Definitely seen that with traditional QR codes in the one place they tended to pop up. Ads.

Boxes are old hat.

Cans are where it’s at. Similar emissions savings based on size and format. But a box, formally a BIB (bag in box), makes significant use of single use plastic in the lining bag.

I’m kinda giggling at the base concept here. Down to familiarity.

Here’s my problem with “QR menus.”

Yeah the movie kinda hashed it up a bit. IIRC it wasn’t necessarily Nedry. More John Hammond buying “the best of everything”. For the late 80's. It was also very much a terminal/mainframe setup that was apparently running on Cray super computers.

A lot of boiled down to Crichton trying to fill it with whiz bang…

Good for you. I have a film degree, earned during the era when 3d projection was being rolled out. Primarily as as strategy of studio and theatrical consolidation.

“This movie basically sold 3d TVs for the next 2 years.”

“first movie to shot, edited and rendered for the specific purpose of being viewed in 3d.”

That’s direct out of the book.

The very article above is wrong. I work in the alcohol business. Never met a distiller, alcohol rep, spirits expert who would tell you 2 years on a whiskey.

The window you have to drink that pappy is decades.

The window you have to drink that pappy is decades.

Already exist. There’s commercial systems that use electric pumps, better seals. Some even purge with nitrogen. But there’s oxygen dissolved in the wine after open that would take considerable hoops to remove. So you’re getting weeks. Nothing will return it to the unopened state. 

Beyond that once opened air/oxygen becomes dissolved in the wine. The pump can not remove that. That takes purging with inert gas, time, and considerable shaking. 

It’s essentially a bitter/amaro. Though only flavored with wormwood.

It will degrade faster than plain spirits. But that isn’t “going bad”. It’s gonna lose some of it’s wormwoody goodness. 

I realize the dogma is a year or two

That’s actually incorrect. Buying physical art generally doesn’t convey copyright to that art. The buyer of a painting can not generally sell copies of that painting.

It wasn’t even a first edition Dune book.

How is that any different than regular registration, licensing and serial numbers?

I’d guess hoax of exposure targeted at uncritical reporting by press release.

This “very good” hoax involved setting up a basic website, and tossing out a press release.

And our writer here “uncovered” the truth with a pretty basic level of due diligence after they uncritically published that press release.