8 ms·
Maybe we can mimic some of the effects found in nature without chemicals and make hydrophobic surfaces based on their nano-level properties? Or like ducks use
by ck2 4y ago
Maybe we can mimic some of the effects found in nature without chemicals and make hydrophobic surfaces based on their nano-level properties?
Or like ducks use preen oil, something closer to that.
- mc32 4y agoThere is already an XVIII century technology and WWII popularized option called millerain. But it requires some maintenance and isn’t “light” as preferred by cyclists and runners.
- coffeebeqn 4y agoYeah wax was used to make tents waterproof as well. But it’s quite a bit heavier than plastic thread
- mc32 4y agoYep. People will have to put more work into things. But it’s that or these toxic options as of now.
- SV_BubbleTime 4y agoOdd choice. Writing “18th” is faster for the writer and the reader.
- pstuart 4y agoI'm guessing it played well with the WWII lettering.
- kwhitefoot 4y agoPerhaps it's my age but I don't find Roman numerals noticeably slower to read than Arabic for the usual use case of recent centuries.
- justsomehnguy 4y ago> is faster for the writer For the whole letter? > reader Only if the reader completely unfamiliar with Roman numbering system. I didn't even thought about it until I saw your comment. Get off my lawn, son?
- burnished 4y agoYeah, but XVIII has a certain appeal to it that your way just can’t match.
- edflsafoiewq 4y agoUsing Roman numerals for centuries is conventional in Romance languages.
- p1mrx 4y agoIsn't nature made of chemicals?
- epgui 4y agoIt is, and you’re totally correct to point that out. Also “you know what he meant” is not a good reason to downvote you, because no, nobody knows what is meant by “chemical” if it isn’t literally “chemical”. One could guess that they meant “synthetic chemical”, as if that was somehow meaningfully different than a “natural chemical”, but it’s not and it’s just as wrong.
- profile53 4y agoIn most casual English conversation, “chemical” is implied as “[man made] chemical”, though I will admit that may not be obvious to people for whom English is not a first language. It’s obvious to (almost) any native speaker what is being said, and to willfully ignore that is to be pedantic for the sake of arguing.
- lotsofpulp 4y agoIs the fact that something is man made a problem?
- thaumasiotes 4y agoFor many people, yes. It's also a very common belief that one and the same state of the environment is bad if traceable to human actions, but good otherwise. The working premise in many environmental discussions is that humans carry an inherent moral taint and whatever they do creates a problem that needs to be corrected, because it came from an evil source, regardless of whether the resulting state of the world is good or bad.
- burnished 4y agoI don’t think this is a good explanation. Look for a sibling comment from acdha for a better explanation.
- elric 4y agoFor most regular activities, old fashioned things like wool coats, oiled leather, or waxed cotton work remarkably well. Waterproofing imo is only a major issue if you're having to save on weight/space (and cost, I guess). It's hard to run 10k in a wool greatcoat in the rain.
- hinkley 4y agoWicking base layers work pretty damned well. Cyclists did that for ages. When we could finally afford polypropylene is was a godsend. Way cheaper than goretex.
- robocat 4y ago> regular activities The last time I wore a heavy wool greatcoat in solid rain while walking, it stayed dry for a while, but got much heavier as it took up water, then started soaking through on the shoulders after about an hour. Admittedly it is antique and I'm guessing it has lost its original waterproofing (lanolin?). Oiled fabrics like a traditional stockman's jacket can last a working day, but they weight a lot relatively, they need occasional re-waterproofing if used, and are not particularly cheap: https://drizabone.com.au/search?q=Oilskin https://drizabone.com.au/search?q=Oilskin
- throwaway892238 4y agoYep - the original waterproof fabrics were oilskin, waxed cotton, and leather. They've mostly been replaced by PU coatings, though you might still go for the old school stuff for abrasion-resistance.
- persedes 4y agoMushrooms have a protein that can do so on their outer layers (hydrophobin). Worked in a biotech company that was researching it, not sure what came out of it.