5,445 karma · joined May 4, 2012
Firefox as "just a browser" that is entirely dependent on funding from its main competitor just isn't a future-proof solution. That's why they keep on trying to come up with new revenue streams.
Thoughts from Derek Lowe (In The Pipeline).
FreeBSD seems to have three paid directors: https://freebsdfoundation.org/about-us/our-team/
Debian has a leader and also seems to be more a volunteer organisation than a full company: https://www.debian.org/intro/organization
I don't know if you have ever worked in a larger team that lacked someone to make decisions, take responsibility and set a strategy, but in my experience that is almost always a disaster.
Expecting Mozilla to somehow function without a CEO, unlike pretty much every other charity in the world, is just not reasonable.
So to make any sort of sensible decision you need to know how bad these plastic particles really are, to weigh that against the cost of avoiding them.
> Exposure modeling results suggested that the highest estimated daily intake was 20.3 ng/kg·day for infants drinking microwaved water and 22.1 ng/kg·day for toddlers consuming microwaved dairy products from polypropylene containers.
> Furthermore, an in vitro study conducted to assess the cell viability showed that the extracted microplastics and nanoplastics released from the plastic container can cause the death of 76.70 and 77.18% of human embryonic kidney cells (HEK293T) at 1000 μg/mL concentration after exposure of 48 and 72 h, respectively.
If I'm reading this right, they exposed these HEK293T kidney cells to far higher concentrations (1000 μg is 1000000 ng, and that's per mL) than toddlers would be exposed to from these containers. So the fact that the cells die doesn't really mean much, since exposure to too much of anything will cause cells to die.
The real question is whether the exposure you'd receive from occasional microwaving would be enough to ever cause any meaningful health problems. Unfortunately papers like these always like to talk about dramatic metrics like 'billions of nanoplastics' without putting that into any meaningful context.
The real question is whether the exposure you'd receive from occasional microwaving would be enough to ever cause any meaningful health problems. Unfortunately papers like these always like to talk about dramatic metrics like 'billions of nanoplastics' without putting that into any meaningful context.