Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2021/01/05/use-this-code-to-get-50-black-face-masks-for-cheap.html
…
50Y5R3W8
“The promotional code you entered has expired.”
1 Like
Yeah, a lot of the Boing Boing merch managed by another site is either a scam or plain crap. I found the only thing I find worth buy from them are the training bundles. Cables, “desktop airconditioner” (aka swamp cooler), and other questionable merch should be avoided. I had to pull my “I refuse acceptance of this sale per UCC § 2-608” when they claimed “all sales are final”. Nope. You paid with a credit card, you can charge back on this basis. They don’t like it but it’s legally a way around their “all sales final” bs.
4 Likes
Code doesn’t work
1 Like
Meh. Home Depot has a variety of dust masks in stock for pennies more per mask. Presumably your local ACE / TrueValue / Lowes / etc has similar. Zoro has some (house brand for the same cost $15/50 or recognizable brands) – $5 shipping under $50.
One big difference though. No layers and layers of spammy referral links.
2 Likes
As the pandemic grows increasingly worse, people should be considering getting respirator grade performance masks. And it’s possible to get both a stylish black mask and respirator grade performance from South Korean KF-94 masks.
Respirator grade performance masks work better as source control masks than cloth masks, and also work as personal protective equipment, something that cloth masks are very bad at because they’re better at filtering large droplets when they’re exhaled, before they’ve evaporated into smaller droplets.
Process engineer, with a specialty in aerosol science, Aaron Collins posts mask review videos, in which he tests various high quality masks for efficacy using an aerosol particle generator and particle counting machine. He gives his test results as well as links to where he purchased the masks. Plus the KF94 masks he’s testing are already certified by South Korea as meeting the KF 94 standard. (He tests other types of masks as well, but the KF94 are his favorite for everyday use.)
The masks in the OP are procedural style masks which leak at the sides and are not designed to fit the face tightly. They can be as little as 10% effective when breathing in because so much of the air bypasses the filter entirely as you breathe in – it doesn’t matter how good the filter is if the air is going around the sides instead of through it.
If you’re going to wear a mask you might as well wear a good one since it doesn’t take any extra effort to do so. Plus purchasing KF 94 mask does not take away N95 masks from any front line providers.
Collins is not a medical doctor, but he does go over the basic math behind exposure and filtration levels.
We don’t know exact exposure limits that lead to covid infection but we can do some comparative math based on arbitrary numbers.
If it takes 1,000 viral particles to infect you, and you’re in an environment where you’re going to breathe in 1,000 of them in 10 minutes without a mask, then:
A mask that is 50% effective could let you be in that same environment for twice as long - 20 minutes in this hypothetical - before you inhale 1,000 particles.
With a 95% effective mask, it takes 20 times as long to get the same exposure vs. not wearing a mask.
With a 99% effective mask, 100 times as long.
The KF-94 masks Collins tests test at up to 99% filtration while being worn (testing while being worn by actual test subjects doing various tasks is part of the KF 94 standard). That kind of filtration makes you a lot safer than cloth masks or procedural masks.
Mask filtration efficacy matters. It matters a lot.
2 Likes
This is disturbing.
12 Likes
Maybe they meant anti-fogging?
Dunno, but this is a great feature:
The ability to filter “anti-particles” is pretty impressive and will find uses in physics labs all around the world.
7 Likes
Here’s a write up of Arron Collins and what he calls “general population respirators” on Yahoo.
He’s not the only source of information out there, but there is a real dearth of solid, data based info for consumers when it comes to actually buying specific masks.
2 Likes
If you want to eliminate anti-particles just rub it on some normal matter. CAUTION: using this procedure on large quantities of anti-particles can result in lethal exposure to gamma radiation.
5 Likes
Excellent. I’ll use it to wrap my bananas in.
Just look at it. Through the safety of an anti-particle filter, of course.
7 Likes
The buyer may revoke his acceptance of a lot or [commercial unit](§ 2-105. Definitions: Transferability; "Goods"; "Future" Goods; "Lot"; "Commercial Unit". | Uniform Commercial Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute unit_2-105)whose non-conformity substantially impairs its value to him if he has accepted it
This could explain why “Item not as described” is one of the primary phrases needed to get a refund from PayPal.
However, it looks like they don’t have to give you a refund right off the bat, but can try to cure the issue in other ways, such as replacing the defective item or fixing it.
Since the buyer is generally required to give the seller a reasonable amount of time to cure the defect, a reasonable time to revoke should extend at least until it is obvious that such attempts have failed. The buyer should not be penalized for his continued patience with a seller who promises to correct defects in the goods.
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2212&context=flr
I’m also no sure how this relates to an implied warrant of merchantability, which seems related. (IANAL).
Man. Remember when all the official sources were saying “don’t bother with masks, they won’t help?”
Not our finest hour as a civilization.
2 Likes
Ugh, that was the unfortunate concatenation of evil deinalist Trumpian lies with well meant but harmful lies by Fauci and others to preserve limited stock of N95s for front line providers. 
4 Likes
And now I’ve gone so far in the other direction, I’m all like “I’ll NEVER NOT wear a well fitted cloth mask in public places”.
7 Likes
I’m just assuming those other 7 are Noob Saibot on a black background.
1 Like
Thanks for clarifying this.
Originally, I got this from a lawyer’s blog who was used it on behalf of a client who was contesting the sale of a motorhome. They’re over $100K and come with reams of warranty information. The new vehicle in question had much wrong with it and was in the dealer’s shop more than the owner’s driveway. Much of the workmanship was substandard and non-functional and the dealer finally washed their hands of trying to fix it but wouldn’t replace the vehicle as a lemon. The lawyer is well known in his state for taking vehicle lemon cases. He sued the dealer using the “revoking acceptance of the sale” and ultimately the judge found for his client.
The couple times I’ve used this hack in retail situations have been when the merchant wouldn’t accept my return or claimed “all sales are final”, like trying to get my $50 from Best Buy when they sold me a SIM card and service for my phone that didn’t support GoogleFi service when the vendor’s ads didn’t say that. When contesting the charge to the credit card company, I’ve used that along with “merchandise not as represented or faulty and merchant would not fix it”.
Now your clarification gives me more ammo when I come across this in disputes. These aren’t high-value things like the motor home, just things I’ve bought from StackCommerce that were mislabeled like California King sheets that were “King” size and didn’t fit. Or were out and out fraud like “desktop air conditioner”. I’ve reported StackCommerce for fraud a number of times and they clearly don’t verify whatever a vendor puts up on their site.
Now I just don’t buy anything from StackCommerce.
3 Likes
SlackCommerce = some dude selling crap out of the trunk of his 1980 Caprice Classic.
Pass on all accounts.
1 Like
At least Mark’s link for the masks is to Amazon and not Stack Commerce 
It’s pretty pathetic that Amazon seems rosy compared to Stack Social (dba Stackcommerce).
I have to wonder if many of the listings by Stack Social over the years haven’t strayed over the line from puffery into outright fraud. Certainly many of their 90%+ “discount” claims from “original” prices I doubt anybody ever paid would appear to violate California’s advertised discount law, which requires the “original” price to have been the prevailing market price for 3 months, not just some number made up by a Fivrr-quality copy writer.
Like Trump, Stack Social seems to simply ignore the law and do whatever it wants without any consequences.
3 Likes
