General > General Technical Chat

Coin cell safety improvement a world first in Australia

<< < (23/26) > >>

james_s:

--- Quote from: tooki on December 28, 2020, 10:47:10 am ---I can tell you’ve neither read the law itself, nor did you carefully read anything I wrote. Nor have you given two seconds’ thought as to why the law was needed: regulations occur because lots of people don’t act responsibly. If they did, we wouldn’t need regulations. Manufacturers of gas cans shouldn’t have needed to be told to design the canisters such as to not leak, and to be made of materials the gas doesn’t permeate. Consumers shouldn’t have needed to be told to close them. Yet every garage or shed holding an old style gas can constantly reeked of gasoline, indicating ongoing vapor leakage.

--- End quote ---

I don't have to because it's irrelevant. Look, the law may be well intentioned, and if you read it, it may sound very reasonable but the bottom line is that the result of the law is that a majority of the products on the market which are fully compliant with the law and able to be sold are garbage. Not only are they difficult to use and not fit for the purpose for which they are sold, but they result in a large increase in the amount of raw gasoline and vapors spilled into the environment, and reduced safety because of the way they spill gas all over the place. Blame the manufactures of the cans if you want but that's ignoring the FACT that these problems did not exist prior to the law. It's absolutely irrelevant what the law intended, what problem it was meant to solve, and who the blame is placed on after the fact because the actual result is the problem is worse than it was before. If a container can be sold that is compliant with the law yet results in an increase in spilled fuel and other problems then it's a bad law, period. The problem with the whole thing is people with your attitude who perceive a problem and believe the law is good because it "does something" about the problem, while ignoring the mountains of evidence demonstrating that most of the products on the market which comply with the law do not actually solve the problem, they simply comply with the law as written. What part of this are you failing to grasp? Bad law, end of story.

james_s:

--- Quote from: NANDBlog on December 28, 2020, 09:38:08 am ---Have you ever stepped outside your country? Your state? Or, you know, see any documentaries on Fox news about other countries?

--- End quote ---

Yes, I've traveled extensively throughout the Western half of Canada, I've been to several parts of England, I've never watched Fox news in my life. Assume much?

And why are you so obsessed with a fucking screw? Can you honestly say with a straight face that mandating a screw makes children safer? I knew how to remove screws by the time I was 3 years old, they're not an obstacle for kids, they're just a nuisance for me. Can you truly not understand how annoying it is to be treated like a child and have a nanny state government trying to micromanage every detail of your life? Does it make you feel smug and superior to mock others for not wanting to be told what to do? 

Another one for my ignore list...

Monkeh:

--- Quote from: james_s on December 30, 2020, 12:16:58 am ---
--- Quote from: NANDBlog on December 28, 2020, 09:38:08 am ---Have you ever stepped outside your country? Your state? Or, you know, see any documentaries on Fox news about other countries?

--- End quote ---

Yes, I've traveled extensively throughout the Western half of Canada, I've been to several parts of England, I've never watched Fox news in my life. Assume much?

And why are you so obsessed with a fucking screw? Can you honestly say with a straight face that mandating a screw makes children safer? I knew how to remove screws by the time I was 3 years old, they're not an obstacle for kids, they're just a nuisance for me. Can you truly not understand how annoying it is to be treated like a child and have a nanny state government trying to micromanage every detail of your life? Does it make you feel smug and superior to mock others for not wanting to be told what to do? 

Another one for my ignore list...

--- End quote ---

Does it make you feel smug and superior to mock others for not sharing your belief or your violent opposition to something which really doesn't hurt you? Stop choosing to be offended and get a grip.

tooki:

--- Quote from: james_s on December 30, 2020, 12:14:51 am ---
--- Quote from: tooki on December 28, 2020, 10:47:10 am ---I can tell you’ve neither read the law itself, nor did you carefully read anything I wrote. Nor have you given two seconds’ thought as to why the law was needed: regulations occur because lots of people don’t act responsibly. If they did, we wouldn’t need regulations. Manufacturers of gas cans shouldn’t have needed to be told to design the canisters such as to not leak, and to be made of materials the gas doesn’t permeate. Consumers shouldn’t have needed to be told to close them. Yet every garage or shed holding an old style gas can constantly reeked of gasoline, indicating ongoing vapor leakage.

--- End quote ---

I don't have to because it's irrelevant.

--- End quote ---
But it's not irrelevant. Examining it is necessary to truly understand the problem. Your "solution" of just whining and telling everyone they're wrong doesn't actually solve anything. It doesn't solve the vapor escape problems that existed before, it doesn't solve the usability problems with the shitty cans, and it doesn't solve the vapor escape caused by the shitty cans' shitty usability. All your attitude does is try and shut down discussion, and cause animosity.



--- Quote from: james_s on December 30, 2020, 12:14:51 am ---Look, the law may be well intentioned, and if you read it, it may sound very reasonable but the bottom line is that the result of the law is that a majority of the products on the market which are fully compliant with the law and able to be sold are garbage. Not only are they difficult to use and not fit for the purpose for which they are sold, but they result in a large increase in the amount of raw gasoline and vapors spilled into the environment, and reduced safety because of the way they spill gas all over the place. Blame the manufactures of the cans if you want but that's ignoring the FACT that these problems did not exist prior to the law. It's absolutely irrelevant what the law intended, what problem it was meant to solve, and who the blame is placed on after the fact because the actual result is the problem is worse than it was before. If a container can be sold that is compliant with the law yet results in an increase in spilled fuel and other problems then it's a bad law, period.

--- End quote ---
If you'd read the law, you'd know that if those cans are unable to be used without spilling gas, then they aren't compliant with the law (neither as intended nor as written), and the manufacturer needs to be taken to task.

Remember: I'm not saying that all failed laws are written well. Many aren't. But this one just isn't an example of a badly designed or badly written law.




--- Quote from: james_s on December 30, 2020, 12:14:51 am ---The problem with the whole thing is people with your attitude who perceive a problem and believe the law is good because it "does something" about the problem, while ignoring the mountains of evidence demonstrating that most of the products on the market which comply with the law do not actually solve the problem, they simply comply with the law as written. What part of this are you failing to grasp?

--- End quote ---
Didja actually read my posts? Obviously not:

I am absolutely not a blind "well it does something" supporter of bad laws. I expressly said that if a law is not working as intended, then it should be amended or rescinded. Like… even if you don't agree with my ultimate conclusion, you need to be respectful and fair, and give me credit for the things I said that basically agree with you:

--- Quote from: tooki on December 27, 2020, 12:17:01 am ---I do, however, agree that regulations need to be done right, and that means a) making a sincere effort to weigh the benefits of the change against the negative consequences, and b) being willing to quickly and decisively rescind or modify a regulation if it has unforeseen negative consequences. But the latter is something governments in USA are almost never willing to do. So bad regulation, instead of being rescinded, gets more and more crap slathered onto it, with lawmakers digging in their heels rather than simply saying "hey, this didn't work out, so let's undo it, regroup, and do something else".

--- End quote ---
You certainly cannot claim that I think "eh, the law tried, that's good enough" even distantly agrees with my views.




--- Quote from: james_s on December 30, 2020, 12:14:51 am ---Bad law, end of story.

--- End quote ---
Uhhhh, no. Bad manufacturers, "end of story."

(Except that I absolutely don't think that "end of story" is how one should end things like that, because that doesn't resolve the problem. The story should end with the manufacturers being held accountable and/or the law being amended. Foot stomping and whining don't accomplish anything.)

tooki:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on December 29, 2020, 05:34:31 pm ---
--- Quote from: tooki on December 29, 2020, 01:47:55 pm ---
--- Quote from: Zero999 on December 29, 2020, 10:34:29 am ---
--- Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on December 29, 2020, 12:18:22 am ---Any of you who fully understand the consuption of beer from the glass will understand the sacrilege of not rinsing out the detergent.

--- End quote ---
I don't touch alcohol, nasty stuff, so no, I don't understand what you mean with that comment.

--- End quote ---
Alcohol is fine when enjoyed in moderation. No need for judginess.
--- End quote ---
Don't be overly sensitive. It's my opinion. I don't enjoy the effects of alcohol, even in moderation. It's truly nasty stuff.

--- End quote ---
Then you say "I don't like it". Saying that something is "nasty" (as in, an inherent trait of the thing, as opposed to your opinion on it) is just plain rude.



--- Quote from: Zero999 on December 29, 2020, 05:34:31 pm ---
--- Quote ---Nope, I'm actually on the bottom floor.
--- End quote ---
I bet there's a fairly long drop before the sewer, otherwise it wouldn't flush so well. When the toilet flushes, the inertia and siphon effect of the water passing down the long pipe, helps suck the rest of the contents of the toilet bowl out. If you've got a short pipe going into the sewer, it won't flush so well.

--- End quote ---
I don't believe the physics of siphons work that way. Inertia has nothing to do with it. But moreover, my toilet (like all of them I have ever seen here in Switzerland) is a non-siphon toilet. In my case (like in essentially all modern toilets here) it's a washdown toilet.


Assuming your country flag is correct, you're in the UK, where washdown toilets are also the norm. True siphon toilets (the dominant type in my home country of USA) are entirely different beasts.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod