<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: schiffern</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=schiffern</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 11:42:41 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=schiffern" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yes I just mean the more expensive tea on the shelf. On cheaper SKUs they're trying to cut cost so they use normal tea bags. The plastic sachets were a trend for a couple years but hopefully most brands have switched away.<p>That study is interesting because they used SEM to image the plastic afterward, and you can see how the plastic surface has literally been <i>torn up</i> on a microscopic level simply by touching hot water.<p>Plastic has a low-energy surface, which means it doesn't take much energy to tear it apart. Even Brownian motion is enough, which is pretty wild.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 14:40:18 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47731055</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47731055</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47731055</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The kicker? It's only on high-end tea, because it's <i>more expensive</i> than regular tea bags.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 14:22:13 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730884</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730884</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730884</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Agreed. MERV 11-14 can be <i>far</i> more effective than HEPA.<p>If you need to filter "one and done" (like pumping air into a hospital operating room), that's where you need HEPA. Most home air purifiers mix the clean air back into the same room, so MERV is closer to the ideal sweet spot.<p>It's also important to buy <i>reputable</i> brands of MERV filter, ideally ones which have a large number of folds (surface area) like the 3M 1900 MPR. In recent testing about half of filter brands scored well below their claimed MERV rating:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKAVek1YaSQ" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKAVek1YaSQ</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 14:13:04 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730801</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730801</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730801</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>That helps for pollution that comes from outside (traffic, pollen, wood smoke), but most of the microplastics are generated by moving/wearing synthetic textiles inside the home.<p>Positive pressure systems are great, love 'em, but there's a <i>quantitative</i> mismatch in this case. Above ~1 ACH your HVAC costs will go through the roof (even with heat/humidity recovery), but for effective filtration you need 6-8 ACH to catch the larger dust before your lungs do.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 13:46:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730568</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730568</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730568</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>A false sense of security can be <i>worse</i> than nothing, because it prevents you from seeking out actually effective options.<p>I too would like such a "shy" air purifier, but manufacturers always seem to go the other way: when occupancy is detected they <i>increase</i> the fan speed.<p>Best option IMO is just to get an air purifier with a good CADR-to-decibel ratio and then (again) size it correctly. A surprisingly good option is something called the Airfanta 3 Pro, which is basically like those wildfire filter boxes except it uses PC fans.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 13:43:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730545</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730545</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730545</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><p><pre><code>  >microwaving in plastic bowls
</code></pre>
More generally, never let hot food touch plastics. The high temperature is what damages the plastic surface, not anything special about microwaves.<p>For instance the same thing happens with plastic tea bags in hot water: <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0045653524026377" rel="nofollow">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004565352...</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 13:39:58 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730517</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730517</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730517</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "How to breathe in fewer microplastics in your home"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><a href="https://archive.ph/UcCq6" rel="nofollow">https://archive.ph/UcCq6</a><p>Saying HEPA filters remove "99%" of microplastic is pretty misleading.<p>Most of the mass in airborne particles is in the larger sizes of visible dust. However these particles will "fall out" before they reach the air purifier.<p>The best advice isn't "use only HEPA" or (an odd one, from this article) "use filters with multiple stages," it's to have an air purifier where the <i>Clean Air Delivery Rate (CADR) is matched to room size</i>. For filtering large dust you need a lot of air flow, aim for 6-8 Air Changes per Hour (ACH).<p>Also the CADR on the box is always on the highest fan speed, which is always way too loud for constant use in an occupied room. So ideally you want to size the air purifiers assuming a fan speed generating 45 decibels or less. HouseFresh is an excellent review site that publishes these numbers.<p>Most people dramatically undersize their air purifiers, or run them on a very low fan setting, and then they throw up their hands and say that air purifiers don't work.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 13:30:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730432</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730432</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47730432</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "A million new SpaceX satellites will destroy the night sky"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Transport doesn't "go to zero." Terrestrial transportation is already fully reusable, so it doesn't have the same cost headroom for improvement vs orbital launch.<p>Thanks, I really needed this post. I'm saving this for when people inevitably try to re-write history by saying "we didn't need Elon, because did anyone <i>really</i> doubted  space-based AI would be the winner?? It was obvious all along because blah blah... <insert 20/20 hindsight>"</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2026 10:02:10 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647816</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647816</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647816</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Electrical transformer manufacturing is throttling the electrified future"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><p><pre><code>  >Here's an AI-generated fake video of large transformer manufacturing. It's about half wrong.[2] But right enough to be worth watching.
</code></pre>
Which half?<p>You probably got a lot from this video, because you know which half is wrong. I'd probably get <i>negative knowledge</i> from this video, because I don't.<p>This may be a new incarnation of the "curse of knowledge," where one over-estimates the value of AI slop if they already know the subject...</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2026 09:50:15 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647754</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647754</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647754</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Open source CAD in the browser (Solvespace)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><p><pre><code>  >that’s not good enough for real world manufacturing and simulation
</code></pre>
Dumb question: why not?? It's working for that guy and his 3D printer apparently, which is "real world" (though one could certainly argue it's not proper "manufacturing").<p>In theory pi has infinite places, sure . In real-world practice (vs math-lympics) you never need more than 100 digits, and indeed you rarely ever actually need more than 5.<p>Why doesn't it work to "just" throw more bit-width and more polygons at it? Who out there <i>actually</i> needs more than that (vs who just thinks they do)?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2026 08:37:22 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647375</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647375</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47647375</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Open source CAD in the browser (Solvespace)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This is why geometric kernels are the gateway to madness. ;)  Thanks for the clarification.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 14:20:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47601322</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47601322</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47601322</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "A million new SpaceX satellites will destroy the night sky"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>With today's very high orbital launch costs, it's trivially true that the desert is cheaper.<p>With very low orbital launch costs, it's trivially true that space would become cheaper. Solar panels have no atmosphere/night/seasons and are always pointed at the Sun, no cover glass for hail, no 24h battery either. Radiators are 1/10th the area of PV which is very doable.<p>The question is, where exactly is the tipping point between those two extremes, and will Starship reach that? Opinions on this naturally bifurcate depending on one's feelings about Elon Musk.<p>I wouldn't be too worried because SpaceX engineers put a great deal of effort into reflection mitigation, including developing a space-rated mirror able to have an RF signal fire transparently through it.[1] The strategy is to bounce all the sunlight away from Earth, which makes satellites darker than even (hypothetically) covering a satellite in Vantablack.<p>[1] <a href="https://youtu.be/MNc5yCYth5E?t=1717" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/MNc5yCYth5E?t=1717</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 13:25:45 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47600552</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47600552</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47600552</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Open source CAD in the browser (Solvespace)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><p><pre><code>  >corners where 3 fillets meet
</code></pre>
I would imagine there are a few different possible options (preferably a settable parameter):<p>* Intersection. Conceptually the simplest, the chamfers would just be joined by the solid addition of all three fillet surfaces, creating three new sharp corner edges  that meet at a single vertex.<p>* Rolling sphere. Imagine an idealized spherical "thumb" smoothing out caulk. The middle would be joined by a new spherical concave surface, tangent to all three fillets. Also generalizable to convex fillet intersections, smoothing out sharp corners.<p>* NURBS, with adjustable parameters or even control points, eg  when you want a little more "meat" in a corners for strength of a part.<p>* Flat corners, for chamfers (what do do when N>3 corners meet?)<p>* What else?<p>Ideally you might be able set the corner type separately for inside vs outside corners, or on a per-vertex or (in the most granular case) per-incoming-edge basis? Is that crazy?<p>How do saddle corners[0] behave? Does it just "work out" and (by some miracle) uniquely resolve for all permutations and corner types?<p>It certainly gets complex quickly!<p>[0] center, where the cubes all intersect <a href="https://entitleblogdotorg3.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/escher-metamorphose.png" rel="nofollow">https://entitleblogdotorg3.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/esche...</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 06:43:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47597660</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47597660</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47597660</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Tell HN: Chrome says "suspicious download" when trying to download yt-dlp"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>By the same standard, Chrome itself is "a tool to download files from Google's servers." Chrome doesn't <i>only</i> download from Google's servers, but the same thing applies to yt-dlp.<p>I'm equally not "surprised" by their bad behavior, but that shouldn't stop us from condemning Google for unethically misleading people and engaging in browser monopoly abuse.<p>---<p><i>EDIT:</i> holding up (hilariously) <i>RIAA lawyers</i> as ethical role models only proves my point, thanks.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 15:48:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47589169</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47589169</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47589169</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Another Starlink satellite has inexplicably exploded"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>A rate of one collision per year per 10,000 satellites, in low orbits where debris is quickly removed by drag, is perfectly manageable.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 14:44:30 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47588101</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47588101</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47588101</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Another Starlink satellite has inexplicably exploded"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Or just stochastic impacts with debris too small to track. Objects >1 cm are fatal to satellites, but ground radar can only track objects 10 cm or larger.<p>The two scenarios are pretty easy to distinguish. If the explosion occurred near the poles (above 75° latitude), it's most likely a random debris strike.<p>Sure enough, despite the fact that only 2.1% of Starlink satellites[0] are in orbits that go above 75° N/S, Starlink-34343 was one of those satellites.[1]<p>[0] <a href="https://planet4589.org/space/con/star/stats.html" rel="nofollow">https://planet4589.org/space/con/star/stats.html</a><p>[1] <a href="https://www.amsat-uk.n2yo.net/satellite/?s=64157" rel="nofollow">https://www.amsat-uk.n2yo.net/satellite/?s=64157</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 14:29:34 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47587918</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47587918</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47587918</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Nitrile and latex gloves may cause overestimation of microplastics"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I see you still don't say microplastics are rare. Violently agreeing with each-other, it seems. ;)<p>Synthetic textiles (clothes, upholstery, carpet, dryer exhaust, washer drainage) are of course the biggest culprits, with most of that trapped indoors with us, or co-located with human activity. If you have a dog that may change the mass fraction, but the MP exposure remains the same (or worse due to additional wear).<p>Road and tire wear is the other big contributor, again co-localized with population density. That's one of those nuanced cases, because a large fraction of the tire mass is actually natural rubber. The synthetic additives make it categorized as 100% plastic, but this may not accurately reflect reality in terms of the chemistry or hazard-based analysis.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 03:47:32 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47582525</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47582525</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47582525</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Nitrile and latex gloves may cause overestimation of microplastics"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><i>Plastics aren't just plastic</i>, unfortunately.<p>Plastics are chemical "sponges" that will soak up pollutants over time from the environment (brominated fire retardants, bisphenols, PBCs, pesticides, phthalates, heavy metals, etc) and deliver them in a concentrated dose into the body.<p><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389420319026" rel="nofollow">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030438942...</a><p><a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Verla-Wirnkor-2/publication/335395730_Microplastic-Toxic_Chemical_Interaction_A_Review_Study_on_Quantified_Levels_Mechanism_and_Implication/links/5e762a2592851cf2719bf694/Microplastic-Toxic-Chemical-Interaction-A-Review-Study-on-Quantified-Levels-Mechanism-and-Implication.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Verla-Wirnkor-2/publica...</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:55:34 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568744</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568744</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568744</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Nitrile and latex gloves may cause overestimation of microplastics"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Thanks and noted, I'm happy to accept your figure. Even at 40% by number density that still means microplastics are hardly rare. I don't need to nitpick the exact number.<p>It was just an aside anyway.  My main point is that MPs are vehicles for toxins, which addresses the original question about how (supposedly inert) microplastics can cause harm.<p>Thanks again for setting me straight, I must have misremembered.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2026 23:49:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568710</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568710</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568710</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by schiffern in "Netscape News Feed Straight Out of the Late 00s"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If anyone wants to actually use this, here are some uBlock Origin filters for the ISP-specific elements you probably don't need (remove the carets "^" for uBO Lite, it removes elements directly from the HTML to prevent flickering):<p><pre><code>  !Mail button
  isp.netscape.com##^div#mailButton
  !Nav outlinks
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav > .menuBlk:has-text(Member Center)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav > .menuBlk:has-text(Tools)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav li:has-text(Autos)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav li:has-text(Careers)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav li:has-text(Fun & Games)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav li:has-text(Home & Living)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav li:has-text(Shopping)
  isp.netscape.com##^div#nav li:has-text(Travel)
  !Help links in header
  isp.netscape.com##^div#hdrLnks
  !Bing search
  isp.netscape.com##^div#hdrSrch
  isp.netscape.com##^div#newsSearch input#webSearch
  isp.netscape.com##^div#newsSearch label[for="webSearch"]
  !Footer links
  isp.netscape.com##^ul#ftrLinks</code></pre></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2026 22:41:27 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568196</link><dc:creator>schiffern</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568196</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47568196</guid></item></channel></rss>