[HN Gopher] How I won $2,750 using JavaScript, AI, and a can of ...
___________________________________________________________________
How I won $2,750 using JavaScript, AI, and a can of WD-40
Author : davekiss
Score : 253 points
Date : 2024-08-14 16:35 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (davekiss.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (davekiss.com)
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| Did you spend more time working on this blog post than on the
| contest? Yes.
|
| Kind of feels line author spent more time researching their odds
| than working on the submission as well.
| dangsux wrote:
| How a dishonest scam artist fleeced WD-40 out of $2,750.
| echelon wrote:
| It just got to the front page of HN, which includes a large
| percentage of users who buy and use WD-40 [1]. That alone might
| be worth the price of admission. You could also think about
| this as a collab between WD-40 and Javascript, which is pretty
| funny.
|
| The author is presumably posting this video and blog
| everywhere, which only further amplifies WD-40's outreach. And
| they themselves now have a positive brand association with
| WD-40.
|
| [1] I just used WD-40 last night. I'm actually shocked the
| author had to go and buy a can of it.
| davekiss wrote:
| I had a little tiny can in the garage, but it didn't show as
| well on camera
| echelon wrote:
| Smart use of a prop!
|
| I also didn't think about how an older can might not look
| as good on camera as a brand new can.
| BoingBoomTschak wrote:
| > I'm actually shocked the author had to go and buy a can of
| it.
|
| Some fancy people are on the Ballistol team, I'll have you
| know!
| cmiller1 wrote:
| Maybe he just needed to buy a small can to open up his normal
| can of WD-40 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9PFZTPSOkdY
| rfl890 wrote:
| WD-40 is never financially recovering from this
| ycombinatrix wrote:
| How WD-40 successfully launched an indie marketing campaign
| with only $2750
| mmanfrin wrote:
| How do you figure? They wanted people to make videos
| demonstrating what WD-40 can do, he made videos doing just
| that.
|
| What about this do you consider a scam?
| ThrowawayTestr wrote:
| The rules explicitly state that multiple entries are allowed.
| TrackerFF wrote:
| Man, there are people raking in hundreds of thousands, to
| millions, doing exactly the same thing on youtube.
|
| They have tens and tens of (list) channels where all the vids
| are generated, AI voiceover, AI script, AI images, etc. - don't
| think OP hacking his way through a contest is too bad.
| knodi123 wrote:
| More like "How a guy took a non-guaranteed one-off freelance
| marketing gig for WD-40!"
| jabroni_salad wrote:
| Do you know what a marketing firm would cost to generate this
| kind of footage? OP is the one getting fleeced. At least they
| had fun with it.
| j0hnyl wrote:
| Please explain how wd40 is the victim here.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| The WD-40 Company made $53m in income in 2017
|
| If anything, they should be derided for using free labor in the
| form of a contest to produce marketing content.
| cjidjdj wrote:
| [flagged]
| davekiss wrote:
| Aw man, sorry this one wasn't for you!
| j45 wrote:
| Great response. The value is in depth not just soundbites.
| cjidjdj wrote:
| No I'm sorry, for my harsh and unconstructive comment. It was
| unkind and I shouldn't have made it.
| readthenotes1 wrote:
| Odd. I didn't find it tedious at all
| thekevan wrote:
| I was getting bored toward the middle, but that is because it
| is a topic that didn't interest me specifically, NOT because
| the writing was bad.
|
| I found the parts I was interested to be wonderful.
| dang wrote:
| " _Please don 't post shallow dismissals, especially of other
| people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something._"
| - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
|
| I know it feels like you're 'just' sharing an opinion (or, lord
| help us, a 'fact'), but if you consider the externalities--i.e.
| the effect on the culture when many people post this way--the
| expected value of posts like this is super negative for
| everybody--including yourself--since over time it makes the
| commons nasty and lame. That's why we try to avoid them here.
| cjidjdj wrote:
| You're right. Sorry for making a dick comment.
| fsndz wrote:
| This is an excellent example of using LLMs to convert knowledge
| into productivity and profit. This will be the way forward:
| https://www.lycee.ai/blog/large-language-models-productivity...
| sickblastoise wrote:
| Had a similar idea, https://pypi.org/project/ai-alchemy/
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| That's not the way forward, that's how LLMs are already being
| used for short term gains. The way forward cannot possibly be
| having to participate in an even less predictable gig economy
| than the gig economy. That's the way backwards.
| webnrrd2k wrote:
| The linked blog post is hardly a way forward, it's a high level
| summary of LLM uses and drawbacks with no real insight. The
| conclusion: "The potential for generative AI to transform
| industries is vast, but realizing this potential requires a
| thoughtful, strategic approach that balances innovation with
| practicality." Really?
|
| There are no excellent examples of anything. I feel cheated.
| fsndz wrote:
| I read it more as a source of strategic insights, but of
| course, it's not a list of startup ideas ready to be
| executed. No one has that, everyone is figuring things out.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Hahaha this is great dude. Also your creative fae submission is
| fantastic. I can see why it didn't win but it's amusing.
|
| The ElevenLabs narrator did say the faeries applied "Polish".
| From Gdansk or Warsaw? :)
| davekiss wrote:
| I noticed the "Polish" too but thought it was too funny to fix
| it
| gowld wrote:
| I got kicked out of a black-tie gala because my shoes were
| overheard telling Polish jokes.
| TrackerFF wrote:
| I love that 75% of the post was OP checking the math on whether
| or not he should join the contest.
| j45 wrote:
| ..and let the math shed some light on what to create and why.
| nadis wrote:
| Yes, this! Also that OP fully acknowledged spending more time
| on the write up than the actual contest entries. Which I'm glad
| for, that was a fun read!
| justinsaccount wrote:
| Lubricating a sliding door Quieting a squeaky door hinge
| Lubricating an HVAC register lever
|
| Wd-40 is not really a lubricant. You can use WD-40 to clean gunk
| out of things, but you really need to follow it up with a proper
| lubricating oil
| davekiss wrote:
| I learned a lot about WD-40 from this project! This is a highly
| debated topic, but their website leans into the fact that WD-40
| is, indeed, a lubricant.
|
| > While the "W-D" in WD-40 stands for Water Displacement, WD-40
| Multi-Use Product is a unique, special blend of lubricants. The
| product's formulation also contains anti-corrosion agents and
| ingredients for penetration, water displacement and soil
| removal.
|
| Regardless of the facts, when all was said and done, they were
| the ones judging the entries, sooo... yep, it's a lubricant.
| jimnotgym wrote:
| It is a lubricant, just not a very good one for most uses. It
| can't bear much load and it tends to just dissappear in a
| short time.
|
| I once replaced a series of mortice lever locks in a first
| house that were very worn after a decade of use. You had to
| shake the key to get them to open. I was amazed on opening
| them to find them completely dry, when they come greased. I
| suggested they lubricate the replacements occasionally. They
| replied that they sprayed them regularly with wd40. This has
| washed the grease out and left... virtually nothing.
| snozolli wrote:
| For what it's worth, old lock grease tends to move away
| from where it's needed and turn into a hard, waxy
| substance. It's arguably better to have a lock cleaned and
| slightly lubricated with WD-40 than one gummed up with
| ancient grease and dirt, or worse, rusted.
|
| I've heard a lot of anecdotes in every direction: only use
| graphite, only use a cleaning solvent. I've never read
| anything authoritative and I suspect the ideal approach is
| to regularly (e.g. every decade) disassemble the lock,
| clean it thoroughly, and inject grease, but nobody is going
| to do that.
| arcanemachiner wrote:
| I'm pretty sure with locks, you want a dry lubricant. So
| graphite, or better yet, a PTFE spray lubricant. Hasn't
| failed me yet.
| rpcope1 wrote:
| I think that's one of the biggest screwups people make with
| WD-40 is that it's basically just a petroleum solvent and
| other than maybe initially unsticking things, it often
| makes the problem worse. As far as solvents go it's not
| particularly great, and in terms of lubricating or breaking
| free it's pretty bad. I'm surprised they still sell as much
| of it as they do (chalk it up to good marketing), when for
| basically everything there's a better choice (protip: if
| something is really stuck, the best tool provided you don't
| have dogs or children getting near is going to be acetone
| mixed with a good ATF).
| jfengel wrote:
| TIL that ATF=automatic transmission fluid.
|
| Still unclear on why this particular mix is optimal for
| unsticking things but Google suggests a lot of people use
| it.
| winrid wrote:
| Yes, I've used ATF to fix seized up motors. Just fill
| cylinder and let it sit for a few days.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| Jack of all trades, master of none. It is a better
| lubricant than most solvants and a better solvant than
| most lubricants, it will always be worse than a
| specialized product, but if you are only allowed a single
| can, that's a good choice. Affordable and widely
| available too. Oh and the pressurized can form factor is
| convenient.
| dekhn wrote:
| This was in fact one of my big learning experiences in
| mechanical work. As a kid, my bike was running rough so i
| took it apart, cleaned oout all that yucky/dirty grease
| from the bearings using WD-40, and then reassembled it all
| only to find it was even worse than before. Only a few
| years later did I learn that wd-40 is a terrible lubricant
| for bike ball bearings.
|
| You can see a similar effect with standard skate bearings
| used in fidget spinners - most bearings come pre-greased
| with a fairly high viscosity lubricant. If you spin the
| spinner, it will slow down quite fast, but if you take the
| bearing apart, clean out all the grease, and reassemble it,
| it will run wicked fast and long. Until some dirt gets in,
| at which point, grease would have worked better.
| knodi123 wrote:
| > Wd-40 is not really a lubricant
|
| And yet, it lubricates! I've heard your claim a lot, but the
| fact remains, it makes machinery work more smoothly, by
| reducing friction, and it is effective over significant time
| periods. By any definition, it is a lubricant.
|
| https://www.wd40.com/myths-legends-fun-facts/
|
| > Myth: WD-40 Multi-Use Product is not really a lubricant.
|
| > Fact: While the "W-D" in WD-40 stands for Water Displacement,
| WD-40 Multi-Use Product is a unique, special blend of
| lubricants. The product's formulation also contains anti-
| corrosion agents and ingredients for penetration, water
| displacement and soil removal.
| eth0up wrote:
| I don't remember the source and forget many details, but the
| test was very compelling. The guy used approximately a dozen
| different products, clp, wd40, etc. The test involved
| individual identical pieces of steel all coated with each
| product and left in wretched environment.
|
| The control, ie uncoated piece of steel fared better results
| that the regular WD40. I remember the best being Clenzoil (I
| had to grab my can to remember this). However, among the best
| was.... WD-40 _specialist_ , specifically the "corrosion
| inhibitor" version. I think it was either the second or third
| best and I consulted my other can to remember this.
|
| Sadly, my favorite lube ranked very poorly, which was
| Balistol; however, I'll never give up my Balistol.
|
| I have put both the Clenzoil and Specialist to various
| 'tests' over the years and can vouch for their quality. But
| I'd use snot before regular WD-40 unless I was making a stink
| bomb.
|
| Edit: While not the test mentioned, ProjectFarm (youtoob),
| who does myriad high quality evaluations, did test various
| lubes, but I think mostly for lubricity. It was also
| revealing and I highly recommend it and the channel in
| general.
| winrid wrote:
| And yet, if you want to actually lubricate things, there are
| much better, cheaper, options that will last longer.
|
| It's just marketing.
| wnissen wrote:
| Water is a lubricant as well. And yet it is not a good
| lubricant for all applications. WD-40 is absolutely
| spectacular for certain things, but if what you want is a
| lubricant there are much better options. For instance, there
| is a silicone version that will make a sticky old lock work
| like new.
|
| https://www.wd40.com/products/silicone-lubricant/
|
| You could probably burn WD-40 in a propane stove, but that
| doesn't mean it's a fuel.
| knodi123 wrote:
| > And yet it is not a good lubricant for all applications
|
| seems like a bit of a straw man, no?
|
| > a silicone version that will make a sticky old lock work
| like new.
|
| In my apartment, my deadbolt was so sticky that it was hard
| to turn even with the door half open. Two spritzes (keyhole
| and the bolt) with WD-40 classic, and it moved easily, and
| continued to turn easily for the remaining 6 months in my
| time there. Could lubricant-X have done a "better" job?
| Maybe, not that it mattered in practice.
|
| If NASA designed an even better lubricant, would
| lubricant-X no longer be a lubricant at all by your
| standards? Because now there's something that can also
| unstick your lock, but with an even lower coefficient of
| friction?
|
| WD-40 contains lubricants, and it can be used as a general-
| purpose around-the-house lubricant. Proven by my years of
| personal experience. Trying to claim that it isn't a
| lubricant is like trying to convince me that my lightbulbs
| are dim. I just laugh and move on.
| bitshiftfaced wrote:
| It's a solvent (penetrating oil), so it dries out. It works
| well to unstick whatever might be causing trouble with the
| door lock mechanism. If you use something like a silicone
| lubricant, you'll go a lot longer before needing to reapply.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| For the right things, e.g., machining 6061 aluminum alloy,
| WD-40 is an excellent lubricant.
| analog31 wrote:
| It's a mixture of light mineral oil and light mineral spirits.
| As a lubricant, the mineral spirits carry the mixture into
| crevices, then evaporates, leaving an oil film behind.
|
| This is either useful and appropriate for a situation, or it's
| not. Also, the oil might not be a specialized oil for any
| particular use, but a lot of applications don't need a high
| performance oil.
|
| In my view, the drawbacks are:
|
| 1. Controlling overspray. This is why, even if I liked the
| stuff, I'd prefer to apply it with an eyedropper in many if not
| most cases.
|
| 2. General ignorance about lubrication needs, where something
| else is preferable, such as grease, a suspension of wax,
| penetrating oil, etc.
|
| On the other hand, keeping a supply of every possible lubricant
| can be a storage problem, and I've gradually come to prefer
| using the "wrong" stuff than buying yet another oversized
| container of something that I have to keep forever or dispose
| of.
| awoimbee wrote:
| That 8th entry pouring loads on WD40 on trees is just crazy, that
| thing is petroleum distillate !
| davekiss wrote:
| Don't worry, this is a stump that's been dead for years,
| isolated to a very small garden bed in my yard
| a1o wrote:
| You chose papyrus too, I think that was the most damning.
| davekiss wrote:
| Fairies literally only use papyrus
| cinntaile wrote:
| I'd still wager that is why it didn't win any prizes though.
| They don't want to show a video spraying WD40 in nature.
|
| I enjoyed the post, I appreciate a good methodical process.
| previousjs wrote:
| Well there is the water table too. But that said weed killer
| is poured all over everywhere
| DowagerDave wrote:
| >> pouring loads on WD40 on trees
|
| not really the same thing as spraying a bit of WD40 on a dead
| stump.
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| I can simultaneously appreciate the write-up for gaming a
| competition while also dreading how it basically describes the
| incentives for contributing to the AI-enshittification of the
| internet.
| davekiss wrote:
| Sigh... you know, there's a bit of "can't beat 'em, join 'em"
| happening here, for sure, but let me be optimistic for a
| second.
|
| This story wouldn't have happened without AI. I genuinely used
| the tools to tell the story I wanted to tell.
|
| There was something about the way friction was removed with the
| typical narration round-trips that actually made the
| storytelling better, easier, less painful... and I truly don't
| believe anything authentic was lost in that process.
|
| My hope is tools like these can make storytelling easier for
| everyone.
| krageon wrote:
| The content produced adhered to the requirements and is
| amusing. It allowed the creativity of a single person to be
| applied in a larger way to more things. This is exactly an
| example of how AI _wouldn 't_ enshittify the internet.
| RockRobotRock wrote:
| I see where you're coming from, but I think it's just a story
| about a guy who outsmarted the system. He used math and AI to
| realize that his odds were actually pretty good, but him
| realizing he could submit multiple submissions is the important
| part. Using ElevenLabs for TTS definitely helped him win, but
| he could have also paid voice actors on Fiverr. He could have
| found royalty free music anywhere.
|
| Basically, there's a lot of AI enshittification going on, but
| this isn't one of them. Just seems like a bit of fun.
| nickspacek wrote:
| I wonder if the mispronunciation of "polish" as "Polish" had
| anything to do with missing out on a win with the fairy
| submission? Fun read!
| BlueGh0st wrote:
| I assumed it was just a bad look dumping WD-40 straight into
| the environment
| garciasn wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9PFZTPSOkdY
| neontomo wrote:
| I'm in the art scene, and when it comes to submitting proposals
| for exhibitions and being in art/film festivals and such,
| competing against other people being picked is surprisingly easy
| when you realise that most people don't study the brief that
| tells you exactly what the organisations is looking for. make
| sure you nail everything in the brief and you're in the lead,
| even if your art is terrible. I feel this is similar in nature,
| but taken to its extreme.
| swayvil wrote:
| As a person who is also in the art scene, this is reasonable
| and inspiring.
| neontomo wrote:
| i have a friend who is great at this, so i picked her brain a
| bit. she does this method and i see her booking show after
| show without a social media presence. she does 90% studying
| the brief, 8 percent presenting her submission in a
| structured way (think: explain the idea, what lead up to it,
| how it will benefit the show, who she is, and even visualises
| how it will look by photoshopping her art into their space)
| and 2% submitting beautiful work.
| swayvil wrote:
| Everybody other than the artists love that "presenting her
| submission" part.
|
| Better than the piece. Better than the essay about the
| piece. They want the summation of the essay of the piece.
| Preferably with an associated pic of a cute art goth pixie.
|
| Ah art.
| dartos wrote:
| Is goth still in?
| swayvil wrote:
| Ya but they call it something different. I forget what.
| Maybe "death cultists".
| transcriptase wrote:
| The same is true for scientific grant applications.
| UniverseHacker wrote:
| Except the reviewers don't usually read it either
| noboostforyou wrote:
| As soon as you listed the full set of prizes I was really hoping
| to see that gallon jug haha. Nice job!
| a1o wrote:
| Hey can you tell me which sling are you using and weight of the
| baby?
| davekiss wrote:
| haha yeah -- it's a Tula, kid is ~11 lb
| a1o wrote:
| Thank you!!!
| jrflowers wrote:
| How I won $2,750 using JavaScript, AI, a can of WD-40 and One
| Secret Factor That Makes This Process Unrepeatable and Useless To
| The Reader
|
| > Where do you find these exceedingly winnable contests? Sorry,
| that's a trade secret -- but it's not any of the standard various
| contest aggregators out there.
| michaelcampbell wrote:
| I mean, sure, but not every post/blog has to be "useful to the
| reader". That last "n" of "n" fiction books I read were equally
| useless, but I'm glad I read them.
| mmcclure wrote:
| I'm not even sure I agree that that one piece renders the
| entire blog post _useless_. The process is all there, just
| because the author didn 't share a list of contests doesn't
| mean someone couldn't do their own research and replicate it.
| jrflowers wrote:
| There's a bit of a difference between a fiction book and a
| 3000+ word ad for consulting services[0] that could
| reasonably be considered a how-to guide until it reveals its
| lack of repeatability in its final sentences.
|
| I'm going to guess that if "You cannot replicate this" were
| at the top of the ad fewer people would spend their time
| reading through it.
|
| 0 (The link is towards the bottom, right above the reveal)
| https://davekiss.com/consult
| mlsu wrote:
| Incredible. One of the winning human made video submissions says:
|
| "There's something almost poetic about working with your hands.
| In a world where everything has gone digital, where things get
| solved with a click and a swipe, there's a unique satisfaction
| about tackling something tangible, something real."
|
| Then there's this guy who algorithmically floods the contest with
| AI slop. Click and a swipe indeed!
| davekiss wrote:
| Hey, it's not slop!
|
| I wrote the script, I shot the video, I edited everything --
| the only place AI was even used in the submissions was to
| alleviate the pain of tracking down fitting music and re-
| recording voice overs (both of which I've done manually in the
| past).
|
| I actually thought the videos would be pretty helpful for a
| non-handy homeowner.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| yeah if anything this is a good example of using AI to speed
| up work that's typically fairy tedious
| Tyr42 wrote:
| Having done voice overs, it takes time and it doesn't feel as
| creative as the rest of the job.
| IanCal wrote:
| > Then there's this guy who algorithmically floods the contest
| with AI slop. Click and a swipe indeed!
|
| But that's not what happened. The blog is very clear about
| explaining where and how it is used.
|
| I know there's AI in the title but it's pretty lazy and frank
| rude to assume that means "mass produced nonsense".
| nasmorn wrote:
| I once ran an ultra marathon distance and had no lubricant but
| getting a bad rash so I sprayed my thighs and balls with WD-40
| which I found outside someone's garage. It lasted me almost 15
| miles until I could buy some Vaseline. Off label use probably
| biofox wrote:
| Genius idea! I've found Vaseline to be less than ideal for
| running, and "personal lubricants" dry out much too quickly. I
| hadn't considered using industrial lubricants. Pretty much
| everyone who uses WD-40 for mechanical work ends up getting it
| on their skin (and probably inhaling a good amount), so I'm
| sure it's fine for limited exposure.
| dartos wrote:
| Yeah but one's balls are pretty sensitive to topicals.
| wiredfool wrote:
| WD-40 isn't really a lubricant, it's more like a de-greaser
| and water remover.
| singleshot_ wrote:
| Water displacer, hence the name, right?
| analog31 wrote:
| It's a mixture of light mineral spirits and mineral oil.
|
| Oil displaces water, who knew?
| anamexis wrote:
| It is a lubricant. There's a lot of confusion around this
| because it often isn't a great lubricant for the purposes
| it gets used for, like door hinges or bicycle parts. But it
| most definitely is a lubricant.
|
| https://www.wd40.com/myths-legends-fun-facts/
| nasmorn wrote:
| Yeah I hate Vaseline too and normally use a stick called
| BodyGlide which just creates a thin coat. Vaseline was the
| only thing I could buy in the village and now I know WD-40
| can work in a pinch
| Pikamander2 wrote:
| Sounds like you missed a great opportunity to make a video for
| the contest!
| brigadier132 wrote:
| You should've submitted a video to the competition!
| djhworld wrote:
| Really interesting and amusing post thanks for taking the time to
| write it and share it.
| mhb wrote:
| Is it common for contests to post all the entries before the
| contest is over? Even if they do, why wouldn't smart competitors
| enter at the last minute in order to prevent their competitors
| from benefiting from their work?
| cubano wrote:
| Love the use of Playwright for the contest intel...I am currently
| using Playwright to redo some prior scraping projects and seeing
| real world examples such as these is a big help.
|
| You attack the problem like blackjack card-counter would. You
| assess the rules, make mathematical odds projections when
| possible and logical ones when not, and keep a keen eye on what
| you are up against as to judge how to best attack the money.
|
| Thanks for the smart write-up...its been a big inspiration for
| me.
| qingcharles wrote:
| A gamed a contest into a brief TV career once.
|
| A British computer TV show ran a content on their web site, but
| it was a fast-paced multiple-choice Flash game. I just opened
| three accounts. Ran through it with the first two to figure out
| all the right answers, then got perfect scores on the third.
|
| The prize was to co-present the show one time, but apparently
| they got so much positive feedback they made me permanent, until
| I found a new job. I never let them know I cheated :/
|
| This is the show. I only did it because I had a huge crush on
| Kate Russell:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q6yPcUwatg
| wrsh07 wrote:
| In that video, Nigel pronounces www as "world wide web" and I
| have not heard that in decades. It's so much better than
| actually pronouncing the letters, I can't believe we ever
| stopped using it
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-14 23:00 UTC)