I still think the next evolution of these vapes is for a Tamagotchi-esque device to get built into them and to have the pet grow when you inhale through it. You're already walking around with enough tech - why not gamify it more?
There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
111–120 of 673 posts
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
With regards to the microwave, here’s a token “please safely discharge and double check the cap” comment! With regards to vapes, just look on the ground near a sidewalk. I find like 3 or 4 big depleted vapes a day in a US urban area. Closer to 15 or 20 in greater London in the UK.
> Closer to 15 or 20 in greater London in the UK. Weren't disposable vapes banned in UK in May 2025? Is the problem still that big?
I haven’t been back since February last year. I guess a win for some people!
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
If true I wonder if that has to do with this incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%932020_vaping_lung_...
It isn't. That was illegal marijuana vapes. The FDA just hates flavored nicotine products because they're appealing (to both adults and children), and the FDA doesn't want nicotine products to be appealing (because nicotine is perceived to be a public health problem on the scale of tobacco).
I'm kind of in favor of non-persecution OTC at a pharmacy nicotine patches.
I hate anything added to the air. Even perfumes irritate and make me sneeze in high quantity.
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#114Many countries have deposits for single use bottles/cans but an electronic device with a lipo battery is seen as perfectly fine to throw away. These things should have 100 times the deposit amount of a can of soda with mandatory requirements for retailers to take the 'empties' back.
Why stop there? I think more or less every non-durable product manufacturer (say, lifespan less than 5 years) should be required to take the product back at end of life and dispose of it properly. Trash is an enormous externality. I'm talking about plastic clamshells, container lids, "disposable" storage containers, the lot.
Mechanism design for better trash economics is hard for the same reasons that making a good linearly typed programming language is hard.
I'm not kidding :)
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#115These products are targeted towards high school teens and middle schoolers, carry a number of serious health risks, and anyone involved in making them can rot in hell.
They’re better than cigarettes, so they’re the lesser evil.
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#116[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think broadly prohibition didn't work but smoking bans do. Where "work" means fewer people smoke and passive smoke.
Prohibition works to stop some people. It doesn't stop addicts from craving and it doesn't curb the appeal of the product. People who think tobacco/nicotine bans would work are people who think they don't have any positive effect associated with them. People don't smoke because the evil cigarette companies tricked them and now they are addicted. It's a drug, it feels good to do it. A tobacco/nicotine ban will end up…
> People don't smoke because the evil cigarette companies tricked them and now they are addicted.
Isn't this exactly what happens, and why cigarette advertising is banned in many countries, and why marketing child-friendly tobacco products is commonly restricted, and why there are even regulations/guidelines around portrayal of smoking on TV in some regions?
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why stop there? I think more or less every non-durable product manufacturer (say, lifespan less than 5 years) should be required to take the product back at end of life and dispose of it properly. Trash is an enormous externality. I'm talking about plastic clamshells, container lids, "disposable" storage containers, the lot.
Trash piles is one way the actual cost of things is obfuscated and punted to future generations. A lot of people wouldn’t want this because it’s asking for stuff to become more expensive for them.
If people had to pay the true cost of their decisions up-front, we'd make a lot of different decisions.
That said, I got quite into this stuff a few years back, and determining "true" cost can be harder than it sounds. Externalities, positive or negative, have to be measured against a baseline, and deciding on where that sits is subject to opinion and bias.
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
> more or less every non-durable product manufacturer (say, lifespan less than 5 years) should be required to take the product back at end of life and dispose of it properly Yeah, we had that. Glass milk bottles and coke bottles and bulk goods sold out of barrels by the lb rather than in plastic bags. But then plastic took off and soon after Big Sugar paid a PR/lobbying firm to run a campaign with a fake Indian cryin…
It was amazing being a kid back then because you could earn some decent coin returning bottles
there are still people today who roam neighborhoods collecting bottles and cans
Re: There's a ridiculous amount of tech in a disposable vape
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nearly all the plastic humans have made still exists. The great garbage patch in the Pacific is growing fast. The plastic is ending up in everything. We need to do better. Make less waste. Use less plastic.
> Nearly all the plastic humans have made still exists. And it just doesn't matter. It's a tiny amount of mass / volume. > The great garbage patch in the Pacific is growing fast. Ocean plastics are almost entirely a consequence of (particularly Indonesian) fishing net waste, not Western consumer products disposed of in managed landfills. The "great garbage patch" is also very much overstating the scale of the problem…
Go on, give us some numbers.
Because 7Bn people multiplied by a few kg/year doesn't seem trivial to me, but sounds like you can prove it.