I think with plastics the situation is not that great because of the complexities in processing

Might be a significant issue if more applications adopt these kind of festures and can’t share the resources in a meaningful way.

I’d add the calcium from the water as a factors

Brain can put its spin on perception, especially when tired or agitated, like, when anticipating something out of worry/fear (which can be somewhat subconscious).

But yeah having talk with a doctor is not a bad idea.

Finns are naked in public saunas if they are same-gender saunas, like in public swimming halls.

There are pro users that don’t need anywhere near that much memory.

Well, every computer is ”Pro” if you take professional writers as an example. But this is a marketing term anyways, not a definition. If it was an actual definition then I’d take it to cover ”most professional computing tasks”.

Exactly why it doesn’t matter, it’s not an incendiary weapon meant to target ppl in the incendiary way, thus it’s not seen as bad of a thing as an incendiary weapon. To put it in other way: that person didn’t feel the horrible (and longer) incendiary effect because of the other effects of the weapon. Does it really matter if the person is outside or inside of an armoured vehicle? The actual incendiary weapons are whole different thing.

It’s irrelevant since, as in the link:

Protocol III states though that incendiary weapons do not include: … Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armor-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities.

Having an incendiary mechanism doesn’t mean it is an incendiary weapon in the sense of your quote of Section 6.2 of the 1999 UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin.

Did you read my link?

do you guys downvote all true things you find inconvenient?

I think people are downvoting the fact that you are insisting the “…incendiary weapons such as the above…”, when the weapon is not in fact an incendiary, also according to UN Convention