Um, the single-hose air conditioners do in fact work passably, probably because they’re designed to minimize the volume of air exhausted compared to the amount circulated. The air you’re blowing out is way hotter than the air you’re drawing in. This makes the heat pump work harder, but it reduces the air exchange problem.
And a lot of structures already have huge amounts of air exchange going on anyhow. And, by the way, a lot of uncooled structures actually do run hotter on the inside than the temperature of the environment, so the air you’re drawing in may not be all that hot depending on where it’s coming from and when you run the machine.
And the market has noticed that the single hose design is inefficient, which is why there are two-hose ones available. In fact, if I were writing a review, I probably wouldn’t bother to mention the matter because I’d assume everybody already knew about the issue. That’s even though I do in fact buy two-hose models for exactly the reasons you describe.
Perhaps people are dumb, but they are not as dumb as you are making them out to be. And I think I have to add that an awful lot of “rationalists” are very fond of talking about how everything is stupid, without in fact having studied the matters in question closely enough to really be allowed opinions...
The fact that you chose to use your superior knowledge to buy the much better air conditioner, while also choosing to not leave a review explaining this, is an illustration of OP’s point, and not a refutation.
If I needed a more compact unit, I might buy a one-hoser.
If I had a more limited budget (and didn’t expect to run the thing all the time) I might buy a one-hoser.
If I had very limited space in which to run the hose, I might buy a one-hoser.
Absolute maximum efficiency may just not be at the top of most people’s lists.
… and you don’t really have much of a basis to say that I do have “superior knowledge” compared to most other potential buyers. Looking at the reviews doesn’t really get you there, since you don’t know that clue is independent of tendency to write reviews, and many of the reviews are probably fake.
Absolute maximum efficiency may just not be at the top of most people’s lists.
You didn’t say any of that before. And you didn’t show that any of that justified the Amazon reviews either, as is necessary to refute OP, and you will have a hard time doing so given that none of the reviews explain the disadvantage those advantages may or may not offset.
… and you don’t really have much of a basis to say that I do have “superior knowledge” compared to most other potential buyers.
OK, so let’s say you don’t have any superior knowledge when you state things about air conditioners. (I am willing to agree that no one should believe your claims if you want to claim that.) Then why do you believe all the things you said about single-hose air conditioners working or about the exchanging or about what reviewers (and non-reviewers) do or do not know, especially when, as you agree with OP, none of the reviews mention this?
Looking at the reviews doesn’t really get you there, since you don’t know that clue is independent of tendency to write reviews, and many of the reviews are probably fake.
This again goes to illustrate OP and not refute it.
Yes, that’s true, I didn’t go into detail on irrelevant side issues, or take up space saying things that a reasonable reader would have assumed anyhow.
That’s for much the same reason that I wouldn’t waste people’s time with Amazon reviews saying nothing but “Well, ACKCHUALLY, two-hose air conditioners are MUCH more efficient (you ignorant plebs).”.
The most reasonable hypothesis is that people know their own priorities better than I do, so I shouldn’t make an ass of myself. Also, of course, even if they’re wrong, I’m unlikely to persuade them, but that’s a separate matter.
You might want to think about why you did not just naturally assume those things.
OK, so let’s say you don’t have any superior knowledge when you state things about air conditioners.
I have adequate knowledge. I am willing to assume that most other buyers of air conditioners also have, or will independently seek out, adequate knowledge. Adequate knowledge includes everything I said.
I was claiming that OP was pontificating based on inadequate knowledge. Less than my own and very possibly less than that of the average Amazon air conditioner buyer. Basically getting a nasty case of engineer’s disease and treating a basic first-order understanding as if it were special expertise, in a context where most other people might very well have understanding superior to OP’s own.
And if buyers did not have “adequate” understanding in the area of efficiency, one very strong candidate explanation for that would be that they didn’t care so much about efficiency compared to other things. Especially because, even if they didn’t understand the whole airflow pattern, they could act on the published efficiency ratings, which take airflow into account. If they’re buying something with a lower numerical headline efficiency rating, then you have to assume that they’re real idiots to arrive at the idea that efficiency is their main concern.
… all of which I would have let pass if smug, arrogant, supercilious dismissiveness were not a common problem that alienates a lot of people from “rationalists” and their viewpoints.
This again goes to illustrate OP and not refute it.
OP claimed, essentially, that the reviews were clueless, and that that was evidence that the average buyer was clueless. That would only be true if clueless people did not disproportionately write reviews, or if you had a whole bunch of other data to let you compensate for the bias.
There no a priori reason to believe that.
In fact, having spent more time than I care to admit reading those reviews, I have come to the conclusion that clueless people do disproportionately write reviews. Usually based on inadequate first-order understanding. But that’s not central to my point, and I will thank you not to whine about my not having mentioned it until now.
EDIT: several commenters seem to think that I’m claiming this air conditioner does not work at all, so I want to clarify that it will still cool down a room on net. The point is not that it doesn’t work at all. The point is that it’s stupidly inefficient in a way which I do not think consumers would plausibly choose over the relatively-low cost of a second hose if they recognized the problems.
Um, the single-hose air conditioners do in fact work passably, probably because they’re designed to minimize the volume of air exhausted compared to the amount circulated. The air you’re blowing out is way hotter than the air you’re drawing in. This makes the heat pump work harder, but it reduces the air exchange problem.
And a lot of structures already have huge amounts of air exchange going on anyhow. And, by the way, a lot of uncooled structures actually do run hotter on the inside than the temperature of the environment, so the air you’re drawing in may not be all that hot depending on where it’s coming from and when you run the machine.
And the market has noticed that the single hose design is inefficient, which is why there are two-hose ones available. In fact, if I were writing a review, I probably wouldn’t bother to mention the matter because I’d assume everybody already knew about the issue. That’s even though I do in fact buy two-hose models for exactly the reasons you describe.
Perhaps people are dumb, but they are not as dumb as you are making them out to be. And I think I have to add that an awful lot of “rationalists” are very fond of talking about how everything is stupid, without in fact having studied the matters in question closely enough to really be allowed opinions...
The fact that you chose to use your superior knowledge to buy the much better air conditioner, while also choosing to not leave a review explaining this, is an illustration of OP’s point, and not a refutation.
If I needed a more compact unit, I might buy a one-hoser.
If I had a more limited budget (and didn’t expect to run the thing all the time) I might buy a one-hoser.
If I had very limited space in which to run the hose, I might buy a one-hoser.
Absolute maximum efficiency may just not be at the top of most people’s lists.
… and you don’t really have much of a basis to say that I do have “superior knowledge” compared to most other potential buyers. Looking at the reviews doesn’t really get you there, since you don’t know that clue is independent of tendency to write reviews, and many of the reviews are probably fake.
You didn’t say any of that before. And you didn’t show that any of that justified the Amazon reviews either, as is necessary to refute OP, and you will have a hard time doing so given that none of the reviews explain the disadvantage those advantages may or may not offset.
OK, so let’s say you don’t have any superior knowledge when you state things about air conditioners. (I am willing to agree that no one should believe your claims if you want to claim that.) Then why do you believe all the things you said about single-hose air conditioners working or about the exchanging or about what reviewers (and non-reviewers) do or do not know, especially when, as you agree with OP, none of the reviews mention this?
This again goes to illustrate OP and not refute it.
Yes, that’s true, I didn’t go into detail on irrelevant side issues, or take up space saying things that a reasonable reader would have assumed anyhow.
That’s for much the same reason that I wouldn’t waste people’s time with Amazon reviews saying nothing but “Well, ACKCHUALLY, two-hose air conditioners are MUCH more efficient (you ignorant plebs).”.
The most reasonable hypothesis is that people know their own priorities better than I do, so I shouldn’t make an ass of myself. Also, of course, even if they’re wrong, I’m unlikely to persuade them, but that’s a separate matter.
You might want to think about why you did not just naturally assume those things.
I have adequate knowledge. I am willing to assume that most other buyers of air conditioners also have, or will independently seek out, adequate knowledge. Adequate knowledge includes everything I said.
I was claiming that OP was pontificating based on inadequate knowledge. Less than my own and very possibly less than that of the average Amazon air conditioner buyer. Basically getting a nasty case of engineer’s disease and treating a basic first-order understanding as if it were special expertise, in a context where most other people might very well have understanding superior to OP’s own.
And if buyers did not have “adequate” understanding in the area of efficiency, one very strong candidate explanation for that would be that they didn’t care so much about efficiency compared to other things. Especially because, even if they didn’t understand the whole airflow pattern, they could act on the published efficiency ratings, which take airflow into account. If they’re buying something with a lower numerical headline efficiency rating, then you have to assume that they’re real idiots to arrive at the idea that efficiency is their main concern.
… all of which I would have let pass if smug, arrogant, supercilious dismissiveness were not a common problem that alienates a lot of people from “rationalists” and their viewpoints.
OP claimed, essentially, that the reviews were clueless, and that that was evidence that the average buyer was clueless. That would only be true if clueless people did not disproportionately write reviews, or if you had a whole bunch of other data to let you compensate for the bias.
There no a priori reason to believe that.
In fact, having spent more time than I care to admit reading those reviews, I have come to the conclusion that clueless people do disproportionately write reviews. Usually based on inadequate first-order understanding. But that’s not central to my point, and I will thank you not to whine about my not having mentioned it until now.
Just added this clarification to the post: