this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
213 points (92.8% liked)
Technology
60178 readers
4010 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
WOTA claims 99.9% sterilization via UV-C. Does Japan have false advertising laws? I genuinely don’t see how it can be that fast, but like, it would be dumb to make difficult-to-believe claims if you could be sued for it.
Anyway, mostly unrelated, I used one of these there and I didn’t care if it was that effective. Wasn’t gonna be holding my phone for that span, so any sterilization is nice.
Just because you don't see how it can be that fast doesn't mean you should immediately jump to false advertising. Think of it like cooking chicken to a safe temperature, you can do it sous vide at a lower temperature and still get safe chicken it'll just take 8 hours or you can throw it in an incinerator at a thousand degrees and have it sterilized in a few seconds.
Sterilized is more than just the amount of time it's also the amount of exposure, an extremely strong UV light needs significantly less time than a weaker one
Oh lol. I said that cause I was inclined to believe it due to false advertising laws. Hence, it would be dumb to make such a grand claim and open yourself up to liability [if it weren’t true]. The anecdote after was worded as mostly unrelated because it wasn’t about the effectiveness, but the convenience of the little unit