News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Beverly Clock. Parent comment

Re:Beverly Clock by laurent123456 on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @06:44AM (#16419626)
Yes that would make sense. It seems it's the article that's not making much sense:

> While the clock has not been wound [...] it has stopped on a number of occasions.

> when the ambient temperature has not fluctuated sufficiently to absorb the requisite amount of energy, the clock will not function

...so it's been wound.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Beverly Clock by toomanybeersies on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @07:05AM (#16419718)
No, after it was initially wound, it hasn't been wound by a person again. It has stopped, but it has restarted on its own without human intervention.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Beverly Clock by GuiA on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @12:16PM (#16421951)
For all we know, it never had to be initially wound.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Beverly Clock by edf13 on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @06:50AM (#16419650)
It reminds me of Triggers Broom... he's had the same broom for 20 years...

http://foolsandhorses.weebly.com/triggers-broom.html

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Beverly Clock by dithering on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @06:53AM (#16419659)
Ship of Theseus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Beverly Clock by biot on Tuesday February 20, 2018 @12:44PM (#16422201)
The very next sentence:

“However, after environmental parameters readjust, the clock begins operating again.”

This suggests a lack of manual intervention.

[ Parent | on HN ]