Live data from Hacker News

A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

core77.com

211–217 of 217 posts

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#211
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying cars just look cool in movies and immediately take the scene to the future . Movies don't need to concern themselves with practicality too much.

Exactly why the cybertruck should never have been something more than a concept car.

[dead]

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A nominal water aerator limits water around 5L-6L/min levels. For every minute I don't use the water, I spend approximately two full kettles of water. With every 5L of water I can - Cook 4 servings (~400 grams) of pasta. - Brew 5L of tea/coffee - Water all the plants at home two times. - Possibly wash most of my handwash-only dishes in one go. - etc. So it's not not meaningfully wasteful . However, I can't turn off t…

Water is by far the most abundant resource on the planet (70+% of earth is water), and we have methods to remove salt and contaminants from almost all of it. We can even turn urine into drinking water. I wouldn’t worry about wasting it. We’ll die from something else long before water becomes an issue.

The issue in cities where most people live is only sometimes about the actual quantity of water available, but the cost and capacity of infrastructure to collect, treat, and distribute the water.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#213
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, there are a lot of people that use the car when they can not use it, thats still most of the car traffic. so, do you have any data to back up that assertion? (I won't claim that I have any favorable to my argument, just the observation that driving in and Paris around Paris is pretty bad) > For a lot of destination you can take 2-3 differentes routes. most alternative routes usually take longer and end up cong…

The average is still 1.3 person per car, if you get outside a little you will see tons of single person in cars, and not in minitruck like artisans. https://www.paris.fr/pages/le-bilan-des-deplacements-a-paris... Indicate 13% of the traffic is for utilitary vehicule. This number include people taking their utilitary vehicule for personal reason. 50% is for personal vehicules. Also, why were you driving around Paris ?…

But I don't see anything in the document that shows that people are using personal vehicles for deplacements they could have easily been made with public transportation. Which was your original point that I disagreeing with: people aren't 'brainwashed by cars', but rather can't practically use another way.

Also, according to one of the linked pdf, cars in Paris are barely for Paris-Paris movement, but more for Paris-suburbs, which is still the biggest weakness of the public transportation network.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#214
post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average is still 1.3 person per car, if you get outside a little you will see tons of single person in cars, and not in minitruck like artisans. https://www.paris.fr/pages/le-bilan-des-deplacements-a-paris... Indicate 13% of the traffic is for utilitary vehicule. This number include people taking their utilitary vehicule for personal reason. 50% is for personal vehicules. Also, why were you driving around Paris ?…

But I don't see anything in the document that shows that people are using personal vehicles for deplacements they could have easily been made with public transportation. Which was your original point that I disagreeing with: people aren't 'brainwashed by cars', but rather can't practically use another way. Also, according to one of the linked pdf, cars in Paris are barely for Paris-Paris movement, but more for Paris-…

If you need to go east-west of paris suburb, that's 1h in car, the same time in public transit. If you need to go north-south of paris suburb, that's 1h in car and 30 mins in public transit.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#215
post #208
post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] 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.

Maybe. Though when you add clean water upstream that usually means water clean enough to be fit for drinking (because that what comes out of your tap.)

When they dilute at the treatment plant, they can use somewhat dirtier clean water.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#216
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This was a polite way of me telling you that I don't think that's normal, and that quoting the bathtub max capacity is fairly meaningless.

Re: A washing machine for human beings, from 1970

#217
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This was a polite way of me telling you that I don't think that's normal, and that quoting the bathtub max capacity is fairly meaningless.

It would have been more polite to offer the actual stat. Do the research and come to the table with that in hand.

I would have quoted that if it were easy to find, or quantify. It's not. I encourage you to do so, put the work in, and let us know what you find.

Its not that I don't agree with you, it's that I want you to do the work for yourself.

Post reply on HN