Hacker News Reader

> 3. Regarding the environmental friendliness of our coatings: Our product is based on silicone. It has been shown in the scientific literature that silicone can be decomposed naturally in soil within 4-7 days. It breaks down in silica, water, and carbon dioxide.

"Based on silicone" does not mean "degrades like silicone." It also doesn't mean your coating will behave like the silicone "in the scientific literature." If I toss a silicone spoon in the ocean, it won't be gone in a week. You can make plastic out of wood. That doesn't make it biodegradable. There are different kinds of silicone. Some degrade quickly, some don't. Some is toxic as it degrades. It can accumulate in fish like plastic, etc.

Without knowing how the coating wears off (in chunks when toilet is cleaned, etc), it's hard to compare. Also, if it's not actually silicone, we shouldn't be pretending it acts like it is.

Have any independent environmental assessment been done? What happens when you drink it? What happens when you feed it to fish?

I also have the same concerns about your product.

Likewise. At massive scale, conserving water by adding more artificial/industrial runoff doesn't seem like a good approach, at all. This version of the world is behind us.

Given that the goal of this product is to reduce the water usage, it would mean that you not only add something to the water, but also reduce the total amount of waste water, thus increasing the concentration.

Can any remains be sorted out at common water treatment facilities?

Generally small particles like micro-plastics are too small to be filtered by treatment facilities. My assumption here would be no. It could be that a chemical/heating process in a treatment facility could accelerate the breakdown. That's just pure speculation though since we don't know enough to judge.

I have concerns because the product descriptions and images don't say the amount anywhere or how long it should be expected to last and under what conditions - kinda feels scammy.

For example, is it 1oz or 20oz? Honestly, it looks like a tiny sprayer - maybe 1oz? How far will it go? Will that 1oz. treat 1 sink/toilet or 10? How long will it last?

I did see that the article says "...researchers also predict the coating could last for about 500 flushes". OK it "could" last 500, or it could last 1. The real question is how long "did" it last when you tested it and what should a normal person expect? Does urine affect it's longevity differently from poop? What happens if you use a toilet brush on it, or use various cleaning chemicals - will that shorten it's usable life?

e.g. from https://www.spotlessmaterials.com/store/p10/Sink_%26_Fixture...:

"Sink & Fixture Coating SKU: S008191114 $15.00 Our Sink & Fixture Coatings are popular amongst our early users. These coatings can be applied to any ceramic surface and are specially formulated for high-touch ceramic surfaces like sinks, toilet exteriors, etc. After application, you’ll feel the difference. Our coatings are ultra smooth to the touch. It’s that same smoothness that makes the surfaces easier to clean. With these coatings, cleaning ceramic surfaces required less time, effort, and cleaning chemicals. Do not apply coating to floors -- it is slippery. This coating can be refreshed with our Maintenance Spray."

Time to get gross here.

I have been dealing with neck/mouth cancer for a while and using a feeding tube for about half of my calories. My movements, depending on the alignment of the stars resemble the mortar used to join cinder blocks together. It is explosive and sticks to the bowl. I can flush ten times and it doesn't budge and I have to manually get in there.

So I am going to try this. It is cheap enough and even if it helps a little will be a huge quality of life improvement.

Three months into chemo it wasn't great dealing with every trip to the bathroom being a chore. And combine that with the fact that my immune system was basically non-existent. Lingering fecal matter was a health risk.

You might want to consider marketing to radiologists, oncologists, and nutritionists. Tons of fellow tubers out there.

Best of luck.

Try a parachute. Put some to down in the water before you let loose.

Sadly, we are dealing with a Jackson Pollock situation.

Props for keeping your sense of humor, dude.

I had to look it up... Haha.

Have you tried a space toilet?

And I know you mentioned a feeding tube, can they add fiber in your diet somehow? I used to get similar issues while not eating enough fiber.

Any forums of people with similar conditions that could recommend solutions?

Best of luck.

I just thought of another idea. A lot of times public bathrooms will have a disposable, flushable, parchment paper that can be placed on the seat and a flap leads down to the water. If you were to have 4 of these flaps instead of 1 I think it would protect the bowl enough.

You sir, are an ace. I wish you all the best.

I wish you lots of strength and an abundance of good luck.

Survivor of sinus cancer here. Not a fun experience but it worked. May you find NED and remain that way. Godspeed.

In a former flat I had a plumber over, we got to chat a bit. He said that in they often get called to subsidized housing, as the amount of water used in toilets there is often set to a low setting in order to save money.

He was a bit more colorful, but in essence he said: With two liters of water you are not going to move 1kg feces far enough down the pipe, so it starts piling up. That's the reason why they get called there more often.

So no matter how you coat it (pun intended), what problem are you trying to solve? Also re-applying the lubricant after 500 flushes means I have to re-apply it after around four months with two people in a household using the toilet twice per day. With kids or more room mates, even more often? I think I'd pass and rather clean the toilet properly.

If you're only using the toilet twice per day, I suggest drinking more water :) https://www.healthline.com/health/how-often-should-you-pee

But maybe you mean only flushing twice per day, despite using it more frequently, in order to save water? That would beg the question of how this coating material would hold up when subjected for hours per day to the "toilet environment" you produce vs. a clean water environment.

Yes, you are right. I should drink more water, but there is also another factor: Going to toilet at work saves water at home and is work time.

I learned that from a former colleague when I worked as a gardener

I think I'd like to know how this does without the second layer. Reapplying every 500 flushes doesn't seem practical. For a family of four and two toilets, if everyone goes four times a day, you're talking about reapplying every 2 months.

Permanent nanohairs sounds very ... permanent, if this doesn't work well without layer 2.

I'm also curious about durability on a car, with windshield wipers and all. How permanent is permanent?

I'll mention:

1) The price and quantity is a little bit off-putting. I'm not sure if that represents real costs (for many business models, the cost is a pennies, but the price goes way up to account for R&D, shipping, marketing, etc.). If this is expensive to produce, keep things as is. If it's dirt cheap, you may consider keeping price fixed, but notching up quantity a bit. If I can coat my whole car (rather than just windshield), or sink+toilet rather than just toilet, or even share with a friend, the economics become very different.

2) You really need online reviews. Few will risk a product like this unseen. Use Amazon or send review copies to someone.

Reapplying every 500 flushes doesn't seem practical. For a family of four and two toilets, if everyone goes four times a day, you're talking about reapplying every 2 months.

I think it depends on how exactly one applies it. If it’s just pouring something from a bottle over the bowl, it is perfectly practical, as this is already what one usually does when cleaning the toilet.

Sounds promising but I personally need more info or at least certification on new products safety characteristics. I wont go into an alarmist list, but some materials "based on silicone" are problematic and some are flat out hazardous. Probably this one is not, but more info is due.

> silicone can be decomposed naturally in soil within 4-7 days. It breaks down in silica, water, and carbon dioxide.

So why doesn't the coating, if it is made of silicone, similarly degrade in 4-7 days?

One doesn't normally keep soil, with its rich microbial ecosystem, inside of their domestic toilet bowl.

One commonly puts something else with a rich microbial ecosystem in it on a regular basis.

Yes. However, it's "something else", meaning that the ecosystem is dramatically different. Furthermore, the majority of that ecosystem should be evacuated on a regular basis. E.g. bury an apple in soil during humid warm weather, and a week later it may be substantially decomposed; float it in a regular toilet bowl and it will recognizably still be an apple.

Will the coating break down in a Septic tank?

My parents use roof water, which is a limited supply so this product would be a great help, but they would be sceptical of any product that could harm the microbiology of the septic tank or that could harm the soil from the overflow.

I imagine they would prefer some sort of scientific facts rather than just marketing blurb (they are quite biologically geeky!)

Is this similar to LiquiGlide? https://www.fastcompany.com/1679878/mits-freaky-non-stick-co...

If not, what are the pros and cons of using LiquiGlide in a toilet vs. yours?

If it's not harmful to sea life then a great potential market for this would be marine toilets. They all use extremely small amounts of water (especially the freshwater ones) and skid marks are always a problem. Boaters are also used to maintaining things like coating.

Smaller market but a good niche to start and spread from.

Why do salt water marine toilets use small amounts of water? It seems like that's a resource that is very easy to acquire.

Especially with plastic plumbing

The water and waste are pumped into a holding tank that needs to be emptied. You can empty it into the ocean if you are 3 miles off shore. Most people stay close to shore, so need to use pump out facilities to empty their holding tank. These are often free but not always, and from my understanding are not entirely pleasant to use.

Typical holding tank volume is 20-30 gallons. This is maybe enough for a week? We have a composting head so I'm not sure. Solid waste goes in a dumpster once a month and I think most people end up "peeing in the water". Which is technically illegal and some people think is bad, some don't.

If you clean the toilet with soap and a brush will it remove either the hairs or lubricant?

Edit: and bleach?

I think it is a brilliant product if it works as explained will sell at the price you have set. I will buy some.

I think a little bit of silicone is a smart trade off to save a lot of toilet-cleaning chemicals and compared to a toilet brush this is an order of magnitude better.

It would be interesting to know how many hacker-news users actually clean a toilet regularly. I'm guessing not many if any but that is an outrageous assumption. I know you will still have to clean the toilet after a spotLESS application but it will be easier and use less detergent.

Does the silicone lubricant have to come in a spray application or could you license spotLESS lubricant to the likes of Toilet-Duck to incorporate into toilet cleaners? If councils treated their sewers with the nanohair layer would the silicone lubricant floating past keep it lubricated.

It's a shame that the swoosh logo is already taken.

Awesome product and its good to see that price is kept affordable. Many comments here don't seem to appreciate the use case (public toilets) in places with high footfalls and high density (basically every public place in India).

Interesting approach back at my first job in Hydrodynamics research BHRA (Now Bhr Group ) in the early 80's

I shared an office with an engineer who's got assigned to research the efficacy of toilets - we had some interesting brainstorming sessions on how to solve some of the experimental problems.

I even started to look at using neural nets to use image recognition to measure how efficient a design was, but as the base hardware cost was over £250,000 that went nowhere, a pity but it would have taken my career in a different direction

How did you test the product during development? Did you have to take a shit on it after every iteration or did you have some kind of replica shit that could be used?

This may be a little broad of a question, but: Why is this being commercialized at all? The linked article makes a lot of noise about benefits for the developing world but making the coating tool dependent on the profit motive will naturally target those with existing money - the developed world. I'm just having a hard time squaring this particular circle.

This seems similar to SLIPS: https://wyss.harvard.edu/technology/slips-slippery-liquid-in...

How do LESS and SLIPS compare?

Is the coating food-safe without the lubricant? I have wanted a superhydrophobic+superoligophobic coating for dishes since I learned of the existence of such nanocoatings, but I haven't seen any that are durable and/or regarded as food safe.

Have you tried looking into applications with training toilets for kids. The clean up on those things is horrible.

So what about something like marble countertops?

Rain-X.