Fordiman

joined 2 years ago
[–] Fordiman@programming.dev -4 points 1 year ago

Largely? The lack of convincing emotional range.

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The fun part about that: you can burn hydrogen with fluorine because fluorine is the best oxidizer; it's then deadly (and caustic) because hydrogen is not the best reducer - it's both an oxidizer and a reducer and, as a result, it's basically middle-of-the-road for both properties. Specifically, most metals are better. So the HF will happily drop its hydrogen for many metals to oxidize (fluoridate) them instead. Lead, iron, zinc, aluminum, magnesium, and lithium will each make a way more stable fluoride than does hydrogen.

In solution (say, if you inhale HF, it'll dissolve into the moisture in your lungs), it breaks apart into H⁺ and F⁻ ions - both of which are just straight-up electrochemically promiscuous. The pair'll run through your lungs breaking up organic bonds like couples at an orgy.

Even so, HF doesn't hold a candle in terms of danger (and oxidation potential) compared to fluorine peroxide / dioxygen difluoride / FOOF.

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago

Yes.

Not only will metal fires break apart the water into oxygen and hydrogen, but they will consume the oxygen, as the metal oxide is a more stable energy state than is water. So you end up with a billow of hydrogen coming off the fire that mixes with the oxygen just above (because lighter gases rise) the oxygen-depleted zone of the fire, and it combusts there.

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 18 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Next time it snows, remember: you're being gently coated in stellar ash.

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

For those wondering, that's a -6 from a range of -8...7 Harsh.

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 16 points 2 years ago (9 children)

At least not until there's a damn web version.

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 15 points 2 years ago

I'm sorry, but why is this not an AbstractToolBuildingFactoryFactoryFactory? How are you going to derive alternatives?

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago

Four score and nineteen reds?

[–] Fordiman@programming.dev 4 points 2 years ago

Creating new objects would confuse your ORM vs. Always create new objects? Well, you've convinced me.

If you just made copy constructors in the first example, the problem wouldn't have existed. This is wholly contrived, and I feel dumber for having watched it.

Not even saying I like OOP, or that functional isn't usually a better paradigm - but this was the goofiest argument I've seen for it.

view more: next ›