I prefer the old fashioned technique of lick and turn. How lazy do you have to be to need a motorised gizmo? We really need to keep people active to reduce obesity.
Now if you made them run to keep the power to the motor, then you might have something.
Just my opinion.
I see the inventor has thought this through. I notice a set of 6 gears to really gear down the motor, presumably to get the number of ice-cream revolutions per minute to a marketable level.
But I see an obvious problem with this device. What happens when the ice-cream is licked down to the lip (33)? There's no easy to way to get at the ice-cream below that level. With a real ice-cream cone, this problem doesn't exist because you start eating the cone.
Perhaps the biggest flaw of this device is all that mechanism limits the amount of ice-cream you can have. In a real ice-cream cone, delicious ice-cream occupies the space taken by the battery, motor, gears and switch. I doubt consumers would want to pay *more* get *less*.
Hey guys, the patent record is rife with patents that are just amazing that way. A few years ago I spent a lot of time searching patents and came upon this one: 4,145,028. Those of you who are deer hunters will just love it! Consider for a moment what is likely to happen when someone in some moderately hunted area starts his engine!
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.