Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

MythBusters - The Lost Experiments

samzenpus posted more than 8 years ago | from the they-should-battle-mr.wizard dept.

362

theLorax writes "From Discovery: "If you like the MythBusters here are some videos they just posted of some of the out takes and things that didn't appear on the show. Cola bits (cleaning things with cola), water torture, otter ping pong, live power lines, cement build up and plywood flight." Here is the interview we did with these guys in December.

cancel ×

362 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

a step removed (4, Funny)

caffeinemessiah (918089) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506011)

From the summary, it sounds like these guys are a step removed from Jackass. But seriously, when are they going to deal with the myth that Java "is just as efficient as C++ these days"

Re:a step removed (5, Funny)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506134)

They only have about 15 minutes per myth. That just isn't enough time to start up your typical Hello World! application written in Java.

Re:a step removed (3, Funny)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506194)

They only take on myths that are remotely possible. Nobody believes that about Java.

Re:a step removed (1)

Decaff (42676) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506277)

But seriously, when are they going to deal with the myth that Java "is just as efficient as C++ these days"

Ah, but the MythBusters actually try things out and believe the evidence.

Slashdot myths this are famously immune to evidence, and therefore un-bustable.

Re:a step removed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506375)

Liar.

Coca Cola a pesticide? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506013)

Re:Coca Cola a pesticide? (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506208)

They did Vodka already, they probably won't do one so similar soon.

Coke (2, Funny)

gcnaddict (841664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506024)

I found it ok, but some of the things they did were a waste (who wastes a good bottle of Coke on a cleaning job? -_-;;)

I could've had that bottle...

Re:Coke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506315)

Who still drinks coke after they all but admitted to killing their own workers. And they're the only manufacturer that still can't make a decent tasting diet cola.

Re:Coke (0)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506372)

No brand can make a decent tasting diet soda. You have to replace the sugar with some mysterious other thing. But there's good news: Just like with coffee, whiskey, tequila, and regular coke, if you drink enough of it eventually you'll think it tastes good.

Re:Coke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506475)

Not so, diet Dr. Pepper tastes better than the real thing, even without drinking a lot of it. There are actually a lot of these now that they're using sucralose which is actually pretty tasty.

Re:Coke (2, Funny)

bipolarpinguino (944613) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506456)

Coke is the essence of life. Without coke the world would be doomed. Not to mention my nocturnal procrastination habits.

What do these experiments entail? (0)

rocketman327 (892746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506031)

Sorry for my lazyness for not wanting to watch all the videos but does anyone know what these "water torture, otter ping pong, live power lines, cement build up and plywood flight" myths are? I've never heard anything about plywood fighting but what are the myths that they deal with on these subjects?

Re:What do these experiments entail? (4, Funny)

dsheeks (65644) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506056)

I'm not sure, but I think the water torture myth has something to do with watching a Sports Illustrated swimsuit shoot and not getting to touch...

Re:What do these experiments entail? (1)

deathazre (761949) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506207)

yes, but instead of SI, it's Kari in a bikini.

Video summaries. (-1, Troll)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506074)

Water torture: they question whether or not water torture can be used to extract quality information from detainees.

Otter ping pong: they test whether otters play a form of ping pong with bundles of leaves and mud.

Live power lines: they test the danger of downed power lines.

Cement build up: they question whether solidified cement can be removed from a cement truck using dynamite.

Plywood fight: they test the myth that a kick can do more harm than a piece of plywood wielded as a weapon.

Re:Video summaries. (1)

rocketman327 (892746) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506084)

Interesting... So how do you test a torture method that could possibly go on cable tv?

Re:Video summaries. (1, Flamebait)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506101)

Interesting... So how do you test a torture method that could possibly go on cable tv?

You call it "fighting terrorism" and declare that it is being done "in the name of freedom and liberty".

Re:Video summaries. (4, Insightful)

Z0mb1eman (629653) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506136)

I actually watched the water torture one, by chance. It refers to the so-called chinese water drop - a person is immobilized, and drops of water drop on the same spot on their forehead, at a rate of one drop every 2 seconds or so.

They tested it on Kari... since there's no physical torture (other than being restrained), and they were obviously going to let her go when she had enough, it's not much of an issue showing it on TV.

Re:Video summaries. (4, Informative)

raoul666 (870362) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506334)

As it happens, she was pretty freaked out by it, which neither she nor anyone else was really expecting. It was very unpleasant to watch, I found. :(

Re:Video summaries. (1)

Z0mb1eman (629653) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506503)

Yup... no one likes to see a pretty girl cry!

(well, okay, there are some sickos out there, but that's another matter).

Mod parent down (0, Flamebait)

LordKronos (470910) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506231)

Yes, No, No, Yes, and No. How the hell did you get +4 Informative when you only have 40% correct.

Re:Video summaries. (4, Informative)

JymmyZ (655273) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506256)

I thought the Plywood flight myth was concerning a man who claimed to have been blown off the roof of a building under construction (several stories high) while holding onto a sheet of plywood. As the myth goes he managed to use the plywood as a sort of parachute and floated down to the ground unharmed. The Mythbusters apprentices did the actual leg-work in breaking the myth and found that the force against the wood was too much to handle and the board continually fell out of their hands. (they set-up some rig where one of the guys held onto the board, with an anemometer and such to test various forces) They failed to take into account the sheer determination a man falling to his potential death would have in holding onto his life-saving device.

Re:Video summaries. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506420)

*rofl*

(What was it modded informative? It's BS!)

Re:What do these experiments entail? (5, Informative)

MagicDude (727944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506088)

I've seen 3 of the 5 episodes that you've described, I'll describe what I can remember from them.

Water Torture - Chineese water torture myth. Basically the idea that if you restrain someone to a chair and constantly drip water at a slow rate (1-2 drops per second or so) it'll cause them to crack. It's an elegant torture in that all it requires is time, it's easy to set up, and you don't need an interrogator to administer it, and it's insidious in that nobody would expect that a little harmless dripping would cause to to break. They did show that the torture was effective against the myth crew in about an hour or 2, though you have to wonder how a hardened navy seal might react differently.

Otter Ping Pong - They were testing the myth that you could raise a sunken ship by pumping thousands of ping pong balls into the hull. During the myth, an otter swam down to the hull and stole a ping pong ball and started playing with it, which caused everyone to worry that it might choke on it if it tried to swallow it. The myth was eventually proved successful.

Cement Build Up - They tested the myth that the inside of a cement mixer could be cleaned of all the dried cement build up that accumulates on the inside of the drum during normal use by exploding a stick of dynamite in the drum, a much more efficient method than the usual method of having to chissel the surface by hand. The clip in the video showed a snafu that occured with the first truck when they accidentally filled it up with cement rather than just having enough for a thin coat. It lead up to a spectacular event where they blew up the enture truck with 850 pounds of TNT.

Re:What do these experiments entail? (1)

NeoSkandranon (515696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506331)

Otter Ping Pong - They were testing the myth that you could raise a sunken ship by pumping thousands of ping pong balls into the hull. During the myth, an otter swam down to the hull and stole a ping pong ball and started playing with it, which caused everyone to worry that it might choke on it if it tried to swallow it. The myth was eventually proved successful.

I don't understand how that's any different than merely filling the hull with air (which would of course cause it to float, as it would return the boat to the condition it was before it sank)

Re:What do these experiments entail? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506414)

Um, perhaps if you tried to fill it with air, it would escape out the same holes that caused it to sink....last I checked, ping pong balls were slightly larger than an average molecule of N2 or 02.

Re:What do these experiments entail? (4, Informative)

MagicDude (727944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506435)

With ping pong balls, you don't have to worry about the thousands of microcracks in the hull which would allow regular air to seep through. You only have to secure the hull so that there aren't any cracks bigger than 10 or 15 millimeters, since the pingpong balls make it so that you basically have air "molecules" that are ping pong ball sized and won't escape at any tiny hole.

Re:What do these experiments entail? (4, Insightful)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506345)

The clip in the video showed a snafu that occured with the first truck when they accidentally filled it up with cement rather than just having enough for a thin coat. It lead up to a spectacular event where they blew up the enture truck with 850 pounds of TNT.

The cement truck was the most disappointing one in a long time. Everyone who has ever even seen explosives in action knows that you drill a hole in the material (the cemet block in this case) and drop the TNT down the hole before detonating it. They just hung a stick of dynamite above the cemet, and gave up when it didn't do anything.

Before Mythbusters, I've never wanted to reach through my TV and smack people for being so stupid. With Mythbusters, it's a regular occurance. It almost seems like they go out of their way to make their tests complete nonsense.

Reason (3, Insightful)

JonN (895435) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506033)

I am just thinking of the reason behind these videos being released. Is it because they enjoy communicating with, and appreciate their fans? Or is it simply a marketing plan created by the Discovery Channel.

Don't get me wrong, I love watching them, I just prefer to keep that squishy feeling in my heart that they really love us, and the interview they did here helped that along, with this pushing it further.

Re:Reason (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506160)

What's the point of looking a gift horse in the mouth and asking if it loves you? It's a horse, not your girlfriend.

Re:Reason (5, Insightful)

MikeWasHere05 (900478) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506234)

It can't be both?

Re:Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506358)

It definitely can be both. Most of that stuff was just extra footage that didn't make it on tv. It is a win-win situation to put it online as it costs very little and it is decent PR.

What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (5, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506047)

I have relatives in the US who recently told me about the lack of quality on the Discovery Channel. I recall watching very good shows on it around a decade or so ago. True to their name, they focused on content that most traditional channels wouldn't bother to touch.

However, what I've been hearing now is that the Discovery Channel is moving away from their specialty programming, more towards content that will appeal to a wider range of people. This change does being a decrease in quality, according to my cousins.

I think I know what they mean. Shows like American Chopper and American HotRod, which I have watched over here in the UK, are more like soap operas than educational, enlightening shows. The two or three minutes of engineering in each episode is overshadowed by 57 minutes of workplace drama and commercials.

While a show like Mythbusters isn't as bad, it still lacks the quality that previous shows on the Discovery Channel had. None of the hosts have much engineering or scientific experience, and it shows. Even watching just one episode, one will hear numerous factually incorrect statements (especially when it comes to chemistry or physics). Perhaps it is entertaining, but educational it is not.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1)

bani (467531) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506061)

mythbusters is produced by an australian company, discovery channel just picked up north american broadcast rights to the program.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (3, Informative)

JonN (895435) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506085)

That is not the arguement though. The arguement is not if Mythbusters is a good show, it is the question of are they playing appropriate shows on the Discovery Channel (as to their reputation)

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (4, Insightful)

bani (467531) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506175)

the assumption people usually make when they bring up the subject is that discovery channel programs are produced by the discovery channel. they are genuinely suprised to find out that e.g. mythbusters isn't produced by them.

discovery channel can only show whats being produced. if shit is being produced then shit is all they have to air. people seem to think they know exactly what is available for discovery channel to purchase for broadcast. keep in mind that junkyard wars, the program discovery channel fanatics always bring up as an example, (aka scrapheap challenge) was a purely accidental find.

if you know specific programs discovery channel should be airing, tell them.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1)

JonN (895435) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506071)

I have come to realize that once a channel gets enough acclaim, they open secondary channels to continue with their old company plan, and maintain the original channel simply for ratings. Examples:

MTV - How often is a diversity of music played on the main channel now?
Discovery Channel - Read the parent
CNN - I find their second channel much more informative in relation to a broader view of the news

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (2, Interesting)

marshallh (947020) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506099)

"Discovery" in the Discovery Channel? Looks like it's just about gone..

Regarding MythBusters, while they can't possibly get all their facts straight, you have to reason they do do a reasonable job, considering the extremely wide breadth of subjects they cover.

This brings up a good point of the problem with shows that focus on such a wide range of topics that they aren't able to focus on one single topic with much amount of detail.

Are these shows educational? No. Can it be a feasible starting point for answers to nagging questions? Possibly.
I think you could compare this show to Wikipedia (various factual errors, inconsistent detail etc), but it is nevertheless a possible source of inspiration for a lot of us.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (0)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506122)

Trying to do too much is never an excuse for doing a shoddy job.

While such a show may have entertainment value, I do admit, it should not be shown on a channel that prides (or at least used to) itself on showing educational content.

Unfortunately, there are far too many people who take the show extremely seriously. For whatever reason (ignorance, I would assume), they consider the Mythbusters to use "proper" scientific method. Of course, anyone with any science or engineering background sees the poor job they do, but your average person does not.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (5, Insightful)

Moofie (22272) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506318)

What a narrow-minded view.

These folks never pretended to be Great Scientists. They can and do, however, come up with clever ways to perform experiments that would otherwise be expensive or dangerous.

They sometimes do the dangerous stuff anyway.

I think it's a superb show. I like the way they often go back and revisit things that people say they got wrong. You know, kinda like scientists are supposed to.

I have an extensive science and engineering background, and I think they do a terrific job. Do they get everything right? No. Who cares?

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (5, Insightful)

samkass (174571) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506218)

Are these shows educational? No.


If you're arguing that Mythbusters isn't educational, you haven't watched enough episodes. Yes, they make mistakes. So do over half of all peer-reviewed scientists' papers, last I read. But it's still a very educational show, and more importantly, one that gets the watcher thinking instead of passively being entertained.

Even if the show contains a greater proportion of entertainment to education than some might like, I think it educates more than some of the old dry shows, because more people watch them. Just to use some silly math, if a show is 90% educational and is watched by 100K people, let's say it has provided 90K education-people worth of education to the world. If a show is 60% educational and watched by 1M people, it's provided 600K education-people worth of education! How's that for a Mythbusters-style estimate?

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1, Flamebait)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506237)

They have a disclaimer in which they explicitly state that they're "professionals", and then encourage that people not try the "experiments" at home, if I'm not mistaken. So it really doesn't encourage others to try such activities themselves.

The main problem is that they portray themselves as being so-called experts, but obviously have very little of the background that actual experts have. Sure, they have experience in visual effects from their past Hollywood work and can put on an entertaining show, but educational their program is not.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506400)

They probably have to say that so they don't get sued when some idiot electricutes himself.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (3, Insightful)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506407)

False their proogram is VERY educational in that its a problem solvers show. They are presented with a problem and they have to use engeneering and design to solve them. The brits had a very simular theme though very different in execution show called Junkyard wars if I remember correctly.

These shows are amazing in that its real world aplications of a lot of the "boring shit" and concepts that they are learning in the classroom. Would you just sit them down to watch it without teaching around it? Hell no. BUT it can become a very informitive AND highly entertaining tool to keep people interested in science, applications of technology, problem solving, list goes on.

And you have obviously not watched many of the episodes, as you would find in most of the later season 1, 2 and now 3 ones they consult experts in their fields a lot these days.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (2, Insightful)

idonthack (883680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506479)

They have a disclaimer in which they explicitly state that they're "professionals", and then encourage that people not try the "experiments" at home, if I'm not mistaken. So it really doesn't encourage others to try such activities themselves.
Would you want someone to sue you because they built a cannon out of a tree, then blew it up and killed/injured themselves? It's there to prevent things like that. Also, IIRC, they have had a few shows with a safe experiment where they said they would like people to try it at home themselves.
...educational their program is not.
I know I've learned a few things on that show, mostly just bits of trivia such as how emergency elevator brakes are triggered (antique ones at least) but a less knowledgable person such as an elementary school student would learn things like what a Faraday cage is, how lightning works, and why putting a vaccum cleaner motor on your face is a bad idea.

But there is no doubt that sometimes they get things wrong. Once I watched them "disprove" a myth that I know for a fact to be true, which was rather dissapointing.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506113)

yea..like tech tv turning into the crappy g4tv :'(

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506116)

I have to agree. A long time ago I used to watch Discovery all the time and I kept my cable just for that channel and a few others like Speedvision. Now Discovery rarely shows anything worthwhile and Speedvision is now SPEED (read: NASCAR garbage).

Now I only keep my cable for the new Battlestar Galactica but it hardly seems worth $40/mo for one show once a week (I would just download the episodes if I could find someone that posts high quality captures instead of the 200MB/hr crap that always gets posted).

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506206)

iTunes sells the episodes now, doesn't it? And the season DVD sets will be there.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506308)

kinda funny and embarassing to admit that I'm in the same shoes -- I paid for satellite service pretty much only for battlestar galactica.

Now that it's for sale on itunes, I plan on getting rid of it and going back to rabbit ears. DVDs aren't an option -- I don't want to wait that long!

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506338)

The iTunes versions are crappy phone resolution versions.

The season DVD's are fine but you have to wait a whole season to watch them...

alt.binaries.multimedia.battlestargalactica (1)

snuf23 (182335) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506384)

Almost always has HDTV rips. I usually watch these instead of my standard Tivo'd off cable ones because the quality is that much better.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1)

i41Overlord (829913) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506125)

This is definitely true. Now it's more like "educational entertainment" than educational shows.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1, Insightful)

lpangelrob (714473) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506196)

The "important" stuff, the stuff you're talking about... that went to PBS or the National Geographic Channel a long time ago.

As the latter has been confined to channel 273 (on Comcast) whereas the Discovery Channel is still in the 70's, that should say something about how many people watch programming on both channels.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (4, Funny)

pomo monster (873962) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506211)

Obviously, there's nothing left to discover.

Mythbusters is Good (5, Insightful)

transami (202700) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506267)

Cyric, you are terribly off base! These guys are professionals who have a huge amount of hands on experience in material science. And these guys are doing a great job of introducing the basics of expiremental method to a wide audience. Is it perfect? Of course not. But you are comparing apples and oranges. While I would certainly appreciate some in depth programs on paricular aspects of science, just becuase Mythbusters is not this, does not make it worthless. I usually watch TV to relax. If I wanted a textbook education in physics I'd take a college course, not watch Mythbusters. While the information gained from the show may often be trivial, there are nontheless a great many useful tidbits to be gained from watching. Anf these guys are funny too!

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (3, Insightful)

freidog (706941) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506270)

Same reason all those interior decorating channels are on "The Learning Channel" and Poker and trashy reality shows are on "Bravo" (more of a high brow / art themed network a while ago): these are buisnesses.

With the proliferation of cable / sat TV networks it is increasingly difficult to draw in the ratings needed to pay the bills. 10 years ago Discovery channel didn't have much competition in its niche market. Now on digial cable or satellite service you might have 4 or 5 networks that devote at least part of their programming to somethign appealing to Discovery's core audiance. So The Discovery Channel has to go off and bring in more viewers, and that means shows with broader appeal: ie Mythbusters. It's still science, and still informative (somewhat), but it's mostly about people blowing things up and hurting themselves.

Try "The Science Channel" (1)

ashpool7 (18172) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506273)

Never heard of it until I went to my employer's house, who has all the channels (sans sports) that DirectTV offers. They had something on fabric roofs vs everything else. I think they kicked all that "weird" but good stuff to that channel.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506278)

You're absolutely correct, Discovery Channel has gone vastly downhill. However, I wouldn't blame the 4 big shows. They could certainly support 4 hours of non-educational crap per week, and still fill the rest of the schedule with their previous (read: GOOD) content. It was a conscious decision they made, and they made it across all of their channels.

TLC was the absolutely worst. It went from showing things like surgery, engineering, and other mostly-good content, to being the 24-hour "Trading Spaces" channel. Nothing left but low-budget decorating shown for women (and gay men).

Animal Planet went to low-budget shows of animals doing tricks, following the ASPCA around, etc.

I've completely given up on any of them. The only good thing being, it seemed like The National Geographic Channel started getting much, much better at the same time Discovery was getting worse and worse. I don't think they are as good as Discovery was at it's best, but they're close enough.

Re:What has happened to the Discovery Channel? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506380)

Here's a suggestion: change the channel. Or turn off the TV.

This reminds me of the folks I hear complaining about all the ads before the trailers (i.e. more ads) before the movies (with their product placements, i.e. more ads). If you find it intolerable, don't go. Only when the numbers drop off will the industry stop insulting us with that crap. Remember, when you go to a movie theater, you think you've simply bought the right to see a movie; true, but the more important transaction is that an advertiser has bought the right to assault your senses. *You* are the product. (This is perhaps more true with TV.)

Lordy, I needed to get that off my chest. (Geeks read Adbusters, too.)

Myth Busters ? (0)

ravee (201020) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506068)

Perhaps they should aim for an entry in the Guiness Book of World Records for busting the largest number of Myths on TV.

Sites like this that require flash.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506083)

Sites like this that require Flash-crapola .... are not going to get my traffic. When are these moronic content developers going to learn to be compliant with standards? [sigh]

Re:Sites like this that require flash.... (1)

6*7 (193752) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506154)

Well flash is a standard by itself I suppose (and has a rather larger installed base (according to macromedia offcourse)).

But even when I enabled it for this possibly interesting site, all I got was a blank area where the content was supposed to be (with flash 7.0.x installed).

Re:Sites like this that require flash.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506210)

dose anyone remember the old tv show conections

Re:Sites like this that require flash.... (1)

oddbudman (599695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506279)

Check your Adblock settings if your running it with Firefox. This caused problems with flash videos on my computer.

Re:Sites like this that require flash.... (1)

theJML (911853) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506507)

I'm definately not a huge fan of flash for videos like this. yeah, it works for quick animations and menus and such, but this is a video, how about we pick a tried-and-true standard that everyone can play back, like Mpeg. or if you want to skimp on bandwidth, divx or xvid.

That being said this is perhaps the only time I've gotten flash videos to play on here correctly. Usually this box just shows a big "you need to download this" box and then it tells me that the appropriate plugin isn't available (firefox on linux). But this time it played, with sound and everything. not sure what they did that other people haven't but kudos to them.

And before people say "well you just need to install..." or "can't you install linux properly" or whatever else they want to say. I kinda like browsing without flash working. Saves me from tons of crap on the net, and half the the time I'm on windows I flat out disable it. Afterall, Slashdot/Gmail/ebay/plenty of other sites run fine, why should I allow more flash based pop-up-over-everything-until-I-Adblock-them ads to annoy me?

And back on topic. I've definately seen all of these before During shows On TV. It's hard to forget an episode where they blow up a concrete truck with TONS of TNT!

They truly are "lost" (1)

ZipR (584654) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506089)

All I get when I go to that page is the page header and a screen full of white.

Re:They truly are "lost" (1)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506157)

Are you using Internet Explorer or Firefox? If you are, that might be the problem. Their site renders fine with both Opera and Konqueror, but fails to work with Firefox. It's not a Flash problem, as other Flash sites work fine with Firefox.

Re:They truly are "lost" (1)

AgentAce (246327) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506269)

I viewed it fine in Firefox.

Re:They truly are "lost" (1)

GoodOmens (904827) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506339)

It works for me and I use firefox ;-)

Re:They truly are "lost" (1)

justinstar77 (876995) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506459)

The videos wouldn't work for me until I disabled flashblock and restarted Firefox

Re:They truly are "lost" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506247)

You might have to try viewing the video content using IE. For me, Firefox (WinXP) did not work and I experienced exactly what you described.

Cement Truck go BOOM! (4, Funny)

bizitch (546406) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506106)

God I just love watching that cement truck explode!

If you've never seen it - dont miss it! - It's at the very end of the video

Re:Cement Truck go BOOM! (1)

sunwolf (853208) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506242)

I find it ironic that this is just below CyricZ's comment about quality.

Re:Cement Truck go BOOM! (1)

idonthack (883680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506504)

Blowing things up is quality awesomeness. Did you know they had to shut down a nearby highway when they did that?

Re:Cement Truck go BOOM! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506323)

i freeze framed it when i saw the original broadcast. it was great.

frame 1: cement truck
frame 2: huge ball of debris
frame 3: debris fills screen
frame 4: camera destroyed

awesome.

Digg (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506138)

You know, as much as I agree with people that say Digg and Slashdot serve different purposes and can thus co-exist, this is getting to be too much. I'm assuming there's a bunch of cross-posting because both are starting to look like mirrors of each other.

Re:Digg (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506396)

Seeing as how they're both tech/sci-oriented, why is it so difficult to comprehend that they will both cover some of the same stories?

Especially seeing as how:
A) regardless of age/maturity level - both digg & /.'s visitors tend to be the "geeky" type &
B) there is a certain amount of crossover visitors as well

Lost Experiments? (1, Interesting)

NoGuffCheck (746638) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506163)

If these episodes are so lost how come I have seen them all on TV?

Re:Lost Experiments? (5, Funny)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506176)

If these episodes are so lost how come I have seen them all on TV?

Shit, son. This sounds like a job for the MythBusters! They could test the validity of the myth that these videos have been seen on TV before.

Sounds interesting... (1)

Anonymous QWord (590872) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506171)

Anybody have a link past the flash? Or are they flash videos? Very useless.

They WERE shown on TV (5, Interesting)

BrentM77 (553133) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506182)

Most of these were shown on TV in an outtakes show they did. I love the show, but don't understand why they are saying these weren't shown before.

An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (2, Insightful)

CyricZ (887944) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506204)

I have heard it suggested that each segment of their show should be preceeded by a disclaimer explaining that what they're doing is not science, but is purely entertainment.

Many people mistakenly think that the MythBusters present the proper way of performing scientific experiment, and that they present verified scientific information. Indeed, watching even a single episode shows that they have very little scientific or engineering background.

Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (2, Funny)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506310)

"Indeed, watching even a single episode shows that they have very little scientific or engineering background."

How scientific.

Science (5, Insightful)

Freaky Spook (811861) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506312)

Science in its most basic form is a system of acquiring knowledge, based on experimentation to find truth.

The mythbusters discuss the theory of the myth & then generate a hypothesis weather it is plausible or not, then conduct an experiment to find out weather their hypothesis is correct.

What is not science about that???

It may be basic science, but its still science.

From what I have seen it is getting a lot of people interested in science so that has to be good doesn't it.

Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (2, Insightful)

msloan (945203) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506335)

I think you do not understand the concept of science. The shows follow the base scientific method you learn in elementary school. As to the engineering comment, I take it you haven't watched the rainwater-pipe runoff episode, or the one where they disprove the myth of slingshotting immigrants over the border.

Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506356)

Are you really looking to the Discovery channel for pointers on the proper way of performing scientific experiment?

Re:An "Entertainment" disclaimer? (4, Insightful)

raoul666 (870362) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506480)

It's not great science, but a lot of it isn't half bad. Besides which, they're usually testing fairly simple myths to see if they're plausible or not. Some stuff, like "could you raise a boat with ping-pong balls" they do. Scientific or not, that's a good, solid result. It's possible. It's really the busted myths that may or may not be accurate. To give them credit, I usually hear them say things like "for this to work you'd need this, this, this, and this to happen, and that's incredibly unlikely" or "we couldn't build a jetpack, so an average joe probably couldn't either." As for scientific or engineering background, they may not be certified or educated, but they certainly do alright. Their solutions are usually simple, and they typically work. Look at the rig they used to get those ping-pong balls down to the boat. Design me something cheaper, faster, and easier, if you can.

Also, a lot of the time they call in experts. I think that's a pretty good lesson to be teaching people, about both science and life.

Warning: Mythbusters fanboy here (2, Interesting)

MindPrison (864299) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506223)

I have to admit it - I absolutely love the mythbusters show. Its a show allright - but wouldnt you rather prefer as how like this (being the geek you are) rather than those endless idiot-shows like wheel-of-fortune, jeopardy, tv-poker etc.?

Sure, Jamie and Adam gets it wrong sometimes, but it inspires normal people to get an interest in science because theyre "naturally" funny and they like what they do, whats wrong with that?

You want to see bad stuff on Discovery? Watch Brainiac - probably the "WORST" science-wannabee show ever.

Being the "geek" I am, electronics all over my house theres nothing nicer than to come home from work to a little "tech" show about "normal people" dealing with things related to science they may or may not know about - and getting it out into the open. Its fun, makes tv background-noise worthy ;)

show is crap (0, Troll)

zlyoga (834337) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506238)

I really don't get the appeal of this show. I watched it a couple of times because I'd heard so much about it and it just seemed like complete crap. All of the expiriments I saw had such obvious flaws in the way they were excecuted so that they really didnt do anything that could prove if the myth was true or not.

Re:show is crap (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506346)

"I really don't get the appeal of this show. I watched it a couple of times because I'd heard so much about it and it just seemed like complete crap. All of the expiriments I saw had such obvious flaws in the way they were excecuted so that they really didnt do anything that could prove if the myth was true or not."

You must have caught the episode where they didn't have something blow up, Jamie get hurt, or Kari.

Like reading Playboy for the articles... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506268)

Admit it...we watch the show because of Kari!

Never seen before?!? You sure about that? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506271)

Maybe they don't play it on reruns but I've seen pretty much all of those "lost" segments.

i LOVE HOW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14506292)

The bald guy and the producer basically tried to force that chick to slide on the wire with a piece of plywood above her.

Is that even legal in the United States? Their attitude was pretty fucking blase about what they were doing. The producer came off like a complete jackass who didn't give a shit about her safety.

These aren't new (1)

11_biznatch_11 (875790) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506293)

I've seen these before, I think they were in fact on TV on the "MythBusters Outtakes" [tv.com] episode. Although I can't find a reference to this episode on the MythBusters [discovery.com] website.

Otter Ping-Pong? (4, Funny)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506304)

Forget Otter Ping-Ping - I want to know if Thai beaver really can shoot ping-pong balls! I knew a girl with a half-thai beaver, but I could never convince her to give it a shot, so clearly this is a job for mythbusters!

Yes. (2, Informative)

lorcha (464930) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506352)

Yes, Thai bar girls really can shoot ping-pong balls from their pussies. They can also smoke a cigarette, suck in a bottle of Coke, and operate chopsticks, among other stupid pussy tricks.

And before you ask, yes, I have seen it done.

didn't prove power line myth (2, Interesting)

tedpearson (910434) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506364)

As for the power line myth - they didn't prove it by any means. Consider: 1) They didn't know the current on the wires above them, compared to the current of said myth, perhaps it wasn't very high voltage at the time? 2) They had a huge loopy coil of wire, something makes me think that there are more efficient ways of developing an inductive coil... The show is fun to watch, but it makes people who have sense ask a few more questions.

Oh wow! (0, Offtopic)

Broue Master (576074) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506449)

I don't care what is it going to be moderate to, but after a couple of beers, I just had to say "WOW!"!!! Nice gift we got there!!!!

What happened to CmdrTaco's guidelines? (1, Offtopic)

hkb (777908) | more than 8 years ago | (#14506450)

And yet an article that already violates Taco's guidelines.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>