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

Hosting a website on a disposable vape

bogdanthegeek.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 493 posts

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#251

Post by sitzkrieg »

Someone1234 wrote: post #183
sitzkrieg wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

every smoke detector i've seen takes a 9volt battery. maybe this is true for commercial units

Most of those smoke detectors are old and already passed their 10-year-lifespan. People keep putting 9-volt batteries in them, but they shouldn't. If you go look at modern smoke detectors, many-to-most, now have a non-replaceable battery for exactly that reason.

thank you for the information, i bought some in 2023 and they all take 9v batteries so i am quite surprised by this

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#252

Post by palata »

conductr wrote: post #219
palata wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like a law saying "don't put electronics in disposable products" would do the job.

Would you include RFID tags in packaging? If so, you're law needs more nuance back to the drawing board.

Sure, there is a need to draw a line somewhere. The plastic wrapping is disposable as well, and it's not always a solution to just not have it.

But a disposable vape is very clearly on the side of "should not exist, period".

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#253

Post by datameta »

lyu07282 wrote: post #237
palata wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not mutually exclusive with what I said. Laws are not here to make money, they are here to decide what kind of society we want. If electronics is too cheap and it creates wastes, I'm of the opinion that we should make it illegal, period.

[flagged]

I was with you until the last clause of the final sentence, which I believe is against the HN guidelines.

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#254

Post by lapetitejort »

palata wrote: post #252
conductr wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you include RFID tags in packaging? If so, you're law needs more nuance back to the drawing board.

Sure, there is a need to draw a line somewhere. The plastic wrapping is disposable as well, and it's not always a solution to just not have it. But a disposable vape is very clearly on the side of "should not exist, period".

Drawing the line will be the hardest part of writing a theoretical law banning electronics in disposable products. And the line will probably be obsolete a few weeks after the law takes effect. Which is why the line should be continuously drawn by a regulatory body, which in America are being an endangered species.

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#255

Post by steezeburger »

lyu07282 wrote: post #237
palata wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not mutually exclusive with what I said. Laws are not here to make money, they are here to decide what kind of society we want. If electronics is too cheap and it creates wastes, I'm of the opinion that we should make it illegal, period.

[flagged]

Liberals generally want more regulation what are you talking about and why are you breaking the HN rules?

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#256

Post by palata »

lapetitejort wrote: post #254
palata wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, there is a need to draw a line somewhere. The plastic wrapping is disposable as well, and it's not always a solution to just not have it. But a disposable vape is very clearly on the side of "should not exist, period".

Drawing the line will be the hardest part of writing a theoretical law banning electronics in disposable products. And the line will probably be obsolete a few weeks after the law takes effect. Which is why the line should be continuously drawn by a regulatory body, which in America are being an endangered species.

Make a list of tolerated disposable electronics.

RFID chips, maybe (and even then, not sure how much they are needed). What else? I don't think that I consume disposable electronics every day...

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#257

Post by tonyhart7 »

dolmen wrote: post #218
e145bc455f1 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do i get a MSM8916 board for commercial usage at low volumes(1k)?

What about disassembling 1k dongles?

"What about disassembling 1k dongles?"

deadass this literally what they do in china, they just disassemble e-waste that don't get used and resell that oversees

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#258

Post by MattGrommes »

lyu07282 wrote: post #237
palata wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not mutually exclusive with what I said. Laws are not here to make money, they are here to decide what kind of society we want. If electronics is too cheap and it creates wastes, I'm of the opinion that we should make it illegal, period.

[flagged]

Does liberal mean something different where you live? Where I live, the right-wing republicans are the ones who are prone to letting corporations do whatever they want without regard to the people/environment getting hurt.

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#259

Post by tlavoie »

vdupras wrote: post #233
tlavoie wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DuskOS apparently runs on ARM, so one of these vape boards running FORTH would likely feel very roomy indeed.

Even for a Forth, 3KB of RAM is rather tight. Dusk OS intentionally de-prioritize compactness and it couldn't run on that amount of RAM. It can get a C compiler loaded in about 100KB of RAM, but 3? not enough to boot.

OK, so we'd play with zForth then, as BogdanTheGeek notes here. That reminds me, I have a Scamp board sitting here on my desk that I really should play with more. https://udamonic.com/what-is-a-scamp.html

Re: Hosting a website on a disposable vape

#260

Post by motorest »

staplers wrote: post #110
ffsm8 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

obsessively woke people Because most "woke" stuff is made up or blown out of proportion by people on the internet. One person might do one thing and the video/meme goes viral and people eat up the story like its some movement

> Because most "woke" stuff is made up or blown out of proportion by people on the internet.

I think you are misinterpreting the issue. I'll explain why.

There are attention-seekers which were given access to platforms with unprecedented reach. Some of these types tap into outrage culture as their engagement mechanism. This creates a vicious cycle of outrage which feeds on outputting outrageous claims and taking the resulting outrage as input to further double down on outputting outrageous claims. You then end up with opposing outrage camps of whatever subject you can think of which exist to generate a larger volume of outrage than the opposing camp.

The problem is that the terminally-online types confuse this sort of discourse with reality, and the outrageous claims as representative of what happens in real life. That's how you end up with people outraged with outrageous claims that are so outrageous to the point they are unthinkable.

Post reply on HN