653
submitted 2 years ago by Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net to c/196
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Fester@lemm.ee 127 points 2 years ago

I wonder how many stared without protection, and how many were scammed with fake glasses.

[-] Gormadt 65 points 2 years ago

I'm going to lean more towards fake glasses (benefit of the doubt and what not)

Fake products have been really popping off on Amazon for awhile now

[-] Midnitte@beehaw.org 37 points 2 years ago

Why would you give people the benefit of the doubt? We're stoopid.

Trump staring directly at the eclipse in 2017

[-] Gormadt 4 points 2 years ago

Some are stupid, absolutely

But we can all easily be screwed over by fake products

Shit I got a fake SanDisk SD card a few years ago from Amazon, only found out after the return period because of how long it took to fill. Now I only buy storage from local electronics stores (when I can) and even then I test them.

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

It's not all Amazon's fault. Sometimes people buy a thing, then return it "unopened" because reasons, when, what they actually did, was remove the MacBook from the package and replaced it with a brick, then shipped it back to Amazon for a refund. Free MacBook.

Amazon restocks it because it was "unopened" and ships a fucking brick in a MacBook box to someone for thousands of dollars.

But yes, many, many, MANY, expensive products on Amazon are fake. Even not expensive ones too.

[-] melpomenesclevage@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

There is a lot of red team country there.

[-] ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 years ago

I also noticed after using them with my actual glasses, that it warns not to use them with other optical devices

[-] yuriy@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

I think that’s just because wearing them over regular glasses creates a bigass gap. I tried it for a second this time around before thinking better of it.

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Well, you could put the glasses over the eclipse thingers.... But that would just focus the light right into the eclipse lenses and probably would make them not work so well. IDK.

I'm just some guy. Not like I work with optics for a living.

My only complaint was that, during totality (I was in the path), we couldn't see anything through the eclipse thingers. That's the part I wanted to see, and.... Nothing. Do I need two sets of these? One for totality, and one for the rest of the damn time?

[-] Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 years ago

You take off the glasses during totality. Only during totality is it safe to look.

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

I just fact checked this and apparently you're right.

https://news.utexas.edu/2024/04/08/25-questions-and-answers-about-the-great-north-american-eclipse/#:~:text=It's%20perfectly%20safe%20to%20look,bright%20as%20a%20full%20Moon.

And https://science.nasa.gov/eclipses/future-eclipses/eclipse-2024/safety/

"You can view the eclipse directly without proper eye protection only when the Moon completely obscures the Sun’s bright face – during the brief and spectacular period known as totality. (You’ll know it’s safe when you can no longer see any part of the Sun through eclipse glasses or a solar viewer.)"

[-] Mandarbmax@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Probably not many, the glasses are so cheap to make and so easy to tell if they aren't right.

[-] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago

Don't underestimate the stupidity of man.

[-] Thorry84@feddit.nl 107 points 2 years ago

The region map also tells a story

[-] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 40 points 2 years ago

That's roughly where the path of totality went tho

[-] laurelraven 38 points 2 years ago

Yes, that's the story it's telling

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

Hey now. Correlation does not indicate causation.

But yes. That's the reason because of course it is.

[-] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

When I read OP's comment I thought they were saying that people from that region of the country would be more likely to stare into the sun and then google why their eyes hurt. Maybe that just says something about me and how I feel about them.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 24 points 2 years ago

People misunderstanding and looking at it in partial maybe?

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

It's almost like, you stare at the sun, and it hurts your eyes regardless of whether the moon is in front of it or not.

[-] MadBigote@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

OP swing Texans messed up their eyes more.

[-] TheControlled@lemmy.world 78 points 2 years ago

True story: Today I was on my college campus in California, on the quad, hoping to admire the partial eclipse today. Some enterprising young woman next to me was selling glasses for three bucks. I saw some people buy some and decided what the hell. Unfortunately the only thing she had left was some kind of monocle. I bought it anyway and enjoyed the partial eclipse. After around 10 minutes of looking on and off, I sat down to read the text on the monocle. It said it was exclusively for phone use and under no circumstances was it to be used for viewing with your eye. Saying it could cause serious damage. Thankfully no pain so far, but I hope I didn't do any kind of serious damage. I've had anxiety about it ever since. The seller said to not worry about it and it would be fine. She had no idea either. Lovely!

[-] JudahBenHur@lemm.ee 35 points 2 years ago

sees phone lens cover: "this is an old timey eclipse monocle".. I'm just teasing the idea of an eclipse monocle just made me giggle. I hope you're eyes are ok- it sounds like you're good?

[-] neptune@dmv.social 17 points 2 years ago

I think it's more the manufacturer knows it can't cover both eyes and so tells you not to use it that way. If your eyes don't hurt, I'm sure the damage was very minimal. But what do I know.

[-] TheControlled@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Thanks, makes me feel better.

[-] trolololol@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Well the floaties I bought for the pool had warnings in many languages but only the one in murican got my attention: it's not a toy and it's not a floatation device. What the hell do Americans use it for if the legalese forbids everything?

Same story with people treating kinder eggs like a lethal device.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 52 points 2 years ago

I broke out my welding lens to look through. Worked very well. I can believe most of texas feeling the hurt since 'we' think we're immune to most health and safety warnings published forthe general public.

[-] Kayday@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago

Was the shade in your lens at least 12 I hope?

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago
[-] twack@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Mine too lol. I know that isn't technically enough, but we aren't talking instantaneous damage like a laser here. You need to be much more careful around stuff like that.

Regular UV radiation is a gradient, like going outside without sunblock. You're gonna burn if you are an idiot about it. Don't stare at the thing for 60 minutes straight. We looked, we saw, and then we stopped looking.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah i just looked at it from about 80% to the diamond ring stage. Not more than 5 minutes

[-] Strykker@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago

I mean that is the stage most likely to cause damage, since there is a bit less light so your eyes dilate to take in more, but it is still just as intense.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Hasnt changed anything on me yet. I weld often enough to be acclimated i guess

[-] Strykker@programming.dev 2 points 2 years ago

I mean if your fine currently your probably fine,

[-] twack@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Yep, same here. The auto darkening set I normally use didn't really work, but I just looked through a piece of spare glass I had lying around for a passive set.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yeah i think autodarks have a limited range of activation. 93mil is probably a bit out of reach

[-] MoonRaven@feddit.nl 38 points 2 years ago
[-] pewgar_seemsimandroid 7 points 2 years ago

west Virginians be looking at el sun

[-] HottieAutie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

it's because they're closer to the sun on the mountains

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 4 points 2 years ago

All Hawaiians using glasses as it should be.

[-] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 20 points 2 years ago

What glasses. Cardboard with slits.

[-] MrShankles@reddthat.com 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

But that just projects a shadow of what's happening. I needed the full experience. So yes, idk what glasses people were needing, I could see the sun perfectly fine. The spots and eye-pain afterward was just a bonus feature

[-] cows_are_underrated@feddit.de 7 points 2 years ago

Where can you find these graphs?

[-] Zoop@beehaw.org 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It looks like it's Google Trends, if I'm remembering correctly. If you search for that name, the page should come up, but I believe it's at trends.google.com. They're super interesting to look at!

[-] HottieAutie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago
[-] Zoop@beehaw.org 3 points 2 years ago

You're very welcome! :)

[-] FlaminGoku@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago

Google trends

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

My eyes hurt trying to zoom in on the pixel.

What is the scale on the x axis?

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

The scale is yes.

this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
653 points (100.0% liked)

196

18443 readers
161 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS