Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | hvb2's commentslogin

> if people don't care about PFAS in their tap water

People don't? Sounds to me like they need to look at history a bit more.

To me, this looks very much like some of the other magical materials...

Lead in gasoline, asbestos as building material, tobacco etc


Most people don't care. PFAS is only voluntarily being phased out in food packaging, rather than being banned. People cook with teflon-coated pans for the tiny convenience over a nitrided, ceramic, or seasoned cast iron pan. Outdoors enthusiasts want PFAS rain jackets and PFAS ski waxes, rather than the alternatives.

I definitely agree they need to look at history, consider what they're being exposed to, and understand how simple and easy some of the substitutions/mitigations could be. There's 0 reason why manufacturers are getting 5+ years to phase out a forever chemical in something like ski wax or dental floss.


> tiny convenience over a nitrided, ceramic, or seasoned cast iron pan

Or stainless steel?


Once you go stainless you don’t go back. None of the hassle of cast iron, and eggs don’t stick with just some basic skill. Very easy to clean, no need to be gentle like with cast iron ceramic or non stick pans.

I don't think it's that people don't care, I think it's that people are ignorant. I also don't think that's an accident, I think we're in the midst of a multi-decade project to create a populace that's as dumb as possible, because the more aware and educated people are, the less likely they are to allow the kinds of behaviour that are destroying the health of people, animals and the environment.

The ideal societal conditions for, say, a petrochemical company that is creating toxins that are genuinely "forever" for all intents and purposes, is a society where people are exhausted from their terrible job (or two jobs, or job + gig economy side hustle) and spend their leisure time glued to their phones, scrolling AI slop on instagram and gambling away their meagre savings on sports betting and prediction markets.

These are not people who are going to get educated about chemistry.

Scientific expertise is derided as elitism. The president lies constantly by issuing "truths" on his social media platform. Public education gets defunded and IQ scores are declining. Either this is just random societal decay, or this is serving the interests of the rich and powerful. I know where I stand on it. And yes, I'm cranky.


No it’s because lots of us grew up in the 70s with asbestos, lead, chlordane, ddt, etc… and we are still alive and thriving. We played with radioactive chemistry sets and even made our own plastic animals inside enclosed areas and loved to breath in the vapors : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thingmaker

PFAS is the least of our concerns.


>PFAS in dental floss

Jesus Christ.

Speaking of which, it occurs to me that my toothbrush is also made of plastic, and that most toothpastes are also mildly abrasive...


Toothbrushes wear down against your teeth anyways.

> People cook with teflon-coated pans for the tiny convenience over a nitrided, ceramic, or seasoned cast iron pan.

...which has absolutely nothing to do with the PFOA that you might reasonably be concerned about. Teflon is chemically inert. It's literally used for human body implants. Teflon-coated pans are not your enemy. Fire-fighting foam, on the other hand -- you probably shouldn't bathe in it.

Any test that "detects" teflon in the generic category of "PFAS" is a hopelessly flawed test [1]. Unfortunately, a great many of these papers don't make the distinction, whether intentionally or due to incompetence, or simply because it's far easier to do that, and it gets better headlines.

[1] Important aside: historically, several of the major manufacturers of teflon had problems with PFOA contamination around the factories due to manufacturing processes. This is unrelated to your personal use of a Teflon pan, and also, the process has been changed. If you want to argue that the new process is also polluting, fine, make that argument -- but don't assert that the use of the final product is itself unsafe.


Plenty of people will use those pans and

Overheat them, which means the stuff gets into the air. Many many pet birds have died of this only because they're more susceptible

Use the wrong material in them meaning the start to scratch the Teflon layer.

I'm not saying you cannot use them right, but too many people don't and the product isn't safe when improperly used. This is true for many products but in this case plenty of people aren't aware they're holding it wrong.


> Overheat them, which means the stuff gets into the air. Many many pet birds have died of this only because they're more susceptible

And again, this has nothing to do with PFAS or PFOA. The principle cause is a complete breakdown of teflon into fluorinated small-molecule gases, such as hydrogen fluoride and tetrafluoroethylene. You're literally burning the coating off. It has as much relationship to PFOA as wood smoke has to wood.


> ...which has absolutely nothing to do with the PFOA that you might reasonably be concerned about. Teflon is chemically inert. It's literally used for human body implants. Teflon-coated pans are not your enemy. Fire-fighting foam, on the other hand -- you probably shouldn't bathe in it.

Unfortunately, that is not the case. Yes, Teflon is inert but only when it's not exposed to high temperatures (>350F). When heated, such as in a non-stick pan, Teflon gives off fumes which contain byproducts including breakdowns back into PFAS compounds. So /YES/ the use of the final product (as cookware) /is/ unsafe. NOBODY SHOULD BE USING TEFLON NONSTICK COOKWARE.


> Teflon gives off fumes which contain byproducts including breakdowns back into PFAS compounds.

Completely incorrect. Overheating (aka "burning") completely destroys the molecule, and releases small molecule gases, like hydrogen fluoride. These have no relation to PFAS, they can't turn back into PFAS, and they look nothing like PFAS.

It's like saying that the smoke from burning wood is, in fact, wood.


Teflon is not inert at very high temperatures. Nobody ever overheats a pan?

This has nothing to do with PFAS. When you heat teflon to 500C+, the molecules break down into small molecule fluorinated gases. These molecules are not PFAS, in any way.

the concern is not about immediate effects of using products, but the fact that they are now everywhere in the environment, including water supplies and our own blood streams.

Future archaeologists are going to chronicle humankind's stupidity by the lead layer, the atom bomb testing fallout layer, the PFAS layer, etc. All of these were made possible by a misplaced sense of scale. Yes we can poison the whole planet. That little blue dot.

Geologically speaking it's just one really cool layer.

It's also got my pogs in it!

> If we turn our back on the voting population you have to accept that someone else who reaches out to them gets their vote.

So you need to start spreading fairy tales too?

A bunch of those votes are from people that don't like what's going on. But if you ask them what they do want, you get blank stares. It's easy to, mostly with hindsight, say what things were bad decisions. It's much harder to be in favor of something because that makes you 'vulnerable'.

To keep it US centric, some person campaigned on cost of living issues and how he would fix them all. He got plenty of votes for that and just doesn't care (paraphrasing).

I can campaign on lower taxes, better healthcare, better schools, higher wages and more jobs.... But unless I have a way to actually get there, accounting for political realities, that doesn't really mean anything...


Here's the kind of thing I'm talking about

Hilary's Basket of Depolrables speech 2 months before voting

> you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. (Laughter/applause) Right? (Laughter/applause) They're racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it. And unfortunately, there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people – now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks – they are irredeemable, but thankfully, they are not America.

She's talking about more than 30 million voters there. She's actively rejecting them, and criticising Trump for engaging with them.

This is how you lose votes by default.


> She's talking about more than 30 million voters there. She's actively rejecting them, and criticising Trump for engaging with them.

Ok, but let's say there are 5M xenophobic people. What's your proposed solution for bringing them back into the fold?

It used to be that there was a shared basis of facts. Numbers don't lie, you can explain them any way you want though.

In the past 10 years, America has really just lost it's ability to look at numbers. Partially because of them being explained differently by both sides but mostly I think because of actively discrediting them by one side that doesn't want to talk numbers, but feelings.

Trump wants to address feelings, he'll lose any other debate. He doesn't know his facts, he doesn't care about them, he's basically built his life on selling a brand. And a brand is whatever you think it is today.


That has a capacity of 7M barrels a day, so not an alternative. It'll lessen the blow a tiny bit but that's all it does

Just saying, but this is not really fair. It's not like you use that 2TB. So you shouldn't compare it to a 2TB bucket. Most of these plans have limits to prevent abuse but they're well beyond the 'I need to care' level.

Maybe you use 1TB, maybe just 10GB. As a user on this site I expect you know that a 10GB plan and a 1TB plan won't be that much different.


I don't know what you're talking about. I always reserve right up to the knife's edge of what I actually use.

You're right, I'm currently only using 1.1 TB out of 2.0. But saying a 10GB plan and 1TB aren't much different is crazy talk.

> Iran has already kidnapped a US civilian (a reporter, Shelly Kittleson) and are holding her hostage.

Expect there to be a lot of operatives of the US in Iran. Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but it wouldn't be the first time a CIA or something operative is caught and this is the cover.

In war the first victim is always the truth


> Scale that mindset problem up to a national grid and I imagine the challenge is the same.

Except that we have raw data there? The only question is how fast it grows, but since we're transitioning that's mostly a question of how fast you decommission fossil plants.


Yeah, agreed. It's a lot easier to be empirical when the scale of the requirements is quite literally unimaginable without just dealing with raw numbers.

Germany’s renewables rollout would like a word….

If you mean what they started in the 90s? That's not what this is about. The conversation was about not being able to rightsize today.

Germany did jumpstart their market successfully but that was in a wildly different time. Want to talk about what a typical KWp of installed solar cost at the time?

Hindsight....


Germany has only a tiny portion of their total energy needs on renewables - if we’re being honest about the definition of ‘total energy needs’.

Like in the camper van scenario, if we include winter heating and transportation? Oh boy.

It’s getting better, but if we’re really honest very far from the truth


Is this just to plug the site? What's unique about this, there's quite a few others already?

Aren't most Show HN's plugs to whatever they're presenting?

I mean, sure but I think it would be helpful to explain a couple of things.

How it was decided which vendor is an alternative, what were the criteria etc

How can this be kept up to date?

Can I submit missing data, if so how?

This isn't unique at all, so what sets this one apart from the others?


If you turn on showdead, you'll see OP's explanatory post.

Hard link to [dead] comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47624742

[vouch] for comment, if you have that option, it got caught in the noob green comment auto-flag filter (that is easily triggered).

EDIT: now undead.


Interesting, didn't know that existed...

I would've still put it in the submission itself but that makes sense


But if Gemini doesn't end up using the compute because of whatever reason, Google has other ways to monetize that compute. OpenAI doesn't?

So the same money spent by OpenAI and Google doesn't carry nearly the same amount of risk?


  OpenAI doesn't?
Why not? They've openly said they could in theory sell compute to others if they can't use it all.

And who would be buying this from them? Let's say you're anthropic, would you give money to your competitor?

I'll also add that Google is already a player in that space so more likely to easily sell it off.


this isn't credible though. them not being able to use all their compute likely means that the ai bubble has popped, so they won't be getting a good price on it.

The goal is not to cover everything, the goal is to cover 90% of the use cases.

For C#, I think they achieved that.


If you're developing for the web your attack surface is quite a bit bigger. Your proposed solution of copying a few files might work but how do you keep track of updates? You might be vulnerable to a published exploit fixed a few months ago. A package manager might tell you a new version is available. I don't know how that would work in your scenario.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: