• potoooooooo 🥔@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 hours ago

    While waiting in line for rollercoasters, my dad used to loudly talk at my mom about how “it’s amazing when you think about how these things are built by the lowest bidder,” etc…

  • iocase@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    “lowest bidder and manufactured as shittily as possible without violating the contract” doesn’t roll off the tongue quite the same.

  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Really depends on what you want and expect. “Military Grade” or real military surplus? I’ve been happy with my diesel generator and the jerry cans are definitely better then civilian stuff. I managed to get a military surplus 6.2L diesel engine for a engine swap, which has a few advantages over the civilian version. Water proof, steel ammo cans are definitely plastic shoe boxes from walmart.

    • Paddzr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Not sure about US but UK Surplus clothing is the best. I have tropic trousers and they’re not only super comfortable, they’re the most practical with insane amount of pockets and will survive whatever i do in them… and they cost 1/4 of a store brand jeans.

      Tops are also super cheap but you can get away with camo pants, camo long sleeves makes you stand out. But the bug repellant treated tops are awesome in the summer.

      • Napster153@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Man I want to get military surplus too just to date curiosity but I am afraid of getting yeeted into the Larpers’ group.

        • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          The pants are REALLY nice, but I totally understand your vibe as I almost never wear them unless I am hiking alone.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    ·
    1 day ago

    One notable exception: temperature ranges for electronics. The electronics may be shit, but they will still work when the soldier is an ice popsicle or a roasted piece of meat.

  • jlow@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I saw “military grade” phone screen protectors at the charity shop today (made me lol), so this is quite timely!

      • Shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Exactly the point. Military grade means nothing in regard to its actual quality. It’s just another inane marketing tactic.

        • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          It actually does mean something, most of the contracts for anything you can buy surplus are now public. So you can look up that exact specs the military required and can be ensured you’re getting that.

          Consumer specs can often times be buzzwords or misleading.

          • Shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            It means something in regard to military contracts, though it’s still the bare minimum. For consumer products, though? No. There’s no law, as far as I know, against ‘misuse’ of the term. That means companies can freely market their consumer products as military grade, even if it wouldn’t actually meet the specs. Nevermind the fact that it’s misleading. They know people see ‘military grade’ and think that it’s top quality, despite that not actually being the case.

            • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Oh, I thought we were talking about military surplus. Yeah, it doesn’t mean anything in the general consumer world.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        19 hours ago

        It depends on how well you specified the requirements. Like not leaving out things you might consider obvious. Eg if you’re specifying a sight that includes a range scale, make sure you include that the ranges should be calibrated such that calibrating it at one range will make it accurate at the others instead of just adding random lines and numbers that look like it shows correct range dropoff, and that the ranges correspond to the ammunition that will be fired instead of just copy/pasting from a .22 range sight.

        Think of it like making a wish from a genie (folklore genie, not disney).

      • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        41
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s more like “meets” requirements

        And usually it’s specifically functional requirements. Unless it was spelled out, it was considered and or was designed out / shitty to save cash

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I review bids for government frequently. The requirement is to accept the lowest bid that meets all the requirements. The thing is, if the requirements aren’t written well, it can be a very, very bad deal.

        For instance we bid out for a janitorial contract where the bid did not include refilling cleaner bottles from the dispenser in the janitorial closet, so we had to accept a bid where that wasn’t included, and they charged us $60 every time they topped off the bottles.

      • scytale@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 day ago

        Unfortunately in this case meets requirements just means it ticks a box. The meme is talking about people thinking military grade is top of the line. Like how the cheapest tire you can buy is legal and meets regulations, but it doesn’t mean it’s good.

        • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          The same way building contractors advertise their work with “everything built to code”. Yeah, building code is the bare minimum requirement for something to be legally put on the market. Building to code isn’t a brag. It’s saying “we do everything as cheaply as possible. If we cut any more corners, the house would literally be illegal to sell.”

          • Gormadt@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            23 hours ago

            And even then entirely too many new home builders here in the US cut corners and try to wiggle out of code requirements.

  • hansolo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    How the bots aggregate upvotes that are likely veterans.

    Lemmy is public, y’all. Be careful.

      • hansolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 minutes ago

        That since voting is public, profiles which tend to upvote posts about the military greater than average would be doxxing themselves a bit, even if not commenting.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I think he is trying to imply that anyone upvoting is feeding data into a profile. Which yeah, I assume all my comments and updoots are. That’s why I updoot everything that isn’t spam.

  • TheMuffinMan@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    1 day ago

    As someone who works in defence & surveillance as a systems engineer (so by every measure a civilian), I’m still the one on the right… military grade hardware is a fucking nightmare to integrate into larger systems.

    • cobysev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s not Pixar, it’s Disney.

      Pixar got its animation start when John Lasseter got fired from Disney for promoting CG animation over the traditional hand-drawn animation. He moved over to the Lucasfilm CG studio, which was later renamed “Pixar.”

      Through Pixar (after Steve Jobs bought it from George Lucas), Lasseter and his team proceeded to not only revolutionize CG animation, but to create incredible unique stories with it. They were seen as a real competitor to Disney for a while. They only started making sequels when they started collaborating with Disney.

      Eventually, Disney realized the money to be made from CG animation, so they bought out Pixar. Now it’s a Disney product and their ideas are bankrupt once again. We don’t get original stories anymore, just a bunch of unnecessary sequels and garbage films that were probably written by AI.