• joneskind@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    As a former architecture teacher, all I have to say about those rotating house is that they’re dumb AF, costing a fortune in energy spending.

    The landscape moves. So does your head on your neck, and your eyeballs in your skull, and your ass on your legs.

    Pure stupidity.

    • thunderbird32@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      costing a fortune in energy spending.

      I’m curious where the energy waste comes in. The owner says it only takes a 1HP motor to move the building, so I can’t imagine its very power hungry. What am I missing?

      • crypticthree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Horsepower doesn’t measure the total energy needed to rotate the house because it doesn’t capture the amount of time the motor runs for.

    • damnYouSun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is it of the point about being in architect to design somewhat dumb things.

      Architects always keep trying to reinvent bridge just so they don’t have to make the same bridge twice. The best design for a house is a cube made out of concrete, but we don’t build like that.