It really is a form of not-at-all-subtle trolling. If you feel like you're talking to a wall on the internet, the correct move is to stop interacting with a waste of time.
Or don't repeat yourself, because the text is static, and it's not required. You put it there once, and it's still there. Forum sliding with spammy garbage doesn't make friends. Saying the same thing a different way still amounts to an internet fight, but it's arguing without trolling.
Since you are new here, you should know that the HN guidelines recommend assuming good faith at all times. They also suggest avoiding flame bait, which is what accusing someone of trolling is. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
You've mis-read my motives and this situation, perhaps @jaxwerk's suggestion that I was being condescending was enough to convince you it was true, however that comment is making an incorrect assumption. I didn't feel like I was talking to a wall, I asked the same question of a different person, a person who after I asked the first time, suggested that motorcycles tend to lean into a turn when turning. If you've ridden a motorcycle and know how to counter-steer, you'd know that motorcycles tend to right themselves while turning and that you have to keep counter-steering in order to maintain the turn.
My question was honest. I know from experience that the question of whether someone has ridden a motorcycle is very important when discussing counter-steering. Many people who've only ridden bicycles don't believe counter-steering exists at first. The people who understand counter-steering are the people who've taken a motorcycle safety course and/or learned about motorcycle racing and/or experimented while riding. It's much, much easier to feel & understand counter-steering on a motorcycle than a bike, and it's far, far more important.
I want to know more about how and why this poop finds it's way into a train load, and why there are train loads at all?
Why did they put it on a train? Other than porta-potties, are there any other situations where poop isn't flushed into the sewers?
Do sewage plants normally haul away treatment byproducts as cargo? How much of this, if any, comes from treament processing plants and not ad-hoc plumbing substitutes? I'd figure only porta-johns would have this problem?
Other than porta-potties, are there any other situations where poop isn't flushed into the sewers?
Where, exactly, do you think the poop goes once it's flushed into the sewers?
Sewers are not magical portals into another realm that we can just dump poop into forever. The sewers run to sewage plants where the water is extracted and treated to be sent back into the water supply. The poop that's left over has to go somewhere...
Listen, I get that there are non-decomposable solids like fatberg in the sewage system, but I figure, even in NYC, there'd have been a system in place to reduce that quantity to an amount more managable than a scale that requires freight train shipping to other states.
Human poop is by abitrary fractions, grease, plant fiber, bacterial biomass, ph imbalanced water and table scraps.
Processing plants deal with that, plus everything else people dump down the drain, or what fits without clogging during heavy rain.
The only reason the human excrement is not completely liquified is because digestive tracts are sensitive living membranes, and not chemical distillation vats.
Industrial processing is capable of leveling off the organic waste into salts with enough chemical action, and the grease can be processed through saponification. Our guts aren't capable of hydrolysis, over-boiling organic material until it's transformed and destroyed, or incinerating the waste in situ, but given that NYC has been dealing with the output of millions of toilets for over a hundred years, a brute force option like carting by train seems like a brainless, unsophisticated hack.
How does there come to be such an overflow that trains are the only option? It makes sense to me that porta-potties get handled in their own way, and if that's all this is, then I can see what happened. But if processing demands outstripped the capacity of on site management operations, I'd be interested to learn how that happened, and what leads to those conditions.
I'd figure big cities, like New York, all have had better infrastructure than this since at least the 1950's, when more options for advancing technologies appeared on the table.
These digester eggs presumably do more than just skim and filter purified water for recirculation:
> I'd figure big cities, like New York, all have had better infrastructure than this since at least the 1950's, when more options for advancing technologies appeared on the table.
The NYC sewage system dates back to 1850, with full coverage of the city only being achieved in the early 1900s. New technologies can and are added to the system (water treatment was introduced in the 1940s) - but there has never been a wholesale reconstruction of the sewer system.
It really is a form of not-at-all-subtle trolling. If you feel like you're talking to a wall on the internet, the correct move is to stop interacting with a waste of time.
Or don't repeat yourself, because the text is static, and it's not required. You put it there once, and it's still there. Forum sliding with spammy garbage doesn't make friends. Saying the same thing a different way still amounts to an internet fight, but it's arguing without trolling.