Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#51

Post by gwbas1c » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:40 PM UTC

dandelany wrote: post #30

gwbas1c wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To put it in perspective, people used to consume mercury-based medicine. I'm sure if the glass is thick enough, the risk of a spill (and your health) will be generally managed.

People used to do a lot of stupid stuff. If you live alone and are conscious of the risk, sure, this is not a terribly dangerous item if you're safe about it. If you live with pets or children, it's entirely sensible to be concerned about the risk. A mercury spill can seep between the floorboards and contaminate your house with volatile mercury vapors for years to come if not properly managed.

A few hours after I wrote the above comment, my wife dropped a thick bottle of nail polish and it shattered.

That being said, life without any risk is boring.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#52

Post by SAI_Peregrinus » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:44 PM UTC

throwway120385 wrote: post #4

ambicapter wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> naming the first "battery" (out of the concept of lined-up artillery) That's an amazing fun fact.

Another fun fact is that it was impossible to deduce from any of Ben Franklin's experiments what material was transferred and what material remained in place to give rise to "charge" as we think of it. So he picked a convention that we've continued to use even after we learned that his negative charges were the material that gets transferred by friction.

On the plus side, in electroplating the positive ions are what actually moves. So in the experiments where you can visually see something move from one terminal to the other the conventional current direction is obviously correct.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#53

Post by WalterBright » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 9:38 PM UTC

Teever wrote: post #49

Teever wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walter, you sort of gave the game away with this last post when you wrote 'It is wrong that Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington kept slaves.' It was wrong, but by whose standards exactly? Not the standards of the time as half the colonies, by your own account, thought it was fine. So you're judging them by a fixed standard that sits above the mores of 1787 and is the exact thing you spent the entire thread insisting…

GEORGE WASHINGTON The first President of the United States of America, George Washington, was also a wealthy Virginian plantation owner with 8000 acres of land and the people that he forced to work on it. Washington started with ten slaves inherited from his father and aggressively scaled up his operation as a young man with most of the growth happening largely through birth -- 293 child slaves were born at the Mount…

> I'm not quite sure why you are so insistent about this subject Walter. You could just as easily say that these were men who did great things that people around the world still benefit from, and who also subjugated human beings for profit.

I agree with that. What I'm saying is people should be judged based on the mores of their times, not our mores.

BTW, Washington also treated some of his troops cruelly. But he spent years as a British officer, and that's how the officers did things. Again, it's the context of the times.

> Those aren't the actions of a man whose hands are tied.

I never suggested he was obliged to keep his slaves.

The existence of slavery in those days is evidence that society had not yet deemed it unacceptable. The southern states made it clear that they would not join the union if it meant ending slavery.

Re: Mechanical light bulb from 1675 [video]

#54

Post by WalterBright » Fri, Jul 24, 2026, 3:10 AM UTC

Teever wrote: post #48

WalterBright wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is that really how you think? Nope. It is wrong that Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington kept slaves. But they grew up in a society that accepted slavery, and so harshly judging them as evil is unjust. But they did make the leap of getting rid of the notion of nobility, and separating church and state. In that they rose above what was the accepted norm, implemented their new ideas. Those were huge changes for their…

Walter, you sort of gave the game away with this last post when you wrote 'It is wrong that Franklin, Jefferson, and Washington kept slaves.' It was wrong, but by whose standards exactly? Not the standards of the time as half the colonies, by your own account, thought it was fine. So you're judging them by a fixed standard that sits above the mores of 1787 and is the exact thing you spent the entire thread insisting…

> Walter, you sort of gave the game away

There is no game. I've been clear and forthright with my statements here.

> Why the thing which you value most Walter -- money

A rather presumptive statement, don't you think?

I'm here to discuss ideas, not my or your personality.