interdimensionalmeme
@interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
- Comment on oops 16 hours ago:
Or make sure they don’t have spills again, doesn’t seem that hard.
- Comment on oops 17 hours ago:
some ptfe/ceramic/titanium/diamond metamatrial that tolerates way high temperatures, which you can use metal utensils on and is not as good as regular ptfe at stopping eggs from sticking to the pan.
- Comment on oops 17 hours ago:
They should stop dumping it in the rivers
- Comment on oops 17 hours ago:
I’m more concerned about useless and damaging, performative actions against plastic.
Of course what we need is plastic monomers that are neither carcinogenic nor hormone disrupters. We should stop dumping the stuff into the river. Poisonned blastic with bromine should be labelled in a was that makes it easy to identity. We should breed yeast that can east plastic and keep them in giesters.
- Comment on oops 20 hours ago:
And the current goal is to ban them all wcl.org.uk/transitioning-to-a-pfas-free-economy.a… Leaving us only able to buy the proprietary alternative of an oligopoly, instead of regulating the production of this commodity. End result, we pay for it all and get a degradation in quality.
- Comment on oops 20 hours ago:
current plastics not biodegradable is the same problem that trees had for 300 million years. I think it’s a matter of time before some yeast evolves the ability to eat plastic. Then all plastic will start to mold and rot like all other organic matter.
as for being “endocrinologal distruptor & a carcinogen”, yes so is a lot of other stuff, probably stuff in wood, again, like turpentine
We’re not going to ban all plastics until some company has a proprietary alternative that they can force us to buy by making all other products illegal to produce. But that new alternative doesn’t exist yet.
My advice, don’t eat electrical boxes
- Comment on oops 21 hours ago:
The difference with leaded gasoline and asbestos, is that everyone everywhere was being exposed to those.
And the current trajectory regarding PFAS is, a complete ban wcl.org.uk/transitioning-to-a-pfas-free-economy.a…
But they’re not a problem everywhere, they’re a problem of containment at the manufacturer.
This is what sloppy statements like plastics and teflon are tantamount to the widespread lead and mercury poisoning. That’s just not the case but acting like it is, is exactly how industry initiate regulatory capture.
I see it the same as the big tech giants pushing hard FOR regulation, because ultimately the rules, written with their impetus will become their motes and we will all pay for it.
- Comment on oops 21 hours ago:
That’s been well known for over 50 years, why do you think now, all of a sudden, this is becoming an issue now ? This is because there are new coatings, silicon based PTFE-free coatings and PTFE-based metamaterial that combine titanium, ceramic and/or PCD.
As the manufacturer invest in this new technology, they either restrict PTFE commodity manufacturers out of their market or merely stop funding lobbying that protects the PTFE.
This is not a conspiracy theory, simple emergent interests that do not require a coordination.
- Comment on oops 22 hours ago:
inorganic hydrocarbon
Hydrocarbons are, by definition, organic compounds made exclusively of carbon and hydrogen.
Do you know of any hydrocarbon that do not contain hydrogen nor carbon and that are relevant to this discussion ?
- Comment on oops 22 hours ago:
Yes, I read about it and the teflon on frying pan is explicitely NOT the problem. I understand that pointing to frying pans and saying “PTFE !!” is the attention grabbing thing to do. But there is no danger here.
The problem is the manufacturing plants leaking PFOA/PFAS into their surrounding environment !
- Comment on oops 22 hours ago:
The PFAS/PFOA controversy, is mostly about banning these commodity products so that the proprietary, non-commodity alternatives by western companies can become the only high temperature dry lubricant on sale.
Maybe in another 60 years we’ll have the same controversy about them !
- Comment on oops 22 hours ago:
Plastic is an organic material, trees are mostly plastic (lignin, a phenolic polymer, cellulose a polysaccharide polymer, hemicellulose an heteropolysaccharide and suberin a polyester-like polymer).
The problem we’re having is a naturalistic fallacy crossed with the unpleasant fact that almost everything we touch sheds dust and powder absolutely everywhere. This along with spores and yeast and other dusts constantly enter our bodies.
Plastic is only of note because we made it.
Any problems beyond that is speculative and will requires ginormous gobs of grant money to actually answer with anything than precautionary principle-based FUD.
- Comment on oops 22 hours ago:
Except plastic doesn’t really seem to do anything. It just “is there”. Unless you swallow enough of it to clog something, it doesn’t seem to do anything.
We’ve seens lots of “it might interefere with hormones”, but that part is always to be confirmed in the next research grant request and then we never hear about it again.
- Comment on Switch 2 owner banned for playing second-hand Switch 1 games 1 day ago:
Don’t forget piracy!!
- Comment on I can fix her 1 day ago:
Rusty red
- Comment on call of the void 1 day ago:
Reminds me of all those oil barron owned journalists searching under every rock for an arsonist every time there’s a forest fire !
- Comment on You can only bring back one. Which do you choose? 2 days ago:
That’s not even a question, the spirit of radioshack with 2025 technology, that would be awesome !
- Comment on Take a deep breath and think about it 3 days ago:
Because capitalism (and religion before it) told us it would come in the future. As long as we worked as hard as possible in the present.
In the case of religion, this was after you died, until people figured out it was a little too convenient, a little too much of a blank cheque that leaves very little room for recourse if it doesn’t turn out as advertised.
In capitalism, “defferred gratification” is sold as a virtue, a sign of good moral character, you are made responsible for your own happiness in a way that requires continual vigilence.
- Comment on Just.....why? 3 days ago:
- Comment on Ok, I'll pay you the 1995 price 3 days ago:
For the people with no service and exploitative ratioed service.
I don’t need wifi I have 100 gig of fast data and “unlimited” after that which I never use.
But my brother has 3 gb and then he loses internet access. You do it for him, it’s common courtesy if you’re operating a business which you expect people to hang out at. They are the content that attract your drink-buyers.
- Comment on Ok, I'll pay you the 1995 price 3 days ago:
It’s a business location and they could be anywhere, this is enough to buy unlimited internet basically everywhere there is unlimited internet to buy. Compared with daily business expenses this is basically free for them.
- Comment on Ok, I'll pay you the 1995 price 3 days ago:
We’re assuming a business location here. This is the maximum it should cost pretty much anywhere in the world. So, trivial compared with just one day of business expenses. Functionally free
- Comment on Ok, I'll pay you the 1995 price 4 days ago:
100$/month and a one time purchase of a 200$ wifi router
- Comment on 4D Salmon 1 week ago:
Because of of the extra d I put after salmon
- Comment on 4D Salmon 1 week ago:
All salmonds are four-dimensionnal
- Comment on 4D Salmon 1 week ago:
I think that’s bastion
- Comment on Mullvad's ads are good 1 week ago:
Yes, that’s what I do, but then my address isn’t mixed with hundreds of other users, I wish I could have a web service, with a dynanic dns domain name and letsencrypt certificates but the anonymous front that a vpn provides.
- Comment on >:( 1 week ago:
Here is an excellent retelling of the cold fusion saga
www.youtube.com/watch?v=jn92eWhGG14 www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbfJFPVApu8 www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWlBZT7L1qM
Basically, as soon as the scientist had one anomalous reading, the political and academic machine got into overdrive, huge money started getting thrown around and the scientists got under huge amount of pressure and paranoia.
- Comment on >:( 1 week ago:
Most science isn’t real science in that view, the problem is that most science is funded by ulterior motives, very little science is the basic, primary science of exploration. That creates both huges gaps where the political and financial establishment fails to imagine value (climate science) and also fake science where something should be true for the power that be, but isn’t (glysophate, cigarettes safety).
We should always imagine as a flawed, politically and financially motivated enterprise, a tool in the grip of institutions that need to survive first and science second. Pure science is a rare thing and it shouldn’t be assumed be the case whenever things are happening under the name of science.
This is the framework to avoid being surprised by scientific failures and to compensate for them.
- Comment on >:( 1 week ago:
“No True Scientist” would say cigarettes don’t cause cancer or co2 emission don’t cause global warming, or glyphosate isn’t bad for the environment. Yet, it did, for multiple decades.
You have to consider “actually existing science” with it’s political and financially directed function, choosing what questions get asked and who will answer them. You can say “oh that wasn’t science it was fraud” which is all well and good now but it wasn’t for those decades when they served to obscure or bury the truth rather than discover it.
Actually existing science is a really troubled institution
