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


At a loss for words. :|

That is a crime of humanity. Terrible!

This is horrible! I always wanted to visit this. :(

The stupidest answer is the most likely one. Occam's Kazoo.

The vape is disposable, no need for a charging circuit and maybe a simple ADC to determine battery life based on a discharge curve.

Apparently there is a charging circuit, because the battery will run out long before the fluid does

This is the brand I usually use. https://www.off-stamp.com

It has a separate magnetically attached battery / charging unit. I have to charge 5-6 times per "tank" that's attached. The battery side also has a mini-led display showing animations and battery / juice left so it's actually communicating with the tank side. A kit with battery and tank runs me about $25, but the tank alone is about $20. So they add $5 to cover the battery / charging component. It's a vice, but at least with this brand I'm not throwing away batteries weekly.


I always felt those Off-Stamps were at least a bit better than other disposables since the battery portion was at least reusable.

Forget that. TikTokers are the revenue stream now.

TikTokers ("influencers" in general) don't do their editing or any part of their "production pipeline" on computers, kids are doing the full thing via smartphones nowadays. Blew my mind initially too, as I always did "serious work" at a computer and never the phone, but seems they're managing it somehow.

They often start there, some stay there, some graduate to an iPad, but a a lot of the higher end creators absolutely edit in desktops or laptops (usually MacBooks)

My old job dealt with this quite a lot as they were our target market, so I got some up close views of how for example, creators like MrBeast go about their editing (well the employees anyway)

Though I did note a lot of creators that do graduate to more robust software basically go from lightweight editor via Canva -> iMovie or equivalent -> professional software e.g. FCPX or Premiere


Yeah, that matches what I've seen too, bigger productions adopting a more traditional pipeline, while "influencers" or whatever they're called today, kind of stick with the tools they've learned, until they "graduate" as they expand the team and bring in actual professionals.

They use CapCut which is free and on the web and Google Docs.

To them what Apple just announced is trash.


And he was appointed by Trump during his first term.

Leaving UVC sources exposed to eyesight is completely irresponsible. Please don't do this.

(author)

This absolutely depends on the frequency of UVC and the intensity of the lamp. The lamps this post links such as https://aerolamp.net are putting out 222-nm, which is much safer than longer UVC wavelengths and the intensity is well under TLV when placed 8.5ft up (or higher).

See https://www.faruvc.org for more on eye safety.


They can leak into higher wavelengths. You are really putting a whole lot of trust in manufacturers if you are sitting underneath one of these for decades with unprotected eyes. Not a risk I would take personally (I have glaucoma already, so I'm a bit more sensitive than the average person about eye health)

Ah nice, their data sheet has a spectrum. Kind of odd that they don't market the "we filter out the harmful parts" feature more prominently.

Kinda like advertising "Asbestos-Free Cereal" isn't it? If someone was marketing a product to me and they were super insistent about how super duper safe it was I would probably start getting suspicious

UV rightfully raises concerns about skin damage, highlighting that they're careful about excluding the harmful parts would be helpful for customers who either know just enough to think "UV bad" or to those who wonder how narrow their filters are.

Imo a better analogy would be selling a circular saw with a safety mechanism and hiding the latter in the specsheet.


No, it's more like advertising asbestos-free talc.

Many manufacturers refuse to post third party spectral assays detailing safety and power output, it's a big problem.

This is not UVC - this is Far UVC and is blocked by the outer layer of your eyeball, so it is safe. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10087841/

You are not an expert on optical safety and should not make sweeping, generalized statements as though you were.

I am an optical engineer, but don't specialize in eye-safe studies, and I wouldn't dare make a statement without consulting safety guidelines. The eye's sensitivity to wavelengths is exponentially variable, and very specific about some cutoffs - moreso than most biological phenomena, because the limiting factors are bandgaps of molecules, not cell structures.



Retz, I was replying to the same post you were. You were not the problem.

Far-UVC and Eye Safety: Findings from a 36-Month Study - https://uvmedico.com/news/far-uvc-and-eye-safety - January 16th, 2025

> Far-UVC is a type of ultraviolet light emitted at a 222 nm wavelength that effectively deactivates microorganisms. Unlike traditional UVC light at 254 nm, Far-UVC doesn’t penetrate the outer dead layer of skin or the outer layer of the cornea, making it safe for use around people while maintaining powerful germicidal properties.

> The 222 nm wavelength is unique in its ability to decontaminate without causing harm when used within regulatory limits. Unlike longer UV wavelengths, it interacts only with the outermost layers of the skin and eyes, which naturally renew themselves. This makes it ideal for continuous decontamination in occupied spaces, as confirmed by the 36-month clinical study showing no adverse effects even after daily exposure.

References:

https://www.faruvc.org/ (disclosure: this is published by the same author as this post)

Sugihara K, Kaidzu S, Sasaki M, Ichioka S, Sano I, Hara K, Tanito M. Ocular safety of 222-nm far-ultraviolet-c full-room germicidal irradiation: A 36-month clinical observation. Photochem Photobiol. 2024 Dec 10. https://doi.org/10.1111/php.14052 Epub ahead of print. PMID: 39659140. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/php.14052

Sugihara K, Kaidzu S, Sasaki M, Tanito M. Interventional human ocular safety experiments for 222-nm far-ultraviolet-C lamp irradiation. Photochem Photobiol. 2024 Aug 19. https://doi.org/10.1111/php.14016 Epub ahead of print. PMID: 39161063. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/php.14016

Buonanno M, Hashmi R, Petersen CE, Tang Z, Welch D, Shuryak I, Brenner DJ. Wavelength-dependent DNA damage induced by single wavelengths of UV-C radiation (215 to 255 nm) in a human cornea model. Sci Rep. 2025 Jan 2;15(1):252. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-84196-4 PMID: 39747969; PMCID: PMC11696903. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-84196-4


Interesting study. Only four people though, and the lamps were "carefully calibrated" so exposure was within a safety threshold. I've seen some lamps have safety interlocks that attempt to turn off the light if people get too close. I don't think UVC will be practical for most settings as long as it needs this kind of caution.

If we could establish a higher safety threshold so that we could be sure it wouldn't harm humans even if they were very close to the lamp, that would be great. Then we could deploy it in almost any public or private space.


FYI, all three of the studies are funded by UV light manufacturers: Ushio Inc (first two, 100%), and LumenLabs (last one, partially).

I think that blog post is mostly just an AI summary of one or more of those studies.

Noted, it was included for completeness after I had independently found the resources I enumerate.

This looks like an IT role where you may have to move machines in and out of server racks.

When I worked the kitchen back in the Formula 47 days, the shortening came in 50 pound blocks that needed to be moved around and dumped into the fryers. That's what came to mind first.


Also if you were assigned to unload the trucks, standing in a walk in freezer at 0 degrees F at 5:00am, catching cases of hamburger patties and french fries off of a roller ramp and stacking them up. That was fun.

Been there, done that. It still beat reassembling the shake machine.

Excellent.

I'll use that in my travel insurance claim because I've been stuck in the USVI all week and I'm confident my carrier will deny all claims because they will claim this is a declared/undeclared war, which is not covered. If this is a DEA extradition, I'm good.


One of the few valid uses for polymarket is hedging against events that are hard to insure for. E.g. it made sense to bet on a Trump win (at least early on when odds were good) if you would lose out from him winning.


Maybe check out AirAnswers.

https://www.airanswers.com/


Everything about this website screams alternative medicine scam. "Integrative medicine" and "book a consultation" is not what you want to see on your mold testing lab's website. It means they're out to sell you things. I can almost guarantee that everybody who gets one of their test kits will get, surprise, a positive result that requires more expensive consultations and treatments from them.


One of the founders is a friend of mine that has been an IVD researcher for decades. I don't smell any scam. They are just looking for traction in the consumer and real estate sectors. They already have customers in agriculture, especially with cannabis farms looking for molds. They don't sell treatments. It's more like a radon sampler you leave in a house for a day to get a reading.


The AirAnswers website blocks visitors from the EU.

Most likely because they are in violation of GDPR and have no plan to care about data privacy. This is a really big red flag for all AirAnswers customers.


> Most likely because they are in violation of GDPR

Why do you say that’s the most likely reason? You can’t imagine other plausible reasons?


What if not GDPR would make an american B2C startup intentionally block visitors from Europe? Their investors most likely fly in and out of Europe all the time and want to show their portfolio company to their buddies. The startup's growth case is international expansion.


Because they don't understand GDPR and don't have time to figure out if and how it applies to them?


AirAnswers is not a startup as I originally thought, it seems to be a ten year old company with mature product and a set of patents they mention in marketing materials. If they block EU customers it's definitely a conscious choice.


Agreed. The software situation seems to be getting more confusing by the month. AAOS builds have suddenly jumped from 3.x to 4.x and the release notes say "various fixes". Um, like what? Was there a major update to something or not?

I'm still on a AAOS 2.x release from 2023 and will not upgrade at this point.


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

Search: