Thanks for your elaborate contribution! You are right that the solution is more complex and might not solve a real problem. I think the point Smith Newnam wanted to make is that the product experience of a faucet can be more playful or interesting instead of a standard faucet.

I too doubt large scale deployment.

- more complicated but has less features (what if i want a level of flow that’s in between one of the predefined levels)

- less intuitive, the ball will be disgusting w/ soap within a week

- more fragile and has more parts to require maintenance

- requires an electrical connection along w/ plumbing thus increasing infrastructure costs.

this will never be suitable for any large scale deployments.

sounds like a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.

cute thought experiment, hope you didnt put to much money in it.

Is the tap off when I am holding the ball in my hand? To have the same behaviour when it’s in my hand as when it’s in the middle would be redundant. And it raises the question of what value is there in making a piece that can be removed?