back to article US govt proposes elephant showers for every American after Prez Trump says trickles dampen his haircare routine

Since the United States has had so much success flattening the curve (vertically), President Donald Trump has turned his attention to more pressing matters. No, not rocketing unemployment. Shower pressure standards. As part of The White House's deregulation crusade, which helpfully distracts from the pandemic and has made it …

  1. iron Silver badge
    WTF?

    What hair? Thats a bloody wig.

    I bet he's never spent an hour washing his hair. I have, but then I have actual real hair and lots of it.

    1. 2+2=5 Silver badge
      Joke

      It's a back-combed mullet - this is why rednecks love him so much.

    2. Olafthemighty

      "Actual real hair"

      ...and a girlfriend, but you wouldn't know her. She lives in... Montreal..?

    3. oiseau Silver badge
      WTF?

      Whatever

      What hair?

      That whatever it is he has stuck on his head.

      Absolutely convinced that "laughter is the best medicine" I try not to miss any of the White House press briefings where Trump stars or my daily dose of Peanuts.

      One thing I have noticed in these events (transmitted directly from the White House) is that the blob of hair on the asshole's head is always in a blurr ie: out of focus, like if the camera's lens had a tiny smudge that follows his head movement and blocks his elaborate hairdo so that whatever it is that keeps it propped up remains unseen.

      As this is a constant and it is always in the same setting, it has occured to me that it could well be that the camera crew is applying some sort of optical filter to hide the fact that, yes, it may not be hair at all.

      Has anyone noticed the same thing?

      Cheers,

      O.

      1. earl grey Silver badge
        Trollface

        Re: Whatever

        It's really just a trained red panda. If it weren't for that his pate would look like Mr. Clean.

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Whatever

          Red Pandas are cute. That thing isn't. QED

      2. Schultz Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        The blurred blob of hair ...

        I've seen it too. Clearly, all cameras have to sign a non-disclosure agreement before they are allowed to film the Magnificence on Trump's head.

        Clearly, they just try to obscure the lightness of the comb-over. Can't blame an old man for not having too much hair up there. Could blame him for being overly vain -- but let's leave the moral judgments to the qualified religious zealots, shall we?

        1. oiseau Silver badge
          WTF?

          Re: The blurred blob of hair ...

          ... Can't blame an old man for not having too much hair ...

          No, you can't ...

          ... Can't blame him for being overly vain ...

          No, not that either.

          But, what you can should do is bring him to task, along with his deaf and blind pals in Congress, over wanting to tweak federal water saving guidelines because of his not having too much hair, being overly vain and needing to have his hair perfect.

          O.

      3. Adrian 4 Silver badge

        Re: Whatever

        It's the reality distortion field. He stole it and murdered Steve Jobs.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "followed closely by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson"

    No, I think The Brits may have one that one...

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: "followed closely by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson"

      If you seriously think that look at the picture the Beeb used to illustrate this story. it's ill-hair-ious.

      1. Frumious Bandersnatch Silver badge

        Re: "followed closely by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson"

        Upvote for going a little bit over the obvious "hair-larious." Can I join your fringe?

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: "followed closely by UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson"

          "Can I join your fringe?"

          Sorry, no. I need to keep what's left to myself these days. Have to avoid the PHB look.

  3. 45RPM

    I would have thought that the Republican Party, in its current guise, and those who defend it and its indefensible actions, were a big enough shower without requiring any change to the current legislation.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      "Republican Party [is] a big enough shower"

      A shit shower, maybe. Genuine D.C. Beltway muck/slime. Don't get any on ya'.

      1. HildyJ Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: "Republican Party [is] a big enough shower"

        More of a golden shower. You can choose whether golden refers to his millionaire friends or the Steele dossier.

        1. JohnMurray

          Re: "Republican Party [is] a big enough shower"

          I thought the "golden shower" referred to his Russian girlfriends use of him as a toilet....but now you say his millionaire friends pee all over him too?

  4. Arthur the cat Silver badge
    Devil

    Surely the washing instructions

    say dry clean only?

    1. Brian Miller

      Re: Surely the washing instructions

      You aren't supposed to dry clean hamsters.

      1. Arthur the cat Silver badge
        Gimp

        Re: Surely the washing instructions

        You aren't supposed to dry clean hamsters.

        I wonder how much duct tape the White House buys?

        1. stiine Silver badge
          Devil

          Re: Surely the washing instructions

          They don't. They have pages and expense accounts.

      2. Peter X

        Re: Surely the washing instructions

        That particular hamster has to work the controls as well!

        1. skeptical i
          Devil

          Re: Surely the washing instructions

          It worked for "Ratatouille". ;^)

  5. jake Silver badge

    The Idiot in the Oval Office ...

    ... is attempting to get an Emmy. A daytime Emmy.

    For his hair.

    And that is the legacy the big, fat orange one with tiny hands has invented for himself.

  6. jake Silver badge

    As a side note ...

    ... I use a drill to remove the flow restriction in my shower. Works a treat.

    But drills are probably too complicated for Dummy to wrap his tiny little handsmind around.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: As a side note ...

      "... I use a drill to remove the flow restriction in my shower. Works a treat."

      I came here to post the same thing.

      That's the first thing everyone I know does when they move into a new home, drill out the flow restrictor on their showerhead.

      I remember back when the low-flow water closets first came out.

      You had to flush them at least 3 times and you had better keep a plunger or toilet auger close by.\

      They have improved some over the years though.

      Toto or better yet Wolverine Brass makes a WC that is probably the best toiet I've ever abused.

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: As a side note ...

      "I use a drill to remove the flow restriction in my shower. Works a treat."

      Yes, I am VERY satisfied to do the EXACT SAME THING. Thank you shower head makers for making it SO easy!!! I'd rather control the flow using the valve than rely on someone else's opinion (particularly a gummint bureaucrat) of how much water flow I need to use...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: As a side note ...

        Remember to make sure that the water is turned on when you do that job - ensure that your drill is kept adequately cooled.

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: As a side note ...

          The water for the drill rig came from a largish (4,000 gallon) water truck, which refilled at a city hydrant as needed. We could have used pond water, but it hadn't been tested yet and I was paranoid about potentially contaminating the ground water.

          Thank you for your concern.

    3. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

      Re: As a side note ...

      use a drill to remove the flow restriction in my shower

      I used to know people who did that to power-restricted learner motorbikes. And then whinged when said motorbike engine blew up after their hamfisted butchering and (unsurprisingly) their warranty was void..

  7. Hollerithevo Silver badge

    Why assume he will win?

    It's easy to be worldly-wise and shrug your shoulders and say 'he will probably win', but why preemptively bend the neck? Why create a mind-set for 'an inevitable' which is not?

    1. Excellentsword (Written by Reg staff)

      Re: Why assume he will win?

      I hope he doesn't, but I recall former colleagues saying "Trump will never win! He's an idiot!" and the like, while I went by the logic that if Arnie can be voted governor of California, Trump can be president. If anything, his cultist following has grown stronger since then, and looking at how his supporters view the pandemic, I don't think 170k deaths will matter one jot to them. I hope I'm wrong, for all our sakes.

      1. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: Why assume he will win?

        I don't think 170k deaths will matter one jot to them

        Seriously? But to me, the 20+ million lost jobs matter MORE. Perspective, please. I think Trump is doing the right thing at the moment. We need to get BACK to work, and kids need to get BACK TO SCHOOL.

        In a typical BAD influenza year, you'll see ~100,000 deaths in this country from influenza. but at least people do not LOSE THEIR JOBS and kids still GO TO SCHOOL. Perspective.

        As for shower head flow rates, WHY is it GUMMINT'S business how strong the water flow is? Trump is right, again. Too many regulations. Time to GET RID of as many as possible!

        icon, because, facepalm.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Why assume he will win?

          "In a typical BAD influenza year, you'll see ~100,000 deaths in this country from influenza"

          Trump's 150,000 in half a year sure makes him the biggliest on that count

        2. 45RPM

          Re: Why assume he will win?

          I tried to ignore this trollery. I was half way downstairs before thinking, no. I can't be silent. Trump is a vile, misogynist racist who impoverishes the poor, disenfranchises those who he doesn't like, devalues democracy and commits crime after crime with apparent impunity.

          If you've ever wondered how the Nazi party rose to power in Weimar Germany, or how a failed artist with a Napoleon complex won power, look no further than modern day America. The parallels are there, and they are terrifying.

          Make America Great Again. Don't watch Trump's greed and criminality in silence, or worse yet nod like a parcel shelf ornament and defend him. Shout. Scream. Rail against the injustice. Above all, get out and vote - and make sure that this tragic loser doesn't cheat his way into the Whitehouse a second time.

        3. oiseau Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Why assume he will win?

          Seriously? ... ... possible!

          Icon, because I forgot.

          Write and repeat 1000 times: must.always.remember ...

          Never underestimate the incredible power of stupidity.

          O.

      2. deadlockvictim

        Re: Why assume he will win?

        I put it to good Republicans that a vote for Biden is a better vote than for Trump.

        If they vote for Trump, there seems to be a 50-50% chance that he'll be re-elected for a second term.

        Which means, by the time that 2024 comes around the portion of swing voters will be so pissed of with him, that they'll be ready for a candidate whom they really despise, namely AOC.

        However, if they vote for Sleepy Joe, nothing too politically ground-breaking will happen for 8 years and then the electorate might be ready for another Republican.

        So, Republicans, how soon do you want president Ocasio-Cortez? Because Trump is laying the groundwork for her and the longer he is in office, the stronger she grows.

        1. oiseau Silver badge
          WTF?

          Re: Why assume he will win?

          ... put it to good Republicans ...

          Really?

          Good as in having common sense, unbiased, not racist and/or misogynist, with no double standards?

          They are as rare as a green dog.

          Republicans put him there and will try to keep him and his blind and deaf cronies in Congress.

          Trump or any other Republican in the Oval Office will bring about the end of the US and sink it's population in misery, save for the top 1% of course.

          O.

          1. deadlockvictim

            Re: Why assume he will win?

            No, good Republicans as in freedom-loving, foreigner-distrusting, gun-toting, get-the-government-out-of-my-hair, only-the-Republican-Party-can-let-me-be-rich and so on.

            I'm saying that they have a choice of Biden now or Ocasio-Cortez in 4 years' time. They distrust one and foam at the mouth at the other.

    2. CrackedNoggin

      Re: Why assume he will win?

      Because in 2016 the common knowledge was "He Will Lose!", and he won, because his voters were driven by fear, while Clinton's were overconfident.

      1. Getmo

        Re: Why assume he will win?

        There were plenty of reasons to despise Hillary as well, namely all campaign donations she accepted from big oil and big pharma. Her campaign was looking like we were about to get more of the same: another Clinton and another point for the American oligarchy. I remember quite a few were voting "Not Hillary", yours truly included.

        Still didn't want him to win. There was still a fleeting hope that some different Republican candidate would swoop in from the heavens at the last moment and take his place, or maybe he would be so grossly incompetent that he wouldn't do much damage while in office.

        South Park usually has pretty good commentary on the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDBQzcDQiII

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Why assume he will win?

          "I remember quite a few were voting "Not Hillary", yours truly included."

          It's interesting to see the campaigns arising around names like "Republicans against Trump" and similar though. Even some Republicans are coming around to the fact that no matter how bad Hillary might have been, Trump has been worse than they could imagine.

          1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Why assume he will win?

            It's interesting that facts were downvoted. I assume we have at least one invested Trump supporter since only someone living in a Reality Distortion Field could have missed those news stories. Even Fox News have run items on it.

            1. jake Silver badge

              Re: Why assume he will win?

              The woo is stronger in the anti-Clinton cult than it is in most other political cults. To the point where their hatred for anything Clinton outweighs their dislike of Trump's proven and ongoing negatives. I know a few rabidly anti-Trump people who are going to be voting Green this coming election because in their minds, somehow voting Democrat is voting Clinton. Despite the fact that there are no Clintons running for anything. The mind absolutely boggles.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Why assume...

    It's the hair on his head he's struggling with? I suspect with all the KFC and McDonalds he claims to eat, he has turds of such staggering density and adhesion, that he must need a zookeeper with a wirebrush to drag the sticky shit nuggets out of his arse hair.

    What he needs is a visit to 3M of BASF to have them produce an appropriate 'bunghole safe' solvent to scrub and scrape his crack with.

    1. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
      Pint

      Re: Why assume...

      Jesus god man I'm trying to eat here....

      And you've put me right off my chicken nuggets

      Pass the mind bleach someone.... I have a posting to remove

      1. logicalextreme Silver badge

        Re: Why assume...

        Sure it's not Covid? I've heard bleach knocks it out in a minute, one minute.

      2. Kane Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: Why assume...

        "And you've put me right off my chicken nuggets"

        You get everything you deserve.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why assume...

      Forget the showerheads -- 'Muricans need high-flow toilets again! How else can we flush all that toilet paper we hoarded in March?

    3. Roger Kynaston Bronze badge
      Coffee/keyboard

      Re: Why assume...

      You owe me a new keyboard! Not for the spilt coffee but the puke!

      That said, it did make me laugh a lot as well.

      Time to stop the adolescent humour!

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I thought the only showers he was interested in came from Russian prostitutes?

  10. markr555

    The problem with water consumption limits is..

    That they don't take into account local factors. I live in a part of the UK where there is very rarely (every 20 years from experience) any shortage of water, yet I'm still forced to have showers with poor flow and toilets that barely shift the detritus from the bowl, nevermind down the 10m of soil pipe to the sewer. Water is in plentiful supply where I live, but because it can get a little short in and around the capital, we all have to suffer.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

      We aren't restricted in the UK. Some water companies try to reduce the pressure to reduce costs, but there isn't a flow restriction.

      The shower in my current place could be used as a weapon!

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

        Eh? Reduced pressure = reduced flow capacity (i.e. flow restriction)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

          Sigh. Cause and effect. There is no specific flow restriction. There are no limiters to restrict flow.

          Some water companies provide the bare minimum pressure generally to an area (especially overnight) which can be problematic for some customers, but at the same time, a customer lower down the road could be bursting with pressure. There is no maximum pressure cap. There is no inbuilt flow restriction.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

      Statutory minium water pressure in the UK is set at 1 bar. Complain if yours is lower. Unless you are still using a header tank?

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

      The capital's fine... so fine we can afford to have hundreds of miles of leaking mains pipes

      The problem's normally further south, nearer the blue bit on the bottom of the map

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

        We also have the cleanest water in the world. It's filtered through 8 people before it reaches you.

        1. Circadian
          Joke

          Re: The problem with water consumption limits is..

          As I heard a Londoner comment once “what you complainin’ ‘bout the water for? It’s been passed by the bleedin’ queen!”

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If the OHSG wins...

    I will flag down the next passing Vogon ship & volunteer to listen to poetry for a ride off this rock.

    1. Robert Moore

      Re: If the OHSG wins...

      I nominate the above for quote of the year.

  12. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

    Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

    It really is time for him to be taken to a place of safefy, his safety. He is a real danger to the civilised world.

    Please USA throw this [redacted][redacted] out on his fat arse in November.

    1. The Dogs Meevonks

      Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

      It's ok, he has a never ending supply of new toys to throw out of his pram... and they're the best toys, the most expensive toys, the greatest toys and they're made for Americans (in China).... sorry and they're paid for by American taxpayers.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

      The problem in the United Snakes is that the other party is no better and wants to F up the country in myriad other ways. We're F'd no matter who gets in there.

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

        At least the world will be a better place to live when the other side is back in power.

        Note that we can still say "fucked" here in the US without fear of prosecution, unlike in your neck of the woods, apparently.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

          "Note that we can still say "fucked" here in the US without fear of prosecution, unlike in your neck of the woods, apparently."

          No, we can still say fucked here here too. We can even call our leaders cunts or bastards if we feel like it. Self-censoring swear words (or cuss words as you might say) is a matter of personal preference or possibly because the poster may be avoiding work-based filters.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

            Try saying it in public, takes one complaint and then the plod (if they can be bothered turning up or a kid within 1000 metres) will act like its 1700 and something and drag you over the coals....case in point, kids throwing stuff at my windows, phone the cops, who reluctantly turn up, find said kids, who then claim I swore at them (I didn't), cops let them go and come racing back to mine reading the riot act about swearing at kids and threats of arrest and all because some little tearaways told them a fairy story....

            Also yelling "Nazi" at a politician gets you a date with the beak.....

            UK is becoming closer everyday to Airstrip 1 / V for Vendetta - Attempts to ban Porn, attempts to restrict Porn, CCTV everywhere, facial recognition, spy gizmos in the home (Echos, Google Home etc) and Scotland is 2 or 3 paces further down the line heading for East Germany....even the FM had to mumble some excuses when asked if she was turning the country into a "nation of curtain twitchers" and that she was sure that the police would use any powers as a "last resort".....that was a howler (see "Extreme Pornography" laws for how this is going to go)

            Only reason we're not in 1984 YET is because plod are butt arsed lazy and can't be bothered 90% of the time

      2. DryBones
        Holmes

        Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

        To steal a phrase, well yes but actually no.

        They are not equal. There is not a valid comparison you can make in which they are equal. Most all the comparisons which you believe do so are false equivalencies from right-wing propaganda designed to make you think just this way, so you won't massively turn against them. Projection, racism, lies, and hate/fearmongering are pretty much all they have, these days.

        Oh, wait. Forgot the voter suppression.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Oh has diddums thrown his toys out of the pram (again)?

        The Decepticrats or the Conservatrons.

        Politiformers, wankers in disguise.

  13. Old Used Programmer

    Wrong lightbulbs...

    He's probably thinking of CFL lights. They contain (very small amounts) of Mercury. Hence being class as hazardous materials. Anyone with their wits about them started switching to LED lights years ago.

    1. The Dogs Meevonks

      Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

      I've still got a load of CFL lights in the house... I've lived here 11yrs and I fitted all CFL lights when I bought the house. I've had 2 of them fail in 11yrs... but as I replace them I'm switching to LED ones.

      As for the LED ones I do have... some of them have lasted 6-7yrs so far... so quality is not an issue.

      I have no idea what old Grumpy Trumpy is doing to make them fail so often.

      1. Justin Pasher

        Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

        I've had the opposite experience with LEDs.

        The two big ideas behind LEDs are that they use less energy and they last longer, so less waste. The energy savings is hard to refute, as they definitely use much less than traditional incandescents (not taking into consideration any manufacturing differences that might require different levels of "energy" to produce them). The lifespan thing... well... I hope you don't have fader switches. For non-fader switches, they seem to have very few problems. However, you put them on a fader, and it seems to dramatically shorten their lifespan.

        By my estimate, over the past 3-4 years, we've had at least 5-6 LED bulbs die that are on faders. They don't completely die like traditional bulbs. They start having flickering issues and sometimes will randomly cut off then back on. If you're smart enough, you keep the original box and receipt, and the manufacturer will usually replace them without problems (they typically come with a five year warranty).

        The biggest problem with the push to more efficient bulbs was that it was so aggressive. Halogen weren't really any better (and often times a shorter life span), CFLs just plain suck, and LEDs have had a lot of teething issues. Technology STILL hasn't caught up to it (as exhibited by my experience). I remember the earlier days of LEDs where they wouldn't work at ALL on a fader. As they progressed, you then had issues where only certain faders were "compatible" (I think an analog vs digital thing). So in addition to getting new bulbs (which were closer to $7-$10 each at the time), you also needed to replace all of your fader switches.

        1. Lon24

          Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

          The problem with most 'dimmable' LED lights is they don't dim like analogue incandescents - where reducing the voltage fades the light.

          They fake dimming by being turned on and off too quickly for the eye to detect the flicker but being off for, say, 10% of the time gives the effect of 10% less light. I guess the switching just wears them out after a few million on/offs.

          https://ledhut.co.uk/blogs/news/five-things-need-know-dimmable-led-lights

          I try and stick to non-dimmables and use multiple smart sockets or switches to manage lighting levels.

        2. Frumious Bandersnatch Silver badge

          Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

          I think that the short life of dimmable LED bulbs is to do with heat build up. As in, the light fittings themselves aren't really suitable for bulbs of that kind. CFL might suck, but they seem to be a better match for the kind of light fittings that people want to use with dimmer switches. Mood lighting.

        3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

          "However, you put them on a fader, and it seems to dramatically shorten their lifespan."

          Unlike "traditional lightbulbs, you need to make sure your LED lamps are rated as "dimmable" and use the correct type of dimmer control otherwise you will get more frequent failures. IIRC, the dimmer switch needs to work on the trailing edge of the power wave, not the leading edge as many older style ones do and the control circuitry inside the LED bulb needs extra components to cope with the fast switching needed to simulate the dimming process.

      2. Trubbs

        Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

        I believe the maths advises to swap them out for LEDs before they fail. The replacement costs are offset by lower running costs. Just remember to recycle the mercury....

        1. Antron Argaiv Silver badge

          Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

          Last time I checked, LED and CFl were more or less equal in terms of energy consumption. The LED ones are newer, and perhaps the circuitry has not been thru as many iterations as the CFLs, which, along with legendary Chinese quality, may account for the lower reliability. I doubt the LED ones are any cleaner to make, overall, than CFL, but they do eliminate the mercury. I switched to LED and they seem to be as good as CFL for my purposes (dont have any dimmers)

          1. Remy Redert

            Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

            Good LEDs use between 25% and 50% less power than CFLs. But obviously that's a MUCH smaller savings than between CFLs and incandescent bulbs. A good reason to replace CFLs early however is that a lot of CFLs suffer from fading, which hurts both light output and efficiency.

            My experience with LEDs so far has been that the early ones had a relatively high early failure rate, usually within the first 2 years. If they didn't die early, they'd last a good 10 years.

            1. mittfh

              Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

              The other thing to consider is that the cheapest LEDs may use a capacitive dropper with bugger all smoothing, so resulting in a 50Hz flicker. They may also drive the LEDs at maximum forward voltage, so possibly reducing lifespan as even a small mains voltage spike could blow one of the LEDs in a COB.

              1. hoola Bronze badge

                Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

                Although in my experience the biggest cause of failures is he driver circuit failing. I can understand why a GU10 or BC needs something to convert to DC and smooth the LV output but surely it is not beyond the wit of man to make a controller that has the capability of lasting more than a couple of years. The LEDs will usually last much longer. I have dismantled loads of "failed" LED bulbs to discover the LEDs ar fine.

                What it really stupid is why a 12v bulb needs any active power management at all. This is supposed to be upstream in the 12v feed. You need to sort out the polarity but that is easy.

                Maybe I have missed something but in my youf when I fiddled with electronics, you make an LED work without needing to worry about polarity with nothing more than a bridge rectifier and a resistor (both passive). No switch mode chips, capacitor inductors.

                1. DJO Silver badge

                  Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

                  nothing more than a bridge rectifier and a resistor

                  With 0.025w LED used as an indicator, no problem the heat produced by the resistor is negligible.

                  With a 5w LED used for illumination using a resistor to step down the voltage would require cooling and the power used in the resistor would largely cancel out the power savings from using an LED instead of incandescent.

            2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

              Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

              "If they didn't die early, they'd last a good 10 years."

              Agreed. The main light fitting in the main living room here has five "candle" LED bulbs that are about 8 years old now. They run from a dimmer switch. The bulbs are rated as dimmable and the dimmer switch is the correct one from the same brand as the bulbs. As you might guess from the location, they are the most used lamps in the house and are regularly dimmed up/down to suit. The only issue is that dimmable LED bulbs may not dim as low as you might like because of the mechanics of how the dimming process works.

      3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

        "I have no idea what old Grumpy Trumpy is doing to make them fail so often."

        Maybe he has Trumpian Tantrums and throws things a lot?

    2. DS999

      Re: Wrong lightbulbs...

      He's probably thinking

      Only three words into your post and you're already wrong.

  14. mark l 2 Silver badge

    Clean water will become more and more costly as population increases. Already in the US lake Mead behind the Hoover dam is at a record low level meaning they are contemplating actually pumping water back up from down river to top it up.

    So having shower heads just pissing water away to please the orange one is not going to help preserve water.

    1. DS999

      While wasting water isn't smart, so much of the water flowing through Lake Mead is used for agriculture in deserts where it doesn't really belong that worrying about flow from California/Arizona residents' shower heads is focusing on the wrong problem.

      Problem is, those farmers have a LOT of political pull, and the way the water allotments were set up makes it really hard to change them despite population in the region increasing by over an order of magnitude since they were drawn up.

  15. Mike Richards Silver badge

    Ah well...

    ...the Colorado River was overrated anyway - much better that all of its water ends up sluicing geriatrics in Phoenix than running wastefully to the ocean.

    1. Trubbs

      Re: Ah well...

      Help to keep the sea level down I suppose

    2. IGotOut Silver badge

      Re: Ah well...

      It's ok, the almond Smilk* drinkers are helping to keep the levels down

      *synthetic milk. You know the stuff that's put un unrecyclable cartons, loaded onto heavily polluting container shipsband sent half way around the world.

      1. Circadian
        Trollface

        Re: Ah well...

        @igotout

        Sorry, but the correct term for that sort-of white fluid is nut juice... (remember not to gargle)

    3. beep54
      Happy

      Re: Ah well...

      I'm always confused when people say the Colorado River has dried up as I live next to it in Austin and it has a very healthy water flow. Turns out, there's two of 'em and mine works just fine. Has to have repeated dams in fact to prevent major flooding.

  16. Ken Moorhouse Silver badge

    Well now, sir -eh- Mr President, I've got just the ideal thing to go with your showerhead

    A completely watertight and sound-proofed shower cubicle.

    It's our top of the range Goldfish Bowl model.

  17. john_w_g

    What the Register doesn't understand from across the pond, is that recent changes in regulation by past presidents have changed water flow rates for shower heads. They new ones suck. Most people have older models with higher flow rates, and they work well for them. Once they have to replace the showerhead, most hate them.

    1. Sandtitz Silver badge
      Go

      "recent changes in regulation by past presidents have changed water flow rates for shower heads"

      Oh yeah, they made a whole Seinfeld episode about low pressure shower heads.

    2. beep54
      Meh

      Meh. I got a whole new shower not too long ago. Sure, I'd LIKE more water pressure, but this thing works just fine. And, yes, 'Muican here.

      1. jake Silver badge

        It's not pressure that you want.

        It is volume that washes away the grime. That's why I drill out the restriction.

        I can give you as much pressure as you like on 2.5GPM, just by necking down the orifice and making the restriction even greater. Just don't go too far if you don't want to draw blood, or worse. (Don't look up "high pressure injection" or "hydraulic injection" if you're squeemish.)

        You can often find real shower heads at junk shops. Be prepared to pay "antique" prices for units made in the '60s and '70s. Thankfully, you can still get the fittings and washers to rebuild them and put them to use.

        There is also a grey market for imported units. The mind absolutely boggles.

        1. DryBones
          Boffin

          Re: It's not pressure that you want.

          Demonstrably false.

          Exhibit A: 50 gallons of water in a bathtub. Go ahead, get in. The water isn't moving, good luck with your volume washing away grime.

          What you are looking for is actual imparted force, F=m*a, possibly divided by targeted area. You started getting into it a little bit when you talked about boosting the pressure, and then you hied off into absurdium and missed what low-flow showers are supposed to do. Less volume, more velocity, and the effect should stay roughly the same due to being less water moving faster.

          Is your pressure low?

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: It's not pressure that you want.

            The thing that moves the grime is the action of the soap. It takes moving water to rinse away soap+grime. The more water, the faster the soap goes away. It's a surfactant thing; a little bit of water just moves it around.

            And sometimes I just plain like getting super-saturated in the shower, so I turn up the flow on the multiple heads. So does my Wife. It's just the thing after a long day on the tractor, planting several hundred feet of veggie starts, mucking out barns, running/fixing fence, or whatever. You got a problem with that?

            Besides, low-flow showers, taps & etc. are a result of feel-good legislation designed to placate loud, yet ignorant, environmentalists (with a heavy emphasis on mental). Domestic water use is just a drop in the bucket (literally) compared to industrial and farm use. The domestic water use of the 12 full-time adults living here at the ranch doesn't even take 1% of our total water needs.

            My water pressure isn't low. It's perfect for my needs. It had better be ...I installed it myself, starting with drilling the wells, so if it weren't I'd only have myself to blame.

            1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

              Re: It's not pressure that you want.

              "It's a surfactant thing; a little bit of water just moves it around."

              That's true as it stands but is as mis-leading as Trumps statements implying a trickle of water. The restriction doesn't reduce flow low enough that it just "moves it around". There's still enough volume to do the job well.

              1. jake Silver badge

                Re: It's not pressure that you want.

                "There's still enough volume to do the job well."

                Trump is an ass and a liar. It is more than a trickle. It does do the the job, if barely, and it takes far too long to do it. I prefer a tool that does the job exactly the way I want the job to be done, and in a timely manner. Your mileage may vary.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: It's not pressure that you want.

          Americans do need to Karcher themselves because they don't know how to actually wash themselves. It's probably a throwback to the Wild West days when they wouldn't bathe for months on end. And that wasn't that long ago.

    3. Frumious Bandersnatch Silver badge

      <em>They new ones suck</em>

      Well I can see why you're upset.

    4. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge

      Newer ones suck much less

      The first generation of low flow shower heads had poor aim, spattering jets, and they clogged immediately with mineral deposits. Today, pretty much any shower head at the hardware store over $25 will rinse away soap quickly.

      This is the same argument as Trump's war on energy efficient light bulbs. Stop buying 15 year old bargain-bin bulbs and there's nothing to complaint about. 90 CRI LED bulbs exist now.

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Newer ones suck much less

        "Today, pretty much any shower head at the hardware store over $25 will rinse away soap quickly."

        Consider this an invite to come over and muck out the stalls in my barn. It'll be 102 in the shade here tomorrow afternoon, probably 120ish in the barn by midday, so you'll want to get started early. When you're done, I'll give you the option of two different showers in the guest house. One is a modern low-flow unit, the other most definitely isn't. Which would you prefer?

        Some of us work for a living. Showers are an important tool.

        And lest you think I'm agreeing with the Idiot-In-Chief, I can assure you that it's only superficial. A stopped clock is right twice per day. Trump's an ass of the first water, and hopefully the public will agree with me in November and we'll never hear from the chump again. Until he gets that Emmy ... that daytime Emmy, for his hair.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: Newer ones suck much less

        If your shower sucks there's something wrong. They are supposed to blow.

        1. jake Silver badge

          Re: Newer ones suck much less

          Well, to be fair, some parts suck, other parts blow. Some do both at the same time ... for example, do you have an extractor fan?

  18. chivo243 Silver badge
    Trollface

    Megalomaniac

    that is all... sociopath? ok that is all...

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    This is the closest the Americans will ever get to trickle down economics.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Alpha Blockers

    If Trump is whining about his flow issues he should ask his physician to get him a prescription of alpha blockers.

  21. Mark 85 Silver badge

    Post Office Funding

    He's still pissed at Bezos because they have a volume discount. That's the excuse because Bezos challenged him. Seems he hates anyone who disagrees or opposes his brilliance of which there's a long history of his doing that to others.

    He's using the election as tool pure and simple as he and his family vote via mail.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Post Office Funding

      >>He's still pissed at Bezos

      Bezos was at that Moscow hotel too?!?

  22. John Savard Silver badge

    Positive Consequence

    Well, if he also gets rid of the limits on how much water toilets can flush, this will help to reduce the chances of toilets clogging - which will help stop the spread of polio! So for a change Trump might be doing something useful.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Positive Consequence

      No, shooting the ant-vaxxers is how you stop the spread of Polio.

      (Is Polio actually spreading and on the increase in the US?)

      1. Ken Moorhouse Silver badge

        Re: Is Polio actually spreading and on the increase in the US?

        Medics have discussed the correlation between polio and having one's tonsils removed for many years now.

        I would have thought that they would be looking for similiar tie-ups between tonsil removal and Covid, but have not found much on the web about this.

        (Covid "noise" doesn't help here. Just about every web page on the planet that''s been amended this year mentions Covid).

  23. Aussie Doc Bronze badge
    Black Helicopters

    Yeah, sure.

    I'm sure this is exactly the most important issue my US friends have on their minds right now. <big head shake>

    Sorry your moron-in-chief is so useless and sorry that nobody within the GOP seems to be able to hold him to account.

    Wishing you all the best, meanwhile.

    Having said that, would I get into trouble for suggesting Pimplethinskin should be more like Lincoln?

    You know, no longer with us?

    If you don't hear from me again you know my phone was listening to everything I said and passed it on to <redacted>.

  24. TRT Silver badge

    It's Donald Trump on the line...

    he just phoned up to wash his head at us.

  25. Winkypop Silver badge
    Pint

    Just import cheap water from China

    In Trump's case, I hear he'd prefer Yellow River water.

  26. Mystic Megabyte
    Stop

    Red light district?

    Many years ago my sister was as a secretary for a global electrical/electronics company. She worked at the headquarters of the lightbulb division. One day they received a letter (Mrs. Trellis?) asking them to stop selling red light bulbs. Apparently a couple across the street had fitted a red light in their porch and this lady was deeply offended. Crazy eh!

    1. TRT Silver badge

      Re: Red light district?

      Did they also sell green lights? Asking for a friend. Really... his name's Cliff.

  27. codejunky Silver badge

    Hmm

    I wonder if Richard Currie is a Trump supporter or not. Did he make his feelings sufficiently clear? Could be worse, it could have been one of the Dems.

    Anyway if you want a better read of the shower pressure situation here you go- https://www.expunct.com/politics/dear-guardian-the-difference-between-an-example-and-a-cause/

    As for postal voting, a result against Trump will be challenged (the Dems might challenge losing but they want postal voting) because they will want to know how many didnt make it on time due to the postal service not being able to handle it (without significant cash bump) and how many dead people voted.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020