Apple Faceshield • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple Faceshield

#381

Post by dillonmckay » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:33 PM UTC

uxp wrote: post #153

epicureanideal wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that they probably would cost $1 to $5, and take almost no space to store, it wouldn't be a terrible thing for people to have a few if they want them. How many people have a $20 multi-tool that stays in a drawer somewhere? Or some bags of rice "just in case" that end up getting thrown in the trash after being forgotten about in the cabinet for 5 years? It may not be a terrible thing if some percentage of people…

It's not about the money. PPE like face shields are specifically used during procedures that involve significant bodily fluid, like intubation, which is the process of pulling or pushing a tube down a patient's esophagus. Going to to the grocery store does not require a shield. Secondly disposable medical equipment, when used properly within a healthcare environment, is extremely wasteful. For most consumable items u…

I used a face-shield in October when I was using an HVLP paint sprayer indoors, so there are definite uses besides the current pandemic.

It definitely cost more than a few dollars and is not disposable.

Also, according to the documentation, these are re-usable and can be sanitized w/ alcohol or H2O2.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#382

Post by roenxi » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:34 PM UTC

mbreese wrote: post #373

roenxi wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone is facing me and a stream of airborne particles hits a plastic shield instead of streaming out to me, it seems pretty likely that I will be protected. I'm certainly open to the idea that fluid mechanics are complicated and somehow air currents are going to do unhelpful things, but until I find someone with a paper on the topic I'd much rather be talking to someone wearing a face shield than not. Plus obvio…

> it seems pretty likely that I will be protected And you'd be wrong. Sure, a face shield will protect you from liquid streaming out at you (partially). However, it isn't a liquid that you need to protect yourself from in this instance... it is aerosolized particles. And those travel in the air. So when you breathe in, that air can and will move around the face shield. The sibling comment about smoke moving is exactl…

You say that with great confidence and a lack of sources; and I'm guessing we are equally ignorant on the actual physics of how small droplets move.

The details aren't clear on how the virus is spreading. The virus might have multiple modes of transmission. Closing 2 of them reliably a great deal. There are important things to do with "catching COVID" that aren't binary; starting doses likely matter as well.

I'd rather not talk to you in person if you aren't going to cover your face, tyvm :)

Re: Apple Faceshield

#383

Post by lonelappde » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:35 PM UTC

ricardobeat wrote: post #317

prostheticvamp wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because best data to date is that sterilization procedures damage the mask in ways that render it unsafe. When someone comes up with data finding a safe way to do so, the masks won’t go in the trash. In the meantime, I’d you have the masks to spare, you -should- be using them safely. Masks are pointless if you use them in a way that will get you sick.

Maybe someone like the CDC? https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/ppe-strategy/d...

You seem confused. This is a complicated topic. That CDC says sterilizing masks is not a safe practice, but in a crisis it's better than having no mask.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#384

Post by samatman » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:35 PM UTC

docbrown wrote: post #35

woofie11 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was hoping everyone in the US might be able to buy one. Ideally, they'd be cheap enough for municipalities to buy and distribute.

> I was hoping everyone in the US might be able to buy one. This burst of PPE being produced in mass quantities are and were never meant to go in the hands of the general public (i.e., non healthcare workers), though. The general public does not need to be walking around with a full face shield, that’ll be a waste of materials, time and money, unfortunately.

The general public includes about a hundred thousand people whose job puts them in touch with everyone: mostly checkout clerks.

They are at great risk for infection and for being vectors of infection, and are performing an essential service.

These face masks are a great piece of technology for them: effective, reusable, and comfortable enough to wear for a full shift.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#385

Post by samatman » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:38 PM UTC

andy_ppp wrote: post #184

wlesieutre wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 16 inch switched back to a scissor mechanism. I do like the butterfly keys though, it’s only the reliability issues that make them problematic for me. Until keys started being flaky I was perfectly happy with it.

Ah sorry my comment is ambiguous; I’m saying I 100% prefer butterfly keys over the new 16 inch keyboard. I’m sure I’ll get used to it though.

You're not alone, I had a mostly-broken left command key for the better part of a year so I despise the butterfly keys.

Nonetheless, when I switched to a 16 inch it felt mushy and weird, and that's with almost a decade using the previous scissor keyboards, which feel effectively identical.

I got used to it pretty quick though, and you couldn't pay me to go back.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#386

Post by wlesieutre » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:39 PM UTC

andy_ppp wrote: post #184

wlesieutre wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 16 inch switched back to a scissor mechanism. I do like the butterfly keys though, it’s only the reliability issues that make them problematic for me. Until keys started being flaky I was perfectly happy with it.

Ah sorry my comment is ambiguous; I’m saying I 100% prefer butterfly keys over the new 16 inch keyboard. I’m sure I’ll get used to it though.

Gotcha. I do like typing on the butterfly keyboard. It's just problematic that keys will randomly not respond or send multiple strokes, and can't be fixed short of taking the entire computer apart.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#387

Post by raisedbyninjas » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:39 PM UTC

ericflo wrote: post #332

gambler wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You're saying to literally wrap your face in plastic Are you trolling or serious? I said forehead, not face. Obviously, do not wrap plastic foil around your face.

If it's around your forehead, how is it shielding you?

Plastic food wrap in my country comes in rolls 12-24" wide. This is more than enough to cover your forehead down past your lower jaw.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#388

Post by dillonmckay » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:39 PM UTC

mbreese wrote: post #323

roenxi wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not about the money. PPE like face shields are specifically used during procedures that involve... There is currently a global pandemic afoot that is spread by droplets expelled from people's mouth and nose. What a tool was being used for 2 months ago isn't relevant; the situation is different now. > Everybody stocking a "handful" of PPE isn't a scalable solution to maintain a national supply. If masks or face…

> What a tool was being used for 2 months ago isn't relevant It is very relevant. These face shields wouldn't protect anyone from airborne/aerosol pathogens or viruses. They have a very specific purpose and that isn't one of them. If you're talking about adapting construction grade shields (like used for painting, etc) for medical use -- sure. But you aren't going to use a face shield as a replacement for a face mask…

Nobody is advocating for a face-shield as a replacement for an N-95 mask, but using them together, would reduce the odds of infection.

According to the MIT paper, a typical sneeze will travel over 20 feet.

Additionally, there is mention of the velocity of the particles may be able to penetrate the mask, so a face-shield could help with that, too.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#389

Post by smabie » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:40 PM UTC

Octoth0rpe wrote: post #158

bluehex wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not grateful as well?

I think you _can_ be grateful, but I understand why people are hesitant to be 'grateful' when companies do things that are clearly in the company's best interest anyway, setting aside any social benefits. Be 'glad' when a company does something that helps society even if there are selfish motives. Be 'grateful' when a company does something that helps society when there's no obvious selfish motive. Hope that makes se…

I mean, companies shouldn't be doing anything out of the goodness of their hearts, since they have a duty to shareholders to maximize the long-term value of the business. Of course, helping people and helping yourself are often aligned.

Re: Apple Faceshield

#390

Post by elsonrodriguez » Tue, Apr 07, 2020, 10:42 PM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #370

blhack wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is all great in theory, but in reality there are hundreds of thousands of these parts being delivered to hospitals right now, and they came from lots of people with lots of 3D printers at their houses, hackerspaces, and printer farms. We can definitely talk about what would have been better and more efficient, but in the meantime people need this stuff today .

It's not a zero sum game. It makes tons of sense for people with 3d printers to print as many as they can now because they can get them in the hands of people now . But once dedicated manufacturing comes online, that capability is going to be quickly become irrelevant. The comment I replied to seemed to suggest individuals were printing 10s of thousands of these per day which is clearly not true. Thousands of individ…

> But once dedicated manufacturing comes online, that capability is going to be quickly become irrelevant.

You're right, but after this emergency all those production lines will be retooled to things that are more profitable.

The upside is that this pandemic has basically created a grass roots production network to fill gaps that will always exist in traditional manufacturing.

If the next world-wide issue can be at least partially mitigated by small plastic parts, that gap will again be filled by 3d printers, and we're all better off for it.