Live data from Hacker News

A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

core77.com

201–210 of 217 posts

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think every woman does this regularly without pay? My entire shower takes 8 minutes as a woman.

You're faster than me, a man with short hair :). Rinse, gel, shampoo, rinse, shampoo, rinse - but the warm water also cleans the mind and soothes the soul, so I'm not in that big of a hurry to end one of the best ways to relax and unwind I have. It usually adds up to 10 minutes. I have a family member, also male with short hair, who used to take 20-30 minute showers every day, driving others in the house insane - but…

But kindergarten kids know there are tons of bugs on everything.

(The dirty little rugrats don't give a damn, but they know).

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the models being women has no impact on the subject It's part of the context; design doesn't exist in isolation. Was this prototype aimed at women? Was it just sexism or its off-shoot 'sex sells'? Or were there actually male models, but the author isn't mentioning it? I would also argue that explicitly ignoring the fact that these models were women amounts to erasure, which is probably not intended, but a consequen…

If we get back to how it was originally presented: https://www.expo70-park.jp/cause/expo/sanyo/ It was part of a world expo, and from the text we can see it was set as a futuristic vision targeted at anyone that could use the apparatus. The official description also has no focus on the models or who it should be used for in any specific detail. I get your point on the models all being women, but as that has more to d…

The machine was indeed targeted at all people, male or female. But this show was in Japan in 1970, and using attractive female models was absolutely the norm (heck, this was even the norm at computer industry trade shows I attended around ~2000; they called them "booth babes"). They would not have had any male models wearing little clothing to show off this machine.

You're right that this part of this history isn't necessarily that important to the machine being discussed in the article, but I think the other poster has a good point that this was absolutely part of the culture of the time, for good or bad, and I don't think this part of history should be ignored personally. Part of reading about something like this is to bring the reader back in time to what it was like being at this show in 1970 and seeing devices like this. Part of the experience was absolutely seeing pretty women modeling things or otherwise being part of the exhibit, because that's something that's completely different these days.

I think it might also be interesting to point out that while having "booth babes" is now out of vogue in the US, it's still the norm here in Japan. Go to an industrial trade show here and it'll be full of men walking around seeing the demos and talking to (generally male) company representatives, while there's a bunch of attractive well-dressed women standing in front handing out brochures and swag and scanning your QR code to put your email address on a mailing list, but who don't actually know anything about the company or products.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#204
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water already is an issue in many places. It's expensive and in limited supply because we can't drink salt water and storage, treatment and delivery cost money.

For the US in particular, water issues come down overwhelmingly to unfettered agricultural use, often with crops like alfalfa that are both mostly water by weight and are shipped out of the country to other places. Domestic use is only a fraction of the total.

I am pretty sure that this is true in all developed countries. When you see farming without irrigation, you will see more poverty. It is very important for human development. That said, it could sometimes be done more efficiently, but more costly.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think every woman does this regularly without pay? My entire shower takes 8 minutes as a woman.

You're faster than me, a man with short hair :). Rinse, gel, shampoo, rinse, shampoo, rinse - but the warm water also cleans the mind and soothes the soul, so I'm not in that big of a hurry to end one of the best ways to relax and unwind I have. It usually adds up to 10 minutes. I have a family member, also male with short hair, who used to take 20-30 minute showers every day, driving others in the house insane - but…

Short hair man here who regularly takes hour-long baths... ;')

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#206
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On/off would do! Just make delicate 30C all the things. If you need sterilization, use a powder that does that.

30C is a bad choice for colors/dyed fabrics. Cold wash is important.

...I wash everything on a 40*C program designed for cotton fabrics and have never had an issue with anything.

Even better, been complemented by a family member recently that they have never seen a wool blanket be washed this well... lol

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#207
post #176
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like that one guy a few years ago who wanted to replace all kitchen cupboards with dishwashers. Gonna steer clear of those directions. All things in moderation, etc.

I think this works. You can buy two small dishwashers, keep clean stuff in one, dirty in the other, then run the dirty one and swap. Or you can also just have one plate and wash it by hand after every meal.

[deleted]

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#208
post #200
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you use the same amount of soap and what nots, and get the same amount of dirt and debris off your body, the more water you use during a shower, the easier it is to process the water at your sewage treatment plant, if your waste water is treated. If your waste water isn't treated, and is discharged to water ways as-is, the more water you use, the more dilute your pollution. If you've got a septic system, I d…

> [...] the easier it is to process the water at your sewage treatment plant, if your waste water is treated. It's easier to process per litre, but it is easier to process in absolute numbers?

Part of processing is often adding clean water; to the extent that you've already done it upstream, the treatment plant can add less.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#209
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you google "average bath size" you find 30-70 gallons. 50 is right in the middle.

I suspect those numbers are for filling the tub to the brim? Is that normal?

Are you a manager?

It seems like you can answer these questions for yourself rather than asking a stranger on the internet.

Let us know what you find.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#210
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't dump everything to the soil and say "that's your problem now, nature. Cope!". Nature couldn't care less. Nature works on much larger timescales than humans. It's the humans that are impacted. Just like climate change, plastic, and all other environmental issues -- humans are paying (or will pay) the price, not nature.

It depends on what you mean by 'nature'. On a large enough scale, 'nature' doesn't care whether earth is hit by a moon sized asteroid, either.

I think we’re in agreement :)
Post reply on HN