So the problem is these particles are literally flying off the gloves of the scientists wearing them to the point it's interfering with the experiment and so... it's less of a problem?

No, the gloves leave stearates (not plastic, but similar looking particles) residue on contact. So there are not literally micro plastics flying off the gloves. Read the article.

It's not microplastics coming from the gloves. It's particles of the powder used to coat the gloves and keep them from sticking. Different composition, but similar and easily mistaken.

Well, it could mean more microplastics occur in an unnatural environment (the lab) containing much more plastics than in a typical home setting.

If you're around plastic a lot you're ingesting a lot and if you're not, you're not.

So the conclusion would be that plastics "sheds" and you should avoid it in packaging, kitchen utensils, etc

Yes? Most people don’t live their entire lives in a lab wearing nitrile gloves, so there’s an argument to be made that the concentration of microplastics found in that setting is not reflective of everyday life.

So, not that microplastics don’t exist, but that they don’t exist to the same degree as in a lab environment.

I wouldn't be surprised if e.g. all these paper-thin synthetic (plastic) disposable parts and fabrics used in labs shed microplastics way more than e.g. synthetic fabrics designed to be survive a machine wash a few dozen times, or upholstery meant to withstand tens of thousands of sitting cycles, nevermind solid plastics (e.g. reusable food containers, furniture surfaces).

If you read the article you'd find that what they are finding are not microplastics - they're stearates[1]

These are soap-like chemicals used as mould release agents on gloves, but what also means are chemically similar to plastics when analyzed by some techniques and under a microscope will spontaneously form micelle-structures which look very similar to microplastics (you can't exactly get in there and poke them).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stearic_acid

“if you read the article”

Now why would anyone do that when the headline already supports their uninformed opinion?

Huh, good point

So why would you outsource it to another team that isn't doing the actual work?

QA is actual work. Building the thing is actual work. Each is not "the" work, which is the task of the whole company.

QA perspective and focus is just different from the one of the team building the thing. It's precisely because of their detached perspective that they can do their work properly.

Team doing the work should do QA so they only produce quality.

But on other hand those people can not often be trusted. As such you need a team that does checks again. Or alternatively they might have misunderstood something and thus produced incorrect system. Or there is some other fault in their thought process or reality. And system operates differently in more real scenario.

I'd say it's more related to getting dressed for work even if you're remote and have no video calls

That's a terrible reason for a mass consumer tool to fail, and a perfectly reasonable one for a professional power tool to fail

Jevons paradox strikes again

That's not AI speak -- it's just how people create clarity

Why the fuck would you use an LLM to determine whether a nuclear missile was hurtling towards you? The question makes no sense, and so you get a nonsensical answer.

Seems not unlikely that Anthropic was manipulated into this position for purposes of invalidating their contract.

Have you raised this question with others, or do they think the same about you?

He thinks the others are NPCs

This is fascism

I don't think many are doubting that. I'm not talking about the way things should be. I'm talking about the way they are.

Which is what naturally happens when fascists are in power.