←back to thread

Hosting a website on a disposable vape

(bogdanthegeek.github.io)
1386 points BogdanTheGeek | 1 comments | 15 Sep 25 17:53 UTC | HN request time: 0.226s | source
Show context
x187463 ◴[15 Sep 25 14:07 UTC] No.45249934[source]▶
Re-using this sort of device is super cool. I can imagine a post-apocalyptic scenario where a city is run on a hodgepodge of random computing devices like this.

I will say, though, disposable vapes with microcontrollers inside (and even full games and screens from recent reporting) are an egregious source of e-waste. Many layers of stupid are present here.

replies(11): >>45250057 #>>45250161 #>>45250275 #>>45250310 #>>45250322 #>>45250541 #>>45250673 #>>45251121 #>>45252055 #>>45252398 #>>45254937 #
palata ◴[15 Sep 25 15:16 UTC] No.45250673[source]▶
The fact that selling such a thing is profitable means that we lack regulations somewhere.
replies(5): >>45250978 #>>45251128 #>>45251642 #>>45256103 #>>45259163 #
gwbas1c ◴[15 Sep 25 16:25 UTC] No.45251642[source]▶
No, it means computing has gotten so %$#@ cheap that it's cheaper to just cobble together cheap parts instead of spending the money to design a purposed device.
replies(1): >>45252114 #
palata ◴[15 Sep 25 16:59 UTC] No.45252114[source]▶
That's not mutually exclusive with what I said.

Laws are not here to make money, they are here to decide what kind of society we want. If electronics is too cheap and it creates wastes, I'm of the opinion that we should make it illegal, period.

replies(1): >>45252437 #
lyu07282[dead post] ◴[15 Sep 25 17:23 UTC] No.45252437[source]▶
[flagged]
steezeburger ◴[15 Sep 25 17:47 UTC] No.45252731[source]▶
Liberals generally want more regulation what are you talking about and why are you breaking the HN rules?
replies(1): >>45256796 #
1. datameta ◴[16 Sep 25 00:59 UTC] No.45256796[source]▶
I don't recall the exact language but it was rather flame-war-esque in a comment full of otherwise benign discourse. The issue isn't liberals or conservatives being mentioned. In what way do you think I broke the rules? That it wasn't a substantive comment on its own? I didn't feel the pull to silently flag and hoped for GP to elaborate.