your own fault. get a nuclear reactor next time d’uh…

When you refund a mattress they just surface clean it

yuck. I doubt that. It’s manual work and far more expensive than a machine.

but getting them dry would be a challenge

seriously? I mean, there is a chance no such service exists in your town. Bad luck then. But there is close to zero chance it doesn’t exist in your country.

What do you think hospitals do? (Or good hotels, as mentioned). Source: Worked in an elderly home that used such a service regularly.

Here’s an image of such a mattress washing machine.

They work.

That’s not true. All mattresses except the cheapest foam ones are washable (they are, too but they might change properties then). But why get a used cheap one?

There are mattress washing services with giant washing machines that are used by hotels. Ask hotel staff to find one.

You can’t get rid of most of the build-up.

You actually can get rid of all the buildups. Just like with clothes. Also don’t think sellers throw it away when you refund a mattress - they wash it and sell it again.

just ask beforehand if you can test it quickly. while that’s not 100% proof, most people are honest (at least when giving away stuff for cheap/free). There’s a risk, but at worst you get free trash. Never happened to me, tho.

Also most high-quality stuff is always salvageable. Surely it’s more hassle then if you have to order spare parts or such.

Some things basically come for free when they were used. Washing machine, stoves… Disassembling them to fully clean them takes a day or two, but it’s still faster than buying new and chances are good, someone wants to get rid of their high quality stuff near you and will give it away for cheap if you “dispose” it for them.

You can even wash a mattress for a few bucks. If it’s good quality, a decade old used filthy mattress can come out like brand new.

People finding that gross or poorish are the reason, stuff is so cheap

on Android, the OS is the firmware. If you talk about peripheral firmware, I’d not call it “software based” anymore.

installing your own OS and/or bootloader is a pain and most of the time unfeasable. And that’s the only way to safely kill software based backdoors.

wouldn’t make that consent even harder? or imply wars?

e.g. Brazil. Imagine they got the last lumber on earth, they’d have to choose between preserving their last trees and incredible wealth by selling it. I can’t imagine a poor country to choose the former.

I don’t believe a CEO or King is necessary for short sighted action. Humans are just very bad at sustainable long-term decisions.

I know a guy who owns a small forrest and when wood prices were skyrocketing due to supply chain disruption, he was tempted to sell more wood than planned. So he couldn’t sell as much in the following years. He has no boss, is not rich and makes his own decisions.

It’s a simple mechanism of supply and demand. I can’t see a reason why people wouldn’t cut down more trees than can grow back when demand is ultra high, other than force/legislation. And then people get angry because they won’t realize that they’d destroy their own business in the long run. A worldwide life-threatening situation won’t change that.

That’s exactly one of the premises in this paper: Deforestation and world population sustainability: a quantitative analysis.

Some say, the easter island model doesn’t scale worldwide but I don’t see a reason why it wouldn’t.

was first to report about israel’s nukes, exposed journalists on CIA payroll and various other great pieces of journalism.

It is a music magazine but I see far worse news sources on social media.

nah. in my experience, even cheaper LED bulbs from discounters can nicely replace old bulbs.

It’s true that what “el-cheapo product” once was done by simply reducing lifetime is currently done with looks.

You could also get ultra cheap crappy incendescant bulbs in the past.

yeah, i was referring to current tech. First LED or those mercury vapor bulbs were basically useless.

So you are saying

“The belief that climate change is unstoppable”

is the same thing as

“a temperature rise of 1.5 degrees Celsius is an existential threat to humanity”

Those are fundamentially different things and you just pulled some study you think is fitting to OPs article. But allright… I’m the one who’s illiterate.

tHe lIgHt is sO mUcH bEtTeR!!!)

narrator voice: “but it was not”

Guy said “don’t be hyperbolic about the 1.5c goal because if people feel hopeless they are less likely to act.”

Then he’s wrong. But it’s more likely you misread the study since that’s not the conclusion.

100.0 TiB(anana)

there will be a ‘bastards up against the wall’ moment for the ones responsible.

i can’t see how that could prevent that. Quite the opposite, if half-assed efforts (without “state of emergency”) lead to higher impact, people will get angrier than with lower impact, simply because more will have to struggle harder.

But first the environmental conditions must allow such activities to have the impacts they have.

Exactly. There might even be the same amount of arsonists/stupid people as in the 80s but it just burns better now. Incidents were no fire developed in the 80s can now spread to huge wildfires with a much higher chance.

Still the claim is true and probably has consequences for hikers, people who live in the woods, settlements near to forrests etc.