1677: "Contrails"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Copper Bezel » Fri May 13, 2016 1:45 am UTC

Yeah, I saw that, too. It just seems so very ... as opposed to the kind of tape which is not sticky? In general, I find myself not really being able to fully appreciate the aesthetic of Australian coinages. There are some patterns in the vernacular that resemble patterns coded for something juvenile or cutesy in American English, and it just feels weird from the outside....
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

CharlieP
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:22 am UTC
Location: Nottingham, UK

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby CharlieP » Fri May 13, 2016 9:43 am UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:Yeah, I saw that, too. It just seems so very ... as opposed to the kind of tape which is not sticky? In general, I find myself not really being able to fully appreciate the aesthetic of Australian coinages. There are some patterns in the vernacular that resemble patterns coded for something juvenile or cutesy in American English, and it just feels weird from the outside....


I love Australian English. Where else do you see "tasty cheese" on packaging?
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Soupspoon » Fri May 13, 2016 10:12 am UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:Yeah, I saw that, too. It just seems so very ... as opposed to the kind of tape which is not sticky?

No, it's single-sided sticky tape, as opposed fo double-sided sticky-tape. Or 'tape' is double-sided unsticky tape and sticky-tape is single-sidedly unsticky tape. Not to be confused with single-sided tape that is an omnisidal (sticky || unsticky) mobius tape. ;)

User avatar
SuicideJunkie
Posts: 428
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2015 2:40 pm UTC

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby SuicideJunkie » Fri May 13, 2016 4:52 pm UTC

I suspect the reason Americans wear their pants on the outside is because they all want to be superheroes.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5474
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Pfhorrest » Fri May 13, 2016 5:07 pm UTC

Tape is not necessarily sticky. Consider things like caution tape, ticker tape, finishing tape, measuring tape, or magnetic or punched data tape in all its varieties. "Tape" most generally just means "ribbon"; not all tape is adhesive tape. (And not just "sticky tape" is adhesive/sticky, if I understand correctly that that term is synonymous with "Scotch tape" / "Sellotape"; masking tape and duct tape and gaffer's tape and so on are all sticky too. And Scotch brand makes a lot of those other kinds too, so I'm not sure why their name became synonymous with transparent plastic adhesive tape. And apparently not all adhesive tape is pressure-activated like all of those, either; some require a solvent or heat to be applied to cause them to stick).
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Copper Bezel » Sat May 14, 2016 7:35 am UTC

"Transparent plastic adhesive tape" itself would also include packing tape / parcel tape. Scotch tape / Sellotape / sticky tape is the crunchy ~1cm wide kind that comes in little flat dispensers with teeth, and can be swapped into larger, more permanent desk units instead.

Gaffer's tape is similarly not just any tape owned by a gaffer. Not only are 2.5 inch SSDs not 2.5", but one that was 2.5" wouldn't be a 2.5 inch SSD.

I'm not objecting to the convention by which words are made. I'm just saying that I freaking hate all of the options for this particular object.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby da Doctah » Sat May 14, 2016 7:40 am UTC

CharlieP wrote:I love Australian English. Where else do you see "tasty cheese" on packaging?


Yabbut where but in the UK do you find "mushy peas" in big bold letters as if it's something to be proud of?

User avatar
Pied typer
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 1:59 am UTC
Location: [i]somewhere[/i]

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Pied typer » Sun May 15, 2016 5:07 pm UTC

da Doctah wrote:
CharlieP wrote:I love Australian English. Where else do you see "tasty cheese" on packaging?

Yabbut where but in the UK do you find "mushy peas" in big bold letters as if it's something to be proud of?

Split pea soup, possibly.
Hey, is my flairTM small enough for here?
Image
Also, go here:
http://stackoverflow.com/q/11227809/6388243

User avatar
flicky1991
Like in Cinderella?
Posts: 779
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 3:36 pm UTC
Location: London

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby flicky1991 » Sun May 15, 2016 5:13 pm UTC

da Doctah wrote:Yabbut where but in the UK do you find "mushy peas" in big bold letters as if it's something to be proud of?
I've always felt similarly (as in, felt that something is being advertised that doesn't sound desirable) about the phrase "crispy bacon". "Look! We burned the meat!"
any pronouns
----
avatar from chridd
----
Forum Games Discord
(tell me if link doesn't work)

Mikeski
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:24 am UTC
Location: Minnesota, USA

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Mikeski » Sun May 15, 2016 6:21 pm UTC

Also, "cheese food", which is often dissimilar to both.

And the stuff that doesn't even meet the US FDA's "cheese food" definition, which then becomes "cheese product".

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10325
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby addams » Mon May 16, 2016 1:08 am UTC

jc wrote:
Justin Lardinois wrote:
jc wrote:It included examples where the island natives were talking openly and insultingly about visiting "summer people", who didn't understand that they were being insulted.


I don't understand how you couldn't figure that out. Especially on an island frequented by tourists in the summer. I guess it vaguely sounds like it could be a euphemism for something, but the literal interpretation is right there.


Aha; I spotted the misunderstanding. It wasn't so much the term "summer people" that was the insult, though that phrase is mildly insulting in the general way that the local word for "tourist" is in much of the world. What the linguistic study turned up was more interesting, but takes more words to describe. They basically described situations where the Martha's Vineyard natives would be talking about (and sometimes to) visitors from the mainland, and the natives would be using many phrases that they understood as insults, but the visitors wouldn't catch the insulting meanings.

The explanation was something that's been seen in many societies: The Vineyard natives are an old, established population that is generally not very wealthy, and they (and their neighbors on Nantucket) are under social and economic pressure from the much wealthier outsiders that have bought up much of the property, built fancy houses, and treat the natives as handy servants. There are two very distinct societies on the island, and as often happens, the poorer "servant" class has developed its own variant of the general language that contains a lot of subtle phrasings for talking about the dominant class. They speak the "general" dialect quite well, and have no problem communicating with their newcomer masters, but they can also talk among themselves within earshot of the masters without the wealthier visitors fully understanding a lot of what they're saying.

A number of linguistic studies have been done on this phenomenon, but there's still a lot of field research needed to fully understand how it works. One of the limits is that the researchers tend to be outsiders themselves, so it takes them a while to gain the trust of the locals (who initially treat them as outsiders). And they need local friends who aren't put off by the fact that they're visiting field researchers who view the locals as research subjects. But it's an interesting phenomenon that involves several fields of research, including sociology, economics, etc.

Gee, jc;
That post was good.

Yes.It is a very Old Phenomenon.
Two populations living side by side speaking the same language ...

I think both those in the Higher more Powerful Position
and those in the Lower less Powerful Position play The Game.

Spoiler:
The Game of speaking in Social Code.
The poor often feel like OutSiders at Home.

I've read articles and heard lectures about American Fashion. (fashion is a kind of speech.)
For some reason American Fashion was moving Up the socio-economic ladder.

It seems more Logical for Fashion to move down the socio-economic ladder; From the Haves to the Have Nots.
There were many examples through History, both in the East and West,of Fashion moving Down the social ladder.

But; They say that is Not what Americans have been doing for (shrug) 50 years or more.
And; Americans are exporting Fashion and Speech and Ways of Thinking. "Ya' all like it."

"Ya' all like it." I am very pleased, "Ya' all like it."
I am So glad The World speaks English as a second language.
orthogon wrote:Sticky-backed plastic and its close cousin, double-sided sticky tape, took on a near-mythical status to me as a child. I don't think I ever encountered either, and I built a lot of things out of cereal packets and toilet- and kitchen-roll tubes.

What a sweet-funny post.
I may not understand it.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Wee Red Bird
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:50 am UTC
Location: In a tree

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Wee Red Bird » Mon May 16, 2016 12:20 pm UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:Yeah, I saw that, too. It just seems so very ... as opposed to the kind of tape which is not sticky?

Tape can be used to refer to cassettes (video and audio) or even paper tape. All a little out of use these days.

More common is Barricade Tape, which is usually a non-adhesive plastic tape tied between locations to keep people out. Normally marked with "Police" or "Danger"

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Copper Bezel » Mon May 16, 2016 11:44 pm UTC

Oh gosh are we still talking about this? "Tape" in this case pretty clearly means adhesive tape. Not all trees are plants but you know which kind you're referring to at an orchard. Just imagine I'd written "as opposed to the kind of adhesive tape that isn't sticky?" and somebody punch Pfhorrest (he's already out-pedanted that distinction and I've already chosen not to respond to it.)
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5474
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue May 17, 2016 1:08 am UTC

The point of this pedantry is that the term "sticky tape" likely is as opposed to the kinds of tapes that aren't sticky, so your rhetorical question is dumb and you should feel dumb. The transparent plastic self-adhesive tape variously known as Scotch tape, Sellotape, etc is the most common kind of adhesive tape around the household, so it's not surprising that people call it a synonym for "adhesive tape" -- yes, as opposed to all the other non-adhesive tapes.

Consider for comparison "vegetable oil" being used to refer to, say, canola oil, that being the most common kinds of household vegetable oil. "What, as opposed to oils that aren't from vegetables?" you ask rhetorically, contrasting in your mind this "vegetable oil" with other common household oils like olive, corn, cottonseed, etc, that are all also from vegetables. But the answer is yes, actually, as opposed to oils that aren't from vegetables, like for example any kind of mineral oil.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

robmobz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:18 am UTC
Location: IO91NG82

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby robmobz » Tue May 17, 2016 1:20 am UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Consider for comparison "vegetable oil" being used to refer to, say, canola oil, that being the most common kinds of household vegetable oil. "What, as opposed to oils that aren't from vegetables?" you ask rhetorically, contrasting in your mind this "vegetable oil" with other common household oils like olive, corn, cottonseed, etc, that are all also from vegetables. But the answer is yes, actually, as opposed to oils that aren't from vegetables, like for example any kind of mineral oil.


<Pedant> Olives are a fruit so it is sensible to contrast olive oil to vegetable oil </pedant> as are sunflower seeds which is the other common type of cooking oil here in the UK. corn is also technically a fruit although I have never seen corn oil used to cook.

Definition of fruit from the Oxford dictionary: 1.1 Botany The seed-bearing structure of a plant, e.g. an acorn.

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Copper Bezel » Tue May 17, 2016 1:58 am UTC

But fruits are vegetable matter. There's no point in going down that hole.

Pfhorrest wrote:The point of this pedantry is

... precisely the same as always, willful ignorance for its own sake.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5474
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue May 17, 2016 2:03 am UTC

Copper Bezel wrote:But fruits are vegetable matter. There's no point in going down that hole.

And every kind of vegetable oil I know of is made from something that is botanically a fruit (including seeds, them being part of the fruit), so that is a dumb level of pedantry, but...

Pfhorrest wrote:The point of this pedantry is

... precisely the same as always, willful ignorance for its own sake.

This post had objectionable content.

However annoying and unjustified you think someone's argument is, that level of flaming and slurs in response is never warranted.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

xtifr
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby xtifr » Tue May 17, 2016 2:09 am UTC

robmobz wrote:
Pfhorrest wrote:Consider for comparison "vegetable oil" being used to refer to, say, canola oil, that being the most common kinds of household vegetable oil. "What, as opposed to oils that aren't from vegetables?" you ask rhetorically, contrasting in your mind this "vegetable oil" with other common household oils like olive, corn, cottonseed, etc, that are all also from vegetables. But the answer is yes, actually, as opposed to oils that aren't from vegetables, like for example any kind of mineral oil.


<Pedant> Olives are a fruit so it is sensible to contrast olive oil to vegetable oil </pedant> as are sunflower seeds which is the other common type of cooking oil here in the UK. corn is also technically a fruit although I have never seen corn oil used to cook.

Definition of fruit from the Oxford dictionary: 1.1 Botany The seed-bearing structure of a plant, e.g. an acorn.

You looked up "fruit", but forgot to look up "vegetable".

1. a plant or part of a plant used as food [....]

Note that by that definition all fruits* are vegetables. "Fruit or vegetable" is a false dichotomy. Of course, if you go by the common culinary definitions, then fruits are separate from vegetables, but tomatoes and corn are vegetables, while rhubarb is a fruit, despite not meeting the botanical definition of one. And in standard culinary definitions, seeds and nuts are neither vegetable nor fruit. Which is particularly odd, because sunflower seed oil is considered vegetable oil, even though sunflower seeds are not considered vegetables.

Then, in addition to the biological and culinary definitions, there's the legal definition. In 1893, the US Supreme Court ruled that the tomato should be considered a vegetable, not a fruit. Other jurisdictions may have their own definitions; if you're not a US citizen, you may need to consult a local lawyer. :)

* Except mushrooms. Which are the really weird case, since biologically, they're fruits but not vegetables, while culinarily, they're considered vegetables, not fruits.
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

robmobz
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:18 am UTC
Location: IO91NG82

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby robmobz » Tue May 17, 2016 2:14 am UTC

xtifr wrote:You looked up "fruit", but forgot to look up "vegetable".

1. a plant or part of a plant used as food [....]

Note that by that definition all fruits* are vegetables. "Fruit or vegetable" is a false dichotomy.


You are right. I should have thought to look up vegetable as well. Thank you for the correction, I will just go back to lurking now I have managed to make a fool of myself :oops: .

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Copper Bezel » Tue May 17, 2016 2:16 am UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Who shoved a fucking high horse up your cunt? You made an ignorant rhetorical quip, and other people are pointing out that the answer to your dumb question that you seem so sure is "no" is in fact "yes", as opposed to fucking non-sticky tapes, you hypersensitive goddamn whore.
I don't have any problem with Wee Red Bird, they're only wrong. I think it's wise that someone occasionally call you out on the shit you pull in every thread involving language in any capacity, and with nothing constructive to say about any of the particulars of your second round of pedantry, took the opportunity.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

xtifr
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 6:38 pm UTC

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby xtifr » Tue May 17, 2016 2:22 am UTC

robmobz wrote:You are right. I should have thought to look up vegetable as well. Thank you for the correction, I will just go back to lurking now I have managed to make a fool of myself :oops: .


Don't be embarrassed! You're one of today's lucky ten thousand! No shame in that at all! :)
"[T]he author has followed the usual practice of contemporary books on graph theory, namely to use words that are similar but not identical to the terms used in other books on graph theory."
-- Donald Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol I, 3rd ed.

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5474
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue May 17, 2016 2:25 am UTC

The shit that I pull? I merely have opinions on the matter, something that's not so fucking unusual, opinions I'm willing to hear counterarguments to and maybe learn something I didn't know, like just happened with xtifr and robmobz in this thread right now. You and people like you are the ones telling everyone else to shove their opinions up their asses and not have any in the first place. You are the one shutting down what could otherwise be perfectly civil discussion and I am fucking sick of that shit, so shove it up your fucking hole until you choke on it, I'm done with you.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
Copper Bezel
Posts: 2426
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:35 am UTC
Location: Web exclusive!

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Copper Bezel » Tue May 17, 2016 2:35 am UTC

You called that item a "dumb level of pedantry" when it came up and it's the best thing to come out of what you and I are presently contributing to the discussion.
So much depends upon a red wheel barrow (>= XXII) but it is not going to be installed.

she / her / her

User avatar
Pfhorrest
Posts: 5474
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:11 am UTC
Contact:

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Pfhorrest » Tue May 17, 2016 3:30 am UTC

Robmobz was technically incorrect while trying to be pedantic; xtifr filled him in on the information he was missing, and robmobz thanked him for the new information and updated his position accordingly. That's the kind of polite back-and-forth that could be possible, and I'm a bit remorseful for directing some of my anger with you at robmobz' innocent mistake by calling it dumb. Xtifr didn't attack robmobz for attempting to argue on technicalities in the first place, he just corrected the technicalities being argued from; he responded to pedantry with better pedantry. That's a good, productive, educational kind of interaction. Pedantry met with "shut your pedant mouth" is not.
Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of All Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The Codex Quaerendae (my philosophy) - The Chronicles of Quelouva (my fiction)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26818
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby gmalivuk » Tue May 17, 2016 3:44 am UTC

Pfhorrest, take a break from this thread.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
The Moomin
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:59 am UTC
Location: Yorkshire

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby The Moomin » Tue May 17, 2016 10:49 am UTC

orthogon wrote:Sticky-backed plastic and its close cousin, double-sided sticky tape, took on a near-mythical status to me as a child. I don't think I ever encountered either, and I built a lot of things out of cereal packets and toilet- and kitchen-roll tubes.


I never understood double-sided sticky tape. I pictured it as being in a roll like standard sticky tape, but the internal sticky of one layer would be stuck to the external sticky of the next layer in so it couldn't be unrolled?!? We used to make tiny loops of sticky tape, with the sticky side facing outwards to make fake double-sided sticky tape, which also allowed for a little movement to adjust things.

Did you never back school exercise books in sticky backed plastic? That and wallpaper were standard I think. Although the plastic was a bugger to write your name and class on.

I don't remember ever making a Blue Peter project. I do remember making a lot of sticky tape and plastic based mess though.
I'm alive because the cats are alive.
The cats are alive because I'm alive.
Specious.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Soupspoon » Tue May 17, 2016 12:23 pm UTC

The Moomin wrote:I never understood double-sided sticky tape. I pictured it as being in a roll like standard sticky tape, but the internal sticky of one layer would be stuck to the external sticky of the next layer in so it couldn't be unrolled?!?
DSST is actually two tapes. You unroll a double-layer of tape. The top (outer) tape being an unadhesive (and adhesion-resistant) tape that acts like the non-sticky top of normal SSST both in roll form and during the cutting and handling.

Place the tape(s) down on the first surface you're DSSTing then peel the top-half off (some pre-adhesived envelopes and jifffy-bags come with this removable-tape covering a sticky-patch1, as a pre-applied example) and place the second surface onto it. Hey presto, you've got two surfaces adhesed together exactlty in the wrong position you placed them at...

1 *cough*

User avatar
The Moomin
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:59 am UTC
Location: Yorkshire

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby The Moomin » Wed May 18, 2016 1:34 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:
The Moomin wrote:I never understood double-sided sticky tape. I pictured it as being in a roll like standard sticky tape, but the internal sticky of one layer would be stuck to the external sticky of the next layer in so it couldn't be unrolled?!?
DSST is actually two tapes. You unroll a double-layer of tape. The top (outer) tape being an unadhesive (and adhesion-resistant) tape that acts like the non-sticky top of normal SSST both in roll form and during the cutting and handling.

Place the tape(s) down on the first surface you're DSSTing then peel the top-half off (some pre-adhesived envelopes and jifffy-bags come with this removable-tape covering a sticky-patch1, as a pre-applied example) and place the second surface onto it. Hey presto, you've got two surfaces adhesed together exactlty in the wrong position you placed them at...

1 *cough*


It's like someone looked at glue and thought 'how can we make this more inconvenient?".
I'm alive because the cats are alive.
The cats are alive because I'm alive.
Specious.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed May 18, 2016 2:51 pm UTC

The Moomin wrote:It's like someone looked at glue and thought 'how can we make this more inconvenient?".
Ummm.. Not really, except for my off-hand joke about inevitably positioning the surfaces wrong, first time.
Spoiler:
Assuming you're not needing adhesion greater than that available from the decent strength of the contact/pressure-sensitive adhesive (usually sufficient, though chemically bonding and/or reactive mixes are greater), you benefit from the lack of mess, especially 'squidging' and soak-through of porous paper and fabric materials, that you might get with the PVA liquid glue or even 'stick'-type (e.g. Prit) that you'd feel comfortable with using, or giving to use, in children's crafts and similar projects.

Just find the end of the tape (easier than with some tapes because of the double-layer) unwind enough to cover the length adjudged need bonding, cut and lay in place {and repeat with further lengths to cover the width required, or continue around the perimeter/spot around the centre of the area, according to the demands of the particular task}, then tease off the low-stick backing (easy because of the stress changes between rolled and flattened bi-laminated forms, often leaving the ends of the top layer frayed away from the bottom and simply plucked away entirely) and carefully place the second material layer atop.

(If you're not applying anything as weak as crepe paper, you can ease off a misapplied top layer and retry the position a few times. And putting the tape first onto a weak material can use the remaining tape-substrate's strength when reverse-peeling the strong base away from the fragile material.)

In short: assess your needs; unroll/cut/place and repeat as necessary; peel the top off, place the piece (undo and redo as necessary and possible)... and you're done.

Squirt and squidge (liquid glue) or smear and press (stick glue) is a little simpler, but the possible resulting mess can be worse (than the small lengths of non-stick 'waste tape' layer could be, if you don't use them for something), and you don't even need to hold the bits together while the adhesive 'dries'. (If it doesn't hold enough straight away, you probably needed more anyway.) And you can even strategically preapply bits of the tape to hold in place an item whilst waiting for the smeared glue to dry or set.
And apparently there's rather neat skin-tape/bra-tape, that is applied in DSST form betwixt fabric and epidermis, to help prevent 'wardrobe malfunctions' when wearing (not only, but especially) sheer strapless and backless numbers with very little in the way of visible support except perhaps the very parts of the body you're attempting to keep not-quite-uncovered. But I've very little personal experience/need of such things, myself. :)

Hafting
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 11:23 am UTC

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Hafting » Wed Jun 08, 2016 11:04 am UTC

Soupspoon wrote:DSST is actually two tapes. You unroll a double-layer of tape. The top (outer) tape being an unadhesive (and adhesion-resistant) tape that acts like the non-sticky top of normal SSST both in roll form and during the cutting and handling.


That would be the thick kind of DSST. Useful for gluing something flat – like a framed picture – onto a wall that is not completely flat.

There is also double-sided sticky tape that is thin & transparent, just like the more common single-sided tape. Then, there is no protective tape between, so one sticky layer connects to the other until you unwind it. Unwinding does not become "impossible", it doesn't stick to itself any more than single-layer tapes do. Tearing off a long piece is trick as both sides sticks very well to fingers though.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 1677: "Contrails"

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Jun 08, 2016 1:30 pm UTC

Hafting wrote:
Soupspoon wrote:DSST is actually two tapes. You unroll a double-layer of tape. The top (outer) tape being an unadhesive (and adhesion-resistant) tape that acts like the non-sticky top of normal SSST both in roll form and during the cutting and handling.


That would be the thick kind of DSST. Useful for gluing something flat – like a framed picture – onto a wall that is not completely flat.

There is also double-sided sticky tape that is thin & transparent, just like the more common single-sided tape. Then, there is no protective tape between, so one sticky layer connects to the other until you unwind it. Unwinding does not become "impossible", it doesn't stick to itself any more than single-layer tapes do. Tearing off a long piece is trick as both sides sticks very well to fingers though.

I have encountered 'thick' DSST, which has a foamy 'tween backing' perhaps a millimetre or such thick (also sold in handy precut square 'patches', especially when it gets too thick to actually wind round in a roll, profitably), but all the 'thin' DSST I have encoutered is as described. (It might come in a dispensor, which separates the tweeny-layer internally and gathers it up for convenient periodic disposal, whilst 'serving' just the doubly-sticky layer.) I've never encountered single-strip doubly-sticky tape.

That may be my inexperience of the varieties available. It has been years since I've bought any (slightly fewer years since I last used any, of mild vintage) and both time and geography might have isolated me from a physically different product on the market under the same description.

(And maybe not 'impossible' to unwind, but more difficult in the way that face-on-face standard adhesive tape is more tenacious than it is when face-on-reverse, as it is prior to dispensing, or whilst removing multiple layers from a(n over-)securely wrapped package.)


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: acunning40, Google [Bot] and 48 guests