6 ms·

Stop for a minute and think about the psychology of what you’ve just written. Instead of getting angry at aviation corporations who save money and maximize pro

Stop for a minute and think about the psychology of what you’ve just written. Instead of getting angry at aviation corporations who save money and maximize profits by degrading the quality of the very air you breath, you direct your anger towards other passengers and their kids. As they would against you. That said, you shouldn’t be allowed to smoke and masks should be mandatory on planes still in my opinion.

hourago 4y ago
> That said, you shouldn’t be allowed to smoke and masks should be mandatory on planes still in my opinion. That is a very reasonable approach. We are billions of humans living in close quarters. Let's make a little effort to offer high quality spaces to everybody. This happened with seat belts in cars, many people were offended by the idea but it is saving many lives each day.
noduerme 4y ago
>> Instead of getting angry at aviation corporations who save money and maximize profits by degrading Sorry! I skipped over the part where I was disturbed and disgusted at the fact that American had cut their filter expense by 80%. My friend's dad was not a smoker but was also appalled that the airline took that decision once they were free from the particulate strictures imposed by cigarettes, because he believed it made the air in the cabin filthy. So, overlaying all of my angst about children and anti-smoking zealots, I do understand that we've all been thrown into this arena by corporations who have lowered my standard of living. Those corporations have, to be fair, raised the standard of living of people who fly with 3 sick kids to Hawaii, when from my perspective without massive credit they would be raising those kids in a coal mine. In a way, it's almost socialism.
- scrollaway 4y ago
  How are you not understanding that they didn’t “cut filter expense by 80%”, but simply they get 1/5th as dirty? If not less. My educated guess is they used to get changed more often than required due to clogging, and now they’re just changed based on some minimum required. Have you ever lived with a smoker? My grandmother’s house used to have to be repainted every other year before her death. Do you think we just “greedily cut painting costs by 80%” because we repainted it once in ten years since, or might it have to do with walls yellowing due to particulate?
  - noduerme 4y ago
    They get less visually dirty, but the same amount of human breath passes through them. It's not just that; the airlines cut the fresh air intake as a portion of circulated air. By not being as visually noticeable, they didn't need to change the filters as often; yet that meant that the filters would have 5x the viral load when they were finally changed out. They used the elimination of smoking as an excuse to save money on basic hygiene. Does this make sense?
    - scrollaway 4y ago
      You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Where did you even hear about this specific number in how often they used to change their filters vs now? Do you have any idea what the reasons are for them changing filters, how they decide? What the minimum is? How they measure it? You seem to not really even understand how air filtration works.
      - noduerme 4y ago
        If one day people aren't allowed to smoke, does the volume of air passing through the filter drop by 80%? Do all the other particulates, e.g. viruses and bacteria, drop by 80%? No? So what makes you think the filter needs to be changed 1/5th as often?
        scrollaway 4y ago
        I'm guessing you've been smoking so long, you don't know what it's like to not live in polluted air. When you change an air filter, repaint a house, wash the inside of a car, you can immediately tell whether somebody is a smoker. It's fucking gross, and I suspect that it's not 1/5th, but probably 1/20th as often. "What makes me think that" is plain simple experience. I don't have the full paper handy (and can't be bothered to look this up just for you) but the highlights should be enough for you on this one: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721058320 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00489...
chrisco255 4y ago
Covid exists, it always will at this rate, and the rest of us won't be suffering for your insecurity about your own immune system. You wear a mask if you like. If it works, you have nothing to worry about.
- noduerme 4y ago
  Right! And if you can have covid and not put on a mask, why the fuck can't I smoke next to you on a plane?
  - chrisco255 4y ago
    Because regulating microscopic airborne diseases is impossible and beyond dumb. Every country that tried to do so failed to do so, even with the most Draconian laws imaginable.
    - noduerme 4y ago
      Sure. But how is that any different from regulating the burning of leaves?
      - Dalewyn 4y ago
        Covid doesn't crash planes. Smoking can.
- forgetfreeman 4y ago
  You misspelled "can't be bothered to contribute to the wellbeing of the people around us". Incidentally, you think wearing a rated mask for a couple hours qualifies as "suffering"? When did notionally adult humans get this soft? Try working 10 hours straight in a tyvek bunny suit and full face respiratory PPE. We'd be carting you off my jobsite in a wheelbarrow after 30 minutes.
  - noduerme 4y ago
    So, I also think politesse is really a critical skill and function in society. I've never smoked in close proximity to anyone without asking them if they minded if I lit up first. I also have never coughed on an airplane. Never. Not once. I've flown upwards of 200,000 miles in my life. I don't understand this urge people have to spread their germs as soon as they get seated and buckled in. I know the air is dry; control yourself. Really, try to control yourself. So what you write is really the basic truth: Try to contribute to the wellbeing of people around you. That shouldn't be so hard.

hourago 4y ago

> That said, you shouldn’t be allowed to smoke and masks should be mandatory on planes still in my opinion. That is a very reasonable approach. We are billions of humans living in close quarters. Let's make a little effort to offer high quality spaces to everybody. This happened with seat belts in cars, many people were offended by the idea but it is saving many lives each day.

noduerme 4y ago

>> Instead of getting angry at aviation corporations who save money and maximize profits by degrading Sorry! I skipped over the part where I was disturbed and disgusted at the fact that American had cut their filter expense by 80%. My friend's dad was not a smoker but was also appalled that the airline took that decision once they were free from the particulate strictures imposed by cigarettes, because he believed it made the air in the cabin filthy. So, overlaying all of my angst about children and anti-smoking zealots, I do understand that we've all been thrown into this arena by corporations who have lowered my standard of living. Those corporations have, to be fair, raised the standard of living of people who fly with 3 sick kids to Hawaii, when from my perspective without massive credit they would be raising those kids in a coal mine. In a way, it's almost socialism.

scrollaway 4y ago
How are you not understanding that they didn’t “cut filter expense by 80%”, but simply they get 1/5th as dirty? If not less. My educated guess is they used to get changed more often than required due to clogging, and now they’re just changed based on some minimum required. Have you ever lived with a smoker? My grandmother’s house used to have to be repainted every other year before her death. Do you think we just “greedily cut painting costs by 80%” because we repainted it once in ten years since, or might it have to do with walls yellowing due to particulate?
- noduerme 4y ago
  They get less visually dirty, but the same amount of human breath passes through them. It's not just that; the airlines cut the fresh air intake as a portion of circulated air. By not being as visually noticeable, they didn't need to change the filters as often; yet that meant that the filters would have 5x the viral load when they were finally changed out. They used the elimination of smoking as an excuse to save money on basic hygiene. Does this make sense?
  - scrollaway 4y ago
    You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Where did you even hear about this specific number in how often they used to change their filters vs now? Do you have any idea what the reasons are for them changing filters, how they decide? What the minimum is? How they measure it? You seem to not really even understand how air filtration works.
    - noduerme 4y ago
      If one day people aren't allowed to smoke, does the volume of air passing through the filter drop by 80%? Do all the other particulates, e.g. viruses and bacteria, drop by 80%? No? So what makes you think the filter needs to be changed 1/5th as often?
      - scrollaway 4y ago
        I'm guessing you've been smoking so long, you don't know what it's like to not live in polluted air. When you change an air filter, repaint a house, wash the inside of a car, you can immediately tell whether somebody is a smoker. It's fucking gross, and I suspect that it's not 1/5th, but probably 1/20th as often. "What makes me think that" is plain simple experience. I don't have the full paper handy (and can't be bothered to look this up just for you) but the highlights should be enough for you on this one: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721058320 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00489...

chrisco255 4y ago

Covid exists, it always will at this rate, and the rest of us won't be suffering for your insecurity about your own immune system. You wear a mask if you like. If it works, you have nothing to worry about.

noduerme 4y ago
Right! And if you can have covid and not put on a mask, why the fuck can't I smoke next to you on a plane?
- chrisco255 4y ago
  Because regulating microscopic airborne diseases is impossible and beyond dumb. Every country that tried to do so failed to do so, even with the most Draconian laws imaginable.
  - noduerme 4y ago
    Sure. But how is that any different from regulating the burning of leaves?
    - Dalewyn 4y ago
      Covid doesn't crash planes. Smoking can.
forgetfreeman 4y ago
You misspelled "can't be bothered to contribute to the wellbeing of the people around us". Incidentally, you think wearing a rated mask for a couple hours qualifies as "suffering"? When did notionally adult humans get this soft? Try working 10 hours straight in a tyvek bunny suit and full face respiratory PPE. We'd be carting you off my jobsite in a wheelbarrow after 30 minutes.
- noduerme 4y ago
  So, I also think politesse is really a critical skill and function in society. I've never smoked in close proximity to anyone without asking them if they minded if I lit up first. I also have never coughed on an airplane. Never. Not once. I've flown upwards of 200,000 miles in my life. I don't understand this urge people have to spread their germs as soon as they get seated and buckled in. I know the air is dry; control yourself. Really, try to control yourself. So what you write is really the basic truth: Try to contribute to the wellbeing of people around you. That shouldn't be so hard.