• 45 Posts
  • 166 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 30th, 2023

help-circle





  • breathability is the key criteria for clothing. Polyester and synthetic fabrics are nearly all terrible at this compared to natural fibres.

    Natural fibers cannot be grouped together in this way because there is a huge variation.

    This is where cotton fails and synthetic microfibers come out ahead. Cotton retains water, swells when wet, and suffocates as water tension spans the threads that are thickened by the swelling. Synthetic microfibers wick moisture away, and do not swell when wet, which gives excellent breathability. Cotton is fine as long as you don’t sweat. Or exceptionally, if it’s extremely hot in some windy situations the water retention can be a plus. I used to don cotton and hose myself down before getting on a motorcycle on a hot dry day. The evaporative cooling effect worked wonders with the high relative wind. But outside of that niche, such as sports, microfibers are king which is why sporting goods shops fetch high prices for high tech synthetics. As someone who sweats profusely more than normal, cotton is a non-starter in warm climates. Evaporation from soggy cotton simply cannot keep up with the rate that I add sweat. So a cotton t-shirt gets soaked in sweat and remains wet the whole workout session, and for days thereafter.

    I used to wear tighty whities which made my gear sweat. Switched to Pategonia boxers and wow what a difference in breathability.

    Wool and synthetics are similar w.r.t. comfort hence the term “smart wool”. But indeed natural wool is pricey and non-vegan.




  • HUGE amounts of clothes are being trashed, many of them new; never worn. I wish I kept the link around. There were several articles in the past few years showing massive piles of clothes along the coastline of some poverty-stricken countries, with all the dyes leeching into the ocean. Fast fashion is the culprit.

    Probably what disgusts me the most are political campaign t-shirts. Surely it’s the worst instance of obsolescence by design in clothing. Andrew Yang claimed to be an environmentalist yet his campaign t-shirts were made of non-sustainable cotton. Attempts to spotlight that were censored by Reddit.

    If it’s OK and just doesn’t fit I donate it.

    All the charities collecting clothes in my area are fussy. They want no flaws, and they want clothes to be cleaned. Apparently there is no infrastructure for repairing them or even simply washing them. Neighbors don’t bother… they just stuff a trash bag with clothes and put it out with other trash. Sometimes someone notices that and tears open the bag and rifles through it for stuff. I’ve moved into places where the previous tenant just left clothes and blankets behind. I dumped them in the clothing donation bins anyway, without washing. But it’s dicey… I could just be adding to their burden and have no idea if the clothes and blankets get used.


  • Patagonia boxers are made using recycled plastics and they also accept worn out boxers for recycling. Patagonia is the only boxers I have found that are very loose fitting (baggy in fact), silky feeling, yet stretchy, yet moisture-wicking all at once. Nothing like this seems to exist in Europe.

    So here’s a debate: synthetic vs cotton

    Synthetic boxers can be recycled and can be made from recycled plastics. But every time synthetic clothes get washed they shed microplastics which most sewage treatment centers cannot filter out. You would have to buy a special filter to attach to your washing machine. Researchers in Ghent discovered that the bacteria that loves perspiration also loves synthetic clothes but not cotton. This is why synthetic clothes get stinky fast and thus need more frequent washing than natural fibers.

    Cotton production consumes absurd amounts of water (2700 liters of water to produce 1 t-shirt). And when you wash it, hang drying takes /days/ (whereas microfibers hang dry in a couple hours). So people use energy wasting tumble dryers when cleaning cotton. But cotton has the advantage of being biodegradable. You can simply compost/landfill finished cotton as long as it doesn’t have harmful dyes that leech out. There is also a cotton t-shirt that is claimed to wearable 7 times before each wash. IIRC it’s blended with silver for anti-microbial effects.

    The environmental debate can go either way depending on which problem you want to focus on, but cotton is clearly lousy performing underwear considering how it retains water and gets soggy. The only natural fiber that performs well for underwear is wool (ideally Marino from what I’ve read). But the prices on that are extortionate. €60+ for one pair of wool boxers, and they’re tight fitting.

    Anyway, the OP’s thesis is lost. There is no BifL boxers AFAIK.

    There are BifL socks though, called “Darn Tough” which have a lifetime warranty. They have 1 competitor but I forgot the brand. Both use marino wool.

    update

    Patagonia plans to open a store in Amsterdam.





  • I needed expensive custom orthotics. Of course making a costly medical modification to flimsy shoes is a terrible idea. The orthotic maker gave me this advice: buy leather shoes and make sure the inside is also leather. It was great advice because when the interior heal of the shoe is some kind of fabric it’s not long before the material forms a hole and the plastic skeleton is exposed.

    I found some ugly tennis shoes (didn’t care); had 3 stripes (i think that’s Adidas). They were all leather inside and outside except the sole. They lasted like over a decade. The outer sole was the first to wear out. I can probably have them resoled.

    But in general, if you go into a place that makes medical orthotics they will have the advice you’re after, and perhaps have specific recommendations.

    Theoretically there is just one material more durable than leather: aramid (aka Kevlar™). Not sure if anyone is on the ball with making aramid shoes though.




  • More often than not, admins are interested in alternatives. When they hear there are no gratis alternatives, they shut down. CF is deceptively gratis. That is, the gratis plan is for relatively low consumption. When a service comes under attack which then leverages the defense admins signed up for, Cloudflare taps them on the shoulder and says: hey, you’re exceeding the bandwidth of the gratis plan… time to switch to premium. So the “free” evaporates.

    Slightly more clever admins will use CF DNS and maintain their site in a non-proxied state (sparing their users from Cloudflare exclusion and over-sharing). Then when an attack hits they just have to flip a switch and CF is put into play. That switch can even be scripted to happen automatically.

    Even more clever admins (e.g. infosec.pub) are very knowledgeable about how to do security properly without offloading their security problems onto everyone else.


  • You could fill a book on the harm Cloudflare does. To describe the walled garden, they have designed Cloudflare without a login so that people in the included group don’t even know they are participating in digital exclusion and supporting a walled garden by a tech giant. The gate is invisible. Those of us in the excluded group see a deceptive block screen that says it’s doing a security check but in reality it’s doing nothing but showing a non-stop spinner. Some people get a CAPTCHA which is often broken (always broken for me).

    By default, Cloudflare blocks access to the following groups of people:

    • users whose ISP uses CGNAT to distribute a limited range of IPv4 addresses (this generally impacts poor people in impoverished regions)
    • the Tor community
    • VPN users
    • users of public libraries, and generally networks where IP addresses are shared
    • blind people who disable images in their browsers (which triggers false positives for robots, as scripts are generally not interested in images either)
    • the permacomputing community and people on limited internet connections, who also disable browser images to reduce bandwidth which makes them appear as bots
    • people who actually run bots – Cloudflare is outspokenly anti-robot and treats beneficial bots the same as malicious bots

    If you are in the included group and get access to a Cloudflare site, CF is a man in the middle who sees all the traffic. The padlock you see only means that your traffic is secure from you to Cloudflare (not to the host you think you are visiting). Cloudflare sees your userid and password, your DMs, everything. CF has grown to take ~20—30% of the web. So probably around roughly ¼ of your web activity is all seen by that one corporation which operates in a country without privacy safegards. So in addition to the above list of groups of people who Cloudflare blocks from web access, there is a group of privacy enthusiasts who block CF as they refuse to disclose ~25% of their web traffic to CF.

    As for the disproportionate size, I think that is somewhat inevitable, even with a Federated platform.

    It’s only inevitable to the extent that it’s inevitable that you will have admins who don’t grasp the philosophy. Admins who embrace the principles of decentralization close registration before their user count gets excessive (lemmy.ml demonstrated some restraint in this regard though some would say they should have closed reg sooner). Others will carry on, and bring in Cloudflare to supercharge the capacity which brings the problem that Cloudflare itself is centralized. They have effectively joined the centralized walled garden and brought a disproportionately large number of unwitting users into that exclusive venue. I say “unwitting” because sh.itjust.works and lemmy.world does not disclose to the users the fact that they are in a walled garden and that they share all the traffic with a US tech giant. Their greed is why there are disproportionately small nodes. It is sh.itjust.works and lemmy.world who decided to exploit all the individuals who individually decide they want to be in the same place where everyone else is, which ruins the balance and keeps small nodes overly small.

    Many posts are in a Q&A format, and if a bot were to crosspost all the content here, any answers here wouldn’t necessarily make it back to the OP. Had you considered this?

    I didn’t necessarily mean to imply that a bot would do the job, but indeed a bot would make sense. The purpose of copying traffic out of the centralized walled garden into a free world instance would be to feed info to those who have chosen the ethical venue. The purpose would not be to feed the giants in any way. So if it’s a personal question post that does not enrich the commons with information then the post could be removed by the bot operator. Or if the question likely provokes an interesting chat then it could be left alone. Responders who want the OP to see the response could simply mention them in the response and the OP would get a notification.



  • I deliberately omitted those two. Notice I said “in the free decentralized world”. The sh.itjust.works and lemmy.world nodes should not be promoted because they are centralized (by two factors) and antithetical to the purpose of the fedi.

    • factor 1: disproportionate size thus concentration of power by those admins over an unacceptably large population.
    • factor 2: cloudflare, who currently decides who gets access to ~20—30% of all websites in the world. CF abuses their power and they marginalize several demographics of people (including poor people who live in regions where ISPs have to use CGNAT).

    So I suggest not feeding those communities. It might be interesting to replicate their content here in such a way that it doesn’t link back to them.

    It’s worth noting as well that Cloudflare’s breakage proliferates when CF’d nodes crosspost outside of their walled garden. E.g. if a CF-sourced image is crossposted to slrpnk.net, the image is inaccessible to me (and everyone else CF excludes) so I get a half missing post. Many people are here in the sufficiently decentralized portion of the fedi to escape abuses of concentrated power.










  • The anti-BifL swindle → no B&M shops sell replacement covers for any mattress.

    Some come with removable covers so you can theoretically put the covers in a washing machine, but there is no replacement. Eventually when you need to replace the cover no one will sell the cover you need. A salesperson confessed to me that a lot of the value is in the cover and if they made those replaceable it would damage their bottom line.

    Some sales people argued: you can buy a separate cover. But of course a cover needs to breath or your skin would suffocate. And because it breathes, the mattress exterior is still exposed to sweat and spills. Otherwise sheets would be the answer. You can have a cover for a cover for a cover, and in the end the mattress exterior will still get stained or rank.

    So this killed it for me. I refuse to buy a mattress if the shop does not sell a replacement exterior cover. We need Fairphone to get into the mattress business.