are absolutely right to be skeptical. There are a great many downsides to this technology. Getting it grimy, pointing it out of the sky, cloud cover, etc. will nullify any cooling effect. And yes, the DIY preparation shown would be completely destroyed by a powerwasher, or even a moderate storm. That said, I read recently of a university of maryland research team made an improved coating, allowing the nanospheres to withstand significantly increased weathering while still remaining effective.

What’s this? Did you rehost it so we dont give google the traffic?

deleted by creator

I’m gonna be honest, it sounds like a bad idea. Disclaimer, i’ve never worked with this, but just describing your problem it sounds like you’re going to run into ground temperature even if you manage to get the air temperature warm enough to set.

Under very specific circumstances, this technology really can reduce surface temperatures by up to the claimed 3.5C. The first I heard of this technology was on Tech Ingredients’ channel about a year ago, where they go into very specific detail about how it works. Since then, I’ve seen Nighthawkinlight attempt to refine the material by producing consistent nanospheres. You could make the stuff yourself, they tell you how.

To be absolutely clear, I’m not knocking these inventors, who have found a novel incremental advance in this technology (they made the technology more durable so it wears in the weather better) I’m saying the article is bad and the author should feel bad. “Unlike previous attempts at cooling coatings…” does more than suggest that those “attempts” were somehow unsuccessful at being a cooling coating, especially when taken with unequivocal claims to unique “invention.” It reads like an ad or propaganda, which of course it is. Daniela Benites is the Communications Coordinator for the University of Maryland School of Engineering, and the author of this article. You’ll never guess where these two researchers/scientists/inventors/students/whateversoundsbestinthearticleatthetime go to school.

This article is a fluff piece of grossly overstated popsci which does a poor job of explaining how the “new technology” works. (some major disadvantages: being almost useless on cars, actually useless in the shade or on any surface that doesn’t point directly into space, and useless when obstructed by clouds) It isn’t new, it isn’t magic, and these guys didn’t invent it. They found a new material/production method, but they don’t get any credit for inventing what is basically reflective paint. Standard science “journalism” stuff, not surprised you doubted it.

Don’t worry about all that though, there’s a handy little popup that says the article is totally trustworthy: We are assured this is a “fact-checked, peer-reviewed publication” from a “trusted source” and has been “proofread.”

It started to affect someone’s bottom line.

Don’t worry. Stick with me, I’ll teach you all the pedantry you need to trick some idiot’s pants off.

That’s figuratively what eat the rich means.

IDF: WHOA WHAT- ARE YOU GUYS DIGGING OVER THERE? BETTER EXPLODE CHILDREN ABOUT IT.

impossible for him to murder anyone else

Is this your first time ever hearing of the american prison system, or do you just not consider prisoners to be people?

You’re really giving me the “your subjective opinions about music are wrong” huh? Lol

… did you read it?

I downvoted it for being an obviously biased propaganda piece.

deleted by creator

Tell me more about your prejudices

what a dumb opinion lol

Interesting and Anxiety-Inducing in about equal measure.

Talk about clickbait. The lab didn’t start to glow at all!