Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#51

Post by ndarwincorn »

jimmaswell wrote: post #23
r00fus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish delivery services like DoorDash would present UI to opt out of cutlery and condiments (preferably as a default). When I order a dinner for delivery to my home, I'm likely going to use my own plates/knives. If I'm ordering via phone or pickup, I can decline the default forks/chopsticks but using the UI it's nto possible without a "comment" and some restaurants don't even read that. Yes there's already wa…

Why would you rather do dishes than use free plastic cutlery/containers?

Free only if you willfully ignore obvious externalities.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#52

Post by ghostwthemost »

EliRivers wrote: post #27
jimmaswell wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you rather do dishes than use free plastic cutlery/containers?

Yet I do. I have some free plastic cutlery in the kitchen right now, yet not ten minutes ago I washed up a ceramic plate and a metal fork. With my hands. There is a dishwasher but I'm using it to store post and as a wine rack.

<3 for the idea to be using my dishwasher as a wine rack.. I despise wasting time waiting for dishes to wash in a dishwasher; noting also the time it takes to fill it before you run it can leave you without your favorite glass/dish!

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#53

Post by gringoDan »

r00fus wrote: post #16
darkpuma wrote: post #11

When did the venerable New York Times turn into a comic book? Anyway, far from being an "important job" this is an example of inexcusable waste. Casually using throw-away plastic junk for something as pointless as "separating the flavors", when I'm just going to shove both of those things into my mouth anyway without bothering to rinse out my mouth and cleanse my palate with bland crackers, is beyond the pale. With o…

I really wish delivery services like DoorDash would present UI to opt out of cutlery and condiments (preferably as a default). When I order a dinner for delivery to my home, I'm likely going to use my own plates/knives. If I'm ordering via phone or pickup, I can decline the default forks/chopsticks but using the UI it's nto possible without a "comment" and some restaurants don't even read that. Yes there's already wa…

I agree with you.

From the company's perspective, though, the number of complaints from customers who didn't get ketchup, napkins, cutlery, etc. greatly exceeds the number of complaints from people who received too many extras. Given this, drivers are trained (and primed through the rating system) to grab all of the extra items they can.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#54

Post by crooked-v »

code_duck wrote: post #25
darkpuma wrote: post #11

When did the venerable New York Times turn into a comic book? Anyway, far from being an "important job" this is an example of inexcusable waste. Casually using throw-away plastic junk for something as pointless as "separating the flavors", when I'm just going to shove both of those things into my mouth anyway without bothering to rinse out my mouth and cleanse my palate with bland crackers, is beyond the pale. With o…

Typically these are added to sushi packaged in disposable plastic trays. This makes the ‘grass’ a tiny percentage of the plastic used in the meal. The article seems to convey that plastic is considered inferior to vegetable matter for this. It is cheaper, which actually suggests less resource consumption. Plenty of plastic and other resources (petroleum itself) would be expended to provide lettuce or bamboo for this…

> It is cheaper, which actually suggests less resource consumption.

Cheaper so long as you ignore the externalities of long-term use of disposable plastic. Using a little piece of harmlessly biodegradable waxed paper instead might be "more expensive" in strict manufacturing terms but would the cheaper option if the externalities of plastic were properly taxed.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#55

Post by untog »

drusepth wrote: post #22

This literally gave me a headache to read. I assume they made the article look like a 6 year old drew/wrote it because they thought it wouldn't be long enough (page-wise) without 10000pt font? I wish there were a day to send feedback to the NYT saying "please do not do this again".

> This literally gave me a headache to read

You may want to see a doctor.

At the bottom of the article it states:

> Wendy MacNaughton is a graphic journalist based in San Francisco.

> Meanwhile: Wendy MacNaughton’s illustrated column about the big implications of seemingly small things.

So, the illustration and the words together are kind of the point (and they don't look like a 6 year old drew them, come on). There's even an interview with her here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/18/reader-center/business-se...

In any case, newspapers have always had comics. I don't really see how this is all that different.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#56

Post by tracker1 »

r00fus wrote: post #16
darkpuma wrote: post #11

When did the venerable New York Times turn into a comic book? Anyway, far from being an "important job" this is an example of inexcusable waste. Casually using throw-away plastic junk for something as pointless as "separating the flavors", when I'm just going to shove both of those things into my mouth anyway without bothering to rinse out my mouth and cleanse my palate with bland crackers, is beyond the pale. With o…

I really wish delivery services like DoorDash would present UI to opt out of cutlery and condiments (preferably as a default). When I order a dinner for delivery to my home, I'm likely going to use my own plates/knives. If I'm ordering via phone or pickup, I can decline the default forks/chopsticks but using the UI it's nto possible without a "comment" and some restaurants don't even read that. Yes there's already wa…

Grubhub has the option, but the label is counter-intuitive.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#57

Post by nkrisc »

bgun wrote: post #36
drusepth wrote: post #22

This literally gave me a headache to read. I assume they made the article look like a 6 year old drew/wrote it because they thought it wouldn't be long enough (page-wise) without 10000pt font? I wish there were a day to send feedback to the NYT saying "please do not do this again".

Reading handwriting gives you a headache?

This handwriting, in this case, yes. I found it very challenging and straining to read.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#58

Post by tracker1 »

darkpuma wrote: post #37
jimmaswell wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you rather do dishes than use free plastic cutlery/containers?

Why would you rather pollute the environment with more thrown away plastic crap than spend 20 seconds by a sink to clean a fork? Even if you recycle the plastic fork (few people bother to, since the fork is already associated with food waste they throw it into the trash along with the food waste) the energy cost of recycling that plastic is still inexcusable when you could have avoided the entire thing by simply owni…

Plastic is largely a byproduct from oil/gas processing... as long as we're using as much oil/gas as we do, plastic usage (even disposable) is already additional use out of the system. If it weren't composite plastic, it would be landfill sludge anyway.

Now, reducing the consumption of oil/gas could reduce plastic as a byproduct and increase costs in which case the market would self-correct.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#59

Post by darkpuma »

tracker1 wrote: post #58
darkpuma wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you rather pollute the environment with more thrown away plastic crap than spend 20 seconds by a sink to clean a fork? Even if you recycle the plastic fork (few people bother to, since the fork is already associated with food waste they throw it into the trash along with the food waste) the energy cost of recycling that plastic is still inexcusable when you could have avoided the entire thing by simply owni…

Plastic is largely a byproduct from oil/gas processing... as long as we're using as much oil/gas as we do, plastic usage (even disposable) is already additional use out of the system. If it weren't composite plastic, it would be landfill sludge anyway. Now, reducing the consumption of oil/gas could reduce plastic as a byproduct and increase costs in which case the market would self-correct.

If that's the direction you want to approach the situation from, then consider that by allowing the byproducts to be commercialized you are in effect subsidizing the oil and gas, and thereby encouraging their continued use.

You should also consider the unique harm plastic waste in particular does to wildlife.

Re: The $0.006 Object in a Sushi Container

#60

Post by darkpuma »

btashton wrote: post #38
hgq wrote: post #3

I hope this crap of having drawings instead of actual text never catches on.

I actually really enjoyed it as a short illustrated story. If this was written as a formal NTY article, it would have been five sentences and not particularly memorable.

>"If this was written as a formal NTY article, it would have been five sentences and not particularly memorable."

Maybe an attempt should have been made to do the story justice then. Discuss where these plastic things came from, who got the idea and when? How did their use spread? And the story doesn't even contain any hint of environmental criticism.

It's an incredibly weak article, and you can tell the editors knew that because of the vague headline they created for it, meant to make people curious. If the headline said "The $0.006 'Plastic Grass' in Your Sushi Container Is Doing an Important Job" far fewer people would have clicked on the article because 'it keeps food separate' is self-evident to anybody who's ever seen it. Better yet would be "The $0.006 'Plastic Grass' in Your Sushi Container Is For Keeping Food Separate." The brief digression into the original bamboo leaf form was slightly interesting, but this article should have gone much deeper to justify itself.

Post reply on HN