dynisor

> Nope, duct tape is for ducts and can't be made of cloth because the water would clearly seep through the cloth. There are strings in duct tape but not cloth.

I am sorry, but you are wrong. The term duct tape is specifically referring to “Duct tape: cloth- or scrim-backed pressure-sensitive tape, often coated with polyethylene.” We don’t even need to argue if it is good for use in ducts, it is not, I agree. However, that isn’t what we are discussing here. From Wikipedia: “The ultimate wide-scale adoption of duck tape, today generally referred to as duct tape, came from Vesta Stoudt. Stoudt was worried that problems with ammunition box seals could cost soldiers precious time in battle, so she wrote to President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1943 with the idea to seal the boxes with a fabric tape which she had tested. … [Johnson & Johnson’s] new unnamed product was made of thin cotton duck coated in waterproof polyethylene (plastic) with a layer of rubber-based gray adhesive (branded as "Polycoat") bonded to one side. It was easy to apply and remove, and was soon adapted to repair military equipment quickly, including vehicles and weapons. This tape, colored in army-standard matte olive drab, was widely used by the soldiers. After the war, the duck tape product was sold in hardware stores for household repairs. The Melvin A. Anderson Company of Cleveland, Ohio, acquired the rights to the tape in 1950. It was commonly used in construction to wrap air ducts. Following this application, the name "duct tape" came into use in the 1950s, along with tape products that were colored silvery gray like tin ductwork. Specialized heat- and cold-resistant tapes were developed for heating and air-conditioning ducts.”

> The part I quoted says that duck tape is made of cloth and therefore is not duct tape.

The part you quoted doesn’t say that at all. The part you quoted says “She is often misattributed as the inventor of duct tape. However, numerous variations of adhesive cotton duck tape had existed for decades, nor did she invent the specific formulation of the popularized duct tape.” Did you quote the wrong thing? It’s simply saying that the duct tape Vesta Stoud developed was not the final product we know today, nor was she the first to come up with the idea.

> I think people get confused because there is a brand of duct tape named Duck Tape. But even the Duck Tape packaging calls it a "duct tape”

I honestly can’t keep track anymore.

I can find more [0] than [1] one [2] source that states that duct tape was ORIGINALLY used in duct work and that was later found out to be not good in duct work, so we don’t do that anymore. I’m a bit dumb, so are you saying that everyone else is wrong about history and duct tape never intended for ducts? That duct tape was not used for ducts all until 181A-P/181B-FX because it wasn’t allowed?

Even your own source on a separate page [3] says:

> After the war, duct tape became popular with the general public. One popular use was holding together ventilation ducts. Ironically, while this is a use that duct tape does not normally have today, the name stuck and is used to this day.

So I am now confused.

[0] https://www.chicagotribune.com/redeye/redeye-is-it-duck-or-d... [1] https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/duct_tape [2] http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/02/duct-tape-wa... [3] https://tapeuniversity.com/industry/building-construction/du...

That is not what the thing you quoted says, or even correct. All duct tape is made of fabric and it is… well duct tape, so ducts were the intended use case when the name was created.

Duct tape has kinda become a general term for all cloth-based tapes though, so you can indeed find duct tape not intended for ducts, but the fact the name was originally “duck tape” has nothing to do with that.

Of course, but this is like if the whole interview were they have you sight read 10 bars of music, and then 8 bars of a different genre, then 18 bars of another harder one. Then they just spam those at you for the duration of the audition. That is the whole thing. Like, yes. It is “a” way to do it, but it is understandable that there would be musicians who aren’t fond of that interview style.

I believe my solar panels are guaranteed to be at 90 percent of their initial performance after 25 years, for comparison.

Hmm. It’s more like you want to hear the musician play first, but you don’t ask him to play something he is comfortable with to learn how skilled he is, nor do you ask him to play a known challenging piece of work. Instead you just start pulling out short “gotcha” songs with obscure key shifts and speed changes to test them. Like, sure a great musician will be able to handle it if they are a great musician, but it’s just annoying for the musician and there should be better ways to determine if they meet your expectations.

Yeah, I agree. If everyone was in a self-driving car and predictable it would be fine. As it stands now, the car is basically trying navigate chaos. Humans already do a terrible job, yet we are expecting machines with less experience and less information to do better. It’s asinine.