#Paper Waste Reduction

[stphns3311]

Using BIRS, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Fraud Detection, and Proprietary Algorithms, we can track real-time whether goods and materials are genuinely destructed and recycled.

[kalpanahandmadepaper]

Farmer Paper Innovated by Kalpana Handmade Paper

[samaspic31]

Im going insane of how well we’re all brainwashed packaging and single use shit especially in those quantities are !! Recent additions to lifestyles !! Not a fatality

[katycreates]

Things to make: carry pouch for metal straws with sassy environment facts on them.

[headspace-hotel]

I went down the internet rabbit hole trying to figure out wtf vegan cheese is made of and I found articles like this one speaking praises of new food tech startups creating vegan alternatives to cheese that Actually work like cheese in cooking so I was like huh that's neat and I looked up more stuff about 'precision fermentation' and. This is not good.

Basically these new biotech companies are pressuring governments to let them build a ton of new factories and pushing for governments to pay for them or to provide tax breaks and subsidies, and the factories are gonna cost hundreds of millions of dollars and require energy sources. Like, these things will have to be expensive and HUGE

I feel like I've just uncovered the tip of the "lab grown meat" iceberg. There are a bajillion of these companies (the one mentioned in the first article a $750 MILLION tech startup) that are trying to create "animal-free" animal products using biotech and want to build large factories to do it on a large scale

I'm trying to use google to find out about the energy requirements of such facilities and everything is really vague and hand-wavey about it like this article that's like "weeeeeell electricity can be produced using renewables" but it does take a lot of electricity, sugars, and human labor. Most of the claims about its sustainability appear to assume that we switch over to renewable electricity sources and/or use processes that don't fully exist yet.

I finally tracked down the source of some of the more radical claims about precision fermentation, and it comes from a think tank RethinkX that released a report claiming that the livestock industry will collapse by 2030, and be replaced by a system they're calling...

Food-as-Software, in which individual molecules engineered by scientists are uploaded to databases – molecular cookbooks that food engineers anywhere in the world can use to design products in the same way that software developers design apps.

I'm finding it hard to be excited about this for some odd reason

Where's the evidence for lower environmental impacts. That's literally what we're here for.

There will be an increase in the amount of electricity used in the new food system as the production facilities that underpin it rely on electricity to operate.

well that doesn't sound good.

This will, however, be offset by reductions in energy use elsewhere along the value chain. For example, since modern meat and dairy products will be produced in a sterile environment where the risk of contamination by pathogens is low, the need for refrigeration in storage and retail will decrease significantly.

Oh, so it will be better for the Earth because...we won't need to refrigerate. ????????

Oh Lord Jesus give me some numerical values.

Modern foods will be about 10 times more efficient than a cow at converting feed into end products because a cow needs energy via feed to maintain and build its body over time. Less feed consumed means less land required to grow it, which means less water is used and less waste is produced. The savings are dramatic – more than 10-25 times less feedstock, 10 times less water, five times less energy and 100 times less land.

There is nothing else in this report that I can find that provides evidence for a lower carbon footprint. Supposedly, an egg white protein produced through a similar process has been found to reduce environmental impacts, but mostly everything seems very speculative.

And crucially none of these estimations are taking into account the enormous cost and resource investment of constructing large factories that use this technology in the first place (existing use is mostly for pharmaceutical purposes)

It seems like there are more tech startups attempting to use this technology to create food than individual scientific papers investigating whether it's a good idea. Seriously, Google Scholar and JSTOR have almost nothing. The tech of the sort that RethinkX is describing barely exists.

Apparently Liberation Labs is planning to build the first large-scale precision fermentation facility in Richmond, Indiana come 2024 because of the presence of "a workforce experienced in manufacturing"

And I just looked up Richmond, Indiana and apparently, as of RIGHT NOW, the town is in the aftermath of a huge fire at a plastics recycling plant and is full of toxic debris containing asbestos and the air is full of toxic VOCs and hydrogen cyanide. ???????????? So that's how having a robust industrial sector is working out for them so far.

[chalogreen]

Exploring Eco-Friendly Packaging

What is Sustainable Packaging?

Sustainable packaging uses materials and production processes that yield a minimal environmental impact. The aim is to be environmentally friendly.

Benefits of Sustainable Packaging

Biodegradable - They are made from either plant-based or recycled materials that naturally degrade without leaving toxic waste.

Compostable - Decomposes naturally through commercial compost processes. Leaves no trace of plastic.

Recyclable - Commodities consisting of post-consumer recycled paper are recyclable.

Accountable Materials - For example, mushroom fibers, banana leaves, and algae reduce the over-reliance on plastic and the excessive processes involved.

Ethical production - the use of sustainably sourced, locally produced, and fairly traded materials has proven to improve lives while having a lighter impact on the environment.

Small Carbon Footprint - Eco packaging vastly reduces the carbon emissions resulting from traditional manufacturing and waste.

Simple Swaps

Paper or Plastics - Go for paper envelopes, boxes and filler made from recycled content. Don’t use plastic poly bags and bubbles.

Glass vs Plastic - Choose glass bottles over single-use plastics because glass is infinitely recyclable.Support plastic reduction initiatives.

Compostable vs. Styrofoam - Replace styrofoam peanuts with compostable corn starch alternatives. Support the ban on non-recyclable products.

For stylish, zero waste, environmentally friendly packaging solutions pay a visit to Chalogreen. They manufacture their products which are entirely plant-based thus saving the planet.

[beautyandlifestyleblog86]

Ways to practice eco-friendly living in your home

1. Reduce energy consumption:

- Install energy-efficient appliances and LED light bulbs.

- Turn off lights and unplug electronics when not in use.

- Use natural light as much as possible.

- Set your thermostat to a lower temperature in winter and higher in summer.

- Insulate your home properly to reduce heating and cooling needs.

2. Save water:

- Fix any leaks in faucets and toilets promptly.

- Install low-flow showerheads and faucets.

- Collect rainwater for watering plants.

- Only run the dishwasher and washing machine with full loads.

- Use a broom instead of a hose to clean outdoor spaces.

3. Practice waste reduction:

- Recycle paper, plastic, glass, and metal.

- Compost kitchen scraps and yard waste.

- Opt for reusable products instead of disposable ones (e.g., cloth napkins, rechargeable batteries).

- Avoid single-use plastics, such as plastic bags and water bottles.

- Use a reusable shopping bag.

4. Use eco-friendly cleaning products:

- Choose natural, non-toxic cleaning products or make your own using ingredients like vinegar, baking soda, and lemon juice.

- Avoid products containing harmful chemicals that can harm the environment and your health.

5. Grow your own food:

- Plant a garden to grow vegetables, fruits, and herbs.

- Use organic and natural fertilizers instead of synthetic ones.

- Compost food scraps to enrich the soil.

6. Opt for sustainable materials:

- Choose furniture made from sustainable materials like bamboo or reclaimed wood.

- Use eco-friendly flooring options like bamboo, cork, or reclaimed hardwood.

- Select paint and other finishes that have low or no volatile organic compounds (VOCs).

7. Reduce plastic waste in the kitchen:

- Use glass or stainless-steel containers for food storage instead of plastic.

- Replace plastic wrap with beeswax wraps or reusable silicone covers.

- Use refillable water bottles and avoid buying bottled water.

8. Conserve energy in the kitchen:

- Use energy-efficient appliances.

- Cook with lids on pots and pans to retain heat and reduce cooking time.

- Opt for smaller appliances like toaster ovens instead of full-sized ovens when possible.

9. Encourage sustainable transportation:

- Use public transportation, walk, or bike whenever possible.

- Carpool or arrange a car-sharing service with neighbors or colleagues.

- Transition to an electric or hybrid vehicle if feasible.

10. Educate and involve your family:

- Teach your family about the importance of eco-friendly practices and involve them in the decision-making process.

- Encourage everyone to adopt sustainable habits and lead by example.

- Discuss environmental issues and brainstorm new ideas for greener living.

[beakers-and-telescopes]

Genetically Modified Bacteria Produce Energy From Wastewater

E. Coli is one of the most widely studied bacteria studied in academic research.  Though most people probably associate it with food/water borne illness, most strains of E. Coli are completely harmless.  They even occur naturally within your intestines.  Now, scientists at EPFL have engineered a strain of E. Coli that can generate electricity.

The survival of bacteria depends on redox reactions.  Bacteria use these reactions to interconvert chemicals in order to grow and metabolize.  Since bacteria are an inexhaustible natural resource, many bacterial reactions have been industrially implemented, both for creating or consuming chemical substrates.  For instance, you may have heard about researchers discovering bacteria that can break down and metabolize plastic, the benefits of which are obvious.  Some of these bacterial reactions are anabolic, which means that they need to be provided external energy in order to carry it out, but others are catabolic, which means that the reactions actually create energy.  

Some bacteria, such as Shewanella oneidensis, can create electricity as they metabolize.  This could be useful to a number of green applications, such as bioelectricity generation from organic substrates, reductive extracellular synthesis of valuable products such as nanoparticles and polymers, degradation of pollutants for bioremediation, and bioelectronic sensing.  However, electricity producing bacteria such as Shewanella oneidensis tend to be very specific.  They need strict conditions in order to survive, and they only produce electricity in the presence of certain chemicals.  

The method that Shewanella oneidensis uses to generate electricity is called extracellular electron transfer (EET).  This means that the cell uses a pathway of proteins and iron compounds called hemes to transfer an electron out of the cell.  Bacteria have an inner and outer cell membrane, so this pathway spans both of them, along with the periplasmic space between.  In the past, scientists have tried to engineer hardier bacteria such as E. Coli with this electron-generating ability.  It worked… a little bit.  They were only able to create a partial EET pathway, so the amount of electricity generated was fairly small.

Now, the EPFL researchers have managed to create a full pathway and triple the amount of electricity that E. Coli can produce.  "Instead of putting energy into the system to process organic waste, we are producing electricity while processing organic waste at the same time -- hitting two birds with one stone!" says Boghossian, a professor at EPFL. "We even tested our technology directly on wastewater that we collected from Les Brasseurs, a local brewery in Lausanne. The exotic electric microbes weren't even able to survive, whereas our bioengineered electric bacteria were able to flourish exponentially by feeding off this waste."

This development is still in the early stages, but it could have exciting implications both in wastewater processing and beyond.

"Our work is quite timely, as engineered bioelectric microbes are pushing the boundaries in more and more real-world applications" says Mouhib, the lead author of the manuscript. "We have set a new record compared to the previous state-of-the-art, which relied only on a partial pathway, and compared to the microbe that was used in one of the biggest papers recently published in the field. With all the current research efforts in the field, we are excited about the future of bioelectric bacteria, and can't wait for us and others to push this technology into new scales."

[crippled-peeper]

plastic straw alternatives make me so mad omg. paper straws? not only do they apparently contain more chemicals than plastic ones, they also suck at being straws! metal straws? can seriously hurt people and also can cause allergic reactions depending on the metal used! glass straws? they fuckin break and that is extremely dangerous!

one thing I will say is that silicone straws work pretty well in my experience, but I’ve seen people complaining about them too and I’m just like… but they’re reusable. and they don’t suck at being straws. unless you have a silicone allergy (in which case do not use them for obvious reasons) they are probably the safest alternative for drinking straws. and people still don’t like them!! agh.

like what are we doing here man. if someone doesn’t like plastic straws they can just… not use them for themselves. wild. most plastic waste in the ocean is from industrial fishing anyway. not people who need plastic straws in order to survive.

(sorry for the rant but yeah. you get it dude👍)

It’s especially stupid to force everyone in your county / state / country to use “cardboard”/“paper” straws that are full of cancer and reproductive health issue causing PFAS that do not biodegrade and if they do, forever poison the soil that they “biodegrade” into

There’s a lot of misinformation about plastic straws too. When McDonald’s switched to their sipping lids and started making you ask for a straw, they didn’t tell you the lids are WAY MORE PLASTIC WASTE than one single use straw

I always recommend silicone as an alternative because wood, metal, and glass are dangerous as hell but single use plastic straws are still mostly harmless, in the grand scheme of “plastic reduction” theatre

[k00297644]

Tuesday 7th November

Today I continued the publication workshop. Suzannah explained to me how to make a ‘zine’ using a high gsm paper or card stock and I got started on that today.

Ethics and Sustainability is important to me and I knew wanted to do collage for my zine. So, instead of printing out new images to collage, I used discarded wrapping paper from gift sets in where I work. I was able to get a variety of colours to collage, and I also used the prints I had done to day before to collage instead of print new ones (recycling and waste reduction)

I really like how the zine is looking so far!

I did some research after the workshop yesterday and I discovered that you can print digital art using the risograph if you seperate the layers out. I asked Fiona about it this morning and she was incredibly helpful. There were point where I had a hard time wrapping my head around what colour would turn out which way, and after the walkthrough I completely understand it. I wanted to use the digital art piece I had done previously of myself as the different dolls, and carry on the theme of overlapping the blue/pink and the masc/fem.

I did some proofs and I thought that that pink was a bit light, so I went back to the file and made it darker for it to appear more saturated in print.

I really like the first print below, but I thought it looked a bit plain and needed something else. I then had the idea to add a pink and a blue shadow to each figure, but make it a drop shadow to disrupt to colour order and the way it will be perceived. However you can still see the silhouette and the details of the figures.

In the overlapping print, the masculine one is more prominent. The feminine one fades into the background a bit more. This reflects how other people perceive me physically as mostly masculine, and even though the femininity is there and it’s a strong force in itself, it’s disrupted by the masculine influence.

I plan to play around with the different prints I have on Thursday and finish off my zine:)

#art #student #artstudent #lsad #print #digitalart #jackjosephryan

[bloodyproudpotterhead]

That whole reddit fiasco is seriously condescending and dismissive it gives me the ick. So I’m gonna write issues that I had with that finale.

Many of the things that he said just doesn’t make sense. The defense for Roy & Jamie weird behavior is “men are dumb” and “Keeley doesn’t need anyone”. You think we don’t know that Keeley doesn’t need anyone to feel complete? WE DO! The show never implied that she has problems being alone anyway. Also, you can’t fit the complexity of feminism and girlhood into one “girlboss” shape. That’s just reductive. The moment I read this, I knew that that part of storyline is written by men.

Another problem: Defending Jane behavior. Stalking your boyfriend’s friend? Shredding your boyfriend passport?? And to dismiss them as ‘quirky behavior’??? To me, that sounds like giving a pass to toxic, abusive relationships. 

Another one: To leave the ending of Ted & Michelle relationship as ambiguous? BIG NO. To even entertain the idea gives a bad taste in my mouth. This is the woman that begged him to sign the divorce paper, for christ’s sake. And they never built of the idea of them getting back together. They even introduce Dr. Jacob into the story. Was that truly necessary? Was the point to show that Michelle needs to be in another relationship to see Ted for who he really is? 

Also: Ted wasn’t at the wedding? Because he’s at Henry’s practice?? What even was that. You cannot actually tell me that they think this through. What, your kid can skip practice for 1 day to attend your best friend’s wedding?

Let’s even go to the boat guy: You cannot tell me this is the ending they plan for Rebecca from the start. If it did, why not build that narrative instead wasting your time introducing unnecessary new characters? Let us get to know the man better so we know that Rebecca will be taken care of by a man who truly knows her. 

Another issue: Henry. When did we ever see him actually missing his father? Because i feel like I missed that. Even that part of the story was told through other character, Dorothy, and not Henry himself. Why not have a scene where the kid express this himself? Even when he had problems at home, he can solve it himself (the bully story). 

Second to last: Ted himself. I don’t mind if their plan from the start was for him to have a Mary Poppins-like journey. What I had problems with is the way they build that theme. They’re too focusing on symbolism, they never truly build the narrative itself. If Ted was supposed to go back to Kansas from the start, why not show him what life he had and going to have there. This was never at any point shown or even hinted at. Also, Mary Poppins, unlike Ted, didn’t leave her hometown with a partner whose love for her has expired. They began Ted’s arc with showing him that his marriage is practically over that he needs to move an ocean away from her. That’s just saying to me that Ted desperately needs a new start (which they clearly displayed multiple times).

Lastly: The editing and the baiting. There are so many intentional edits and camera works and parallels that are meant to teased if not blatantly directed towards Ted & Rebecca. Why zoom in on the matchbook? The tiny soldiers?? Them talking at the hallway??? I can go on and on on this alone. Even to the opening scene of the finale. Just for shits and giggles for audiences who root for the two main leads? Honestly, that to me just felt cruel. Even if their intention was for them to be platonic soulmate, their words not mine, they never really addressed any of the elephant in the room anyway. The call, September 1991. So all I hear is them saying stuff and not following up on that. ALSO, to tease the idea of romcom MULTIPLE TIMES both on and off the show, even referring many times to Nora Ephron, only to laugh at your audience for believing in good old romance felt truly disrespectful to the late director. And as a long time fan of hers, I won’t let that slide. 

My point is: You can’t just patch bad writing with callbacks while ignoring a huge chunk of the character arcs you’ve built. That’s such a disservice to the beloved characters so many people have grown to love. 

And to say we take it personally? Excuse me, when your audience take your work personally, you should take it as a compliment because that means they connect with your work. So much for a show that preaches about being kind, I guess.

Anyway, I always feel sad and embarrassed when writers have to defend their decisions to their own audience. And that is what they/he did. You can elaborate on what you think happen post-finale to your audience, or even explain your intention, but when a big crowd of your audience question it, maybe you should take a look at the way you frame your story before you point fingers at them.

[stphns3311]

Our mission has always been to implement Circular Economy in the modern day world. Not only to help businesses achieve sustainability but to also reduce the stress of pollution on the environment.

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Grist:

Negotiators wrapped up the fourth round of formal discussions over the United Nations’ global plastics treaty early on Tuesday morning, inching closer to a final agreement that’s intended to “end plastic pollution.” 

Delegates made important progress on the treaty, the final version of which is due by the end of the year. They pared down a lengthy draft of the text and agreed on a formal agenda for “intersessional” work ahead of the next — and final — meeting, in Busan, South Korea, scheduled for November 25. That work will involve critical issues around funding the treaty’s provisions and identifying plastic-related chemicals that should be restricted.

The agenda, however, doesn’t mention the elephant in the room: whether and how the treaty will limit plastic production.

“Nothing happened that was particularly surprising, but this outcome is still quite demoralizing,” said Chris Dixon, an ocean campaign leader for the nonprofit Environmental Investigation Agency who attended the talks. Other groups called the outcome “disappointing” and said the negotiations had been “undermined by deep-rooted industry influence.” 

Dixon and other environmental advocates have spent the past three meetings fighting for a treaty that addresses the “full life cycle” of plastics — meaning one that goes beyond waste management to limit the amount of plastic that’s made in the first place. 

The world already produces more than 400 million metric tons of plastic per year, and fossil fuel companies are planning to dramatically increase that number over the next few decades. Plastics have been described as the fossil fuel industry’s “plan B” as the world pivots away from using oil and gas in transportation and electricity generation. This could have dire implications not only for plastic pollution but for the climate; according to a recent study, greenhouse gas emissions from growing plastic production could eat up one-fifth of the world’s remaining carbon budget by 2050. 

Just because production limits aren’t on the agenda for ad hoc working groups, however, doesn’t mean they’re out of the treaty; it just means delegates may arrive in Busan less prepared to discuss technical concepts related to plastics manufacturing. Language about the “full life cycle” of plastics is still in the treaty’s mandate — which countries agreed on in 2022 — and throughout the draft text. Countries can also host unofficial discussions on the topic between now and November. 

There’s already widespread support for addressing plastic production in the treaty. Dozens of countries supported a statement presented by Rwanda and Peru last week saying that a global plastic reduction target should be “a North Star” for the treaty. The paper suggested reducing production by 40 percent below 2025 levels by 2040. Another declaration, published on Monday and signed by 28 countries, called for the treaty to “achieve sustainable levels of production of primary plastic polymers.”

[cowboyjen68]

Oh cowboyjen, the world feels so harsh and damaging and I feel so small. I’m a child of abuse and I feel like I had to teach myself everything to heal myself - but not before I fucked up my life and squandered a windfall that could have ensured my comfortable retirement. I’m so sad and angry and ashamed. I was only doing the best I could at the time. Why is the world so messed up and harsh? Do you think it’s getting better? I’m heartbroken.

I know the world is scary and unpredictable and dangerous. The bad news is, it always had been. Which is also the good news in some ways. The cycle of our world is that it is a constant battle of unfair vs fair and love vs hate and good vs evil and dangerous vs safe. When humans are involved the there will always be an up and down and back and forth in the world we are given to live in. It can be awful to see hurt in the world but can be reassuring to know it is nothing new, only the details and humans find a way to bring comfort and happiness to each other and themselves time after time. 

I had a pretty happy and healthy upbringing and I STILL managed to waste the hard earned money my mom and dad left to me. It was not a windfall but sure would have made my life more financially stable.  At the time I let my wife spend most of it and I take the blame. She was following her own patterns from growing up poor and I did not have the courage to say “no”. The loss caused me to do a few things that, had they continued, could have had a devastating impact on my life. 

After we split up I had the choice of continuing to spend my energy on wishing things were different and to wonder “what if” or do some actual work to make my life better, if not immediately, at least in my future.  My friends encouraged me to get a therapist and to figure out what priorities were important to me. The problem I was facing, which sounds like you are also struggling with, was the fact that I felt so overwhelmed I was stuck in the mud of what was done and unable to know how or what step to take to get back to solid ground. 

I listed on paper what I wanted. I listened to myself. The Me now and not the one from the past. It took several tries to be honest with myself and to lay out a plan. I was, like you, so ashamed of my actions I wasn’t seeking help or trying to find ways to improve my lot in life. When I asked for help I was sure people were judging me and I had to be okay with that happening to get the the resources that could give me some leverage to move on and improve my life.

The pep talk is you are not the only one who screwed up life by not being financially responsible and you can make up for lost chances. Now here are a few of the solid lessons I learned:

Ask your bank for help. Mine has a FREE financial planning/debt reduction planning service and app that I knew nothing about. Look to social services, even ones you think you are not eligible to use. Social workers are masters of networking and if they can’t help they might know someone who can. Don’t ever be ashamed to use local foodbanks or clothing banks. Saving 20.00 from the grocery store is 20.00 you can save or use to put gas in the car to continue working. Don’t spend money to save money. You don’t need an pricey app or special account or fancy investments. A simple free savings account at a credit union is a great start. 

I work three jobs and 7 days a week. I take any hours offered me and I am never afraid to take a few Cash Under The Table jobs when they arise. At 54 I didn’t want to be working 60 to 80 hours a week. BUT I have goals and that is what it is going to take to reach them. I did however, promise myself to not be miserable at my job so I work at three places I love. this was my compromise. I will work my ass off but not as jobs I hate.  This is my good fortune and I don’t take any of that for granted.  

There will be sacrifices to play catch up in your life BUT you can decide which things you are willing to sacrifice and what you will not. Be aware of these decisions and don’t act out of emotions. Weigh the next step with your happiness and how it will affect your success to find the balance. 

You will get your head above water again but it does take work. Sadly our life is not a cute 3 minute montage with a catchy song in some feel good rags to riches movie. It takes time and effort and focus. I do promise. The work, and YOU are worth it. 

[alchemicaldesignquery]

Playing the Hero vs Playing the Role

Something I've noticed in the stretch of conversations that pop up around 6v6 / 5v5 (Overwatch 1 vs. Overwatch 2) is the specific way folks (don't) talk about Tank.

Those players who enjoy(ed) it can get dismissed by large portions of the playerbase, because at some point it was decided that

No one wants to play the role

and you'd be forgiven for believing that? Because Queue times are almost always brought up. They were touted (developer's said as much) as the reason for why the game shifted to a 5v5 format for the sequel. Which...also kinda explains why the design and balance decisions feel a lot like throwing wet paper at a wall to see what sticks. Experimentation and all.

I'd argue though, that Tank, unlike the other Roles in the game, has not had very good decisions made at the design level. I would even go as far as to say, that, after the original cast, there has not been a well designed Tank released into either the original Overwatch 1 or Overwatch 2.

Which isn't to say the heroes released who happen to be Tanks are all bad? But there's a firm demarcation between-

A well designed Hero; engaging, fun, interactive and encouraging of any player willing to give them a try.

and

A well designed Tank: a Role/Job within the game with a certain responsibilities that caters to specific players with particular wants.

There's evidence of this demarcation found in other Roles. The Support Role, for instance, has seen a drastic uptick in "DPS"centric heroes throughout the last few years of Overwatch.

Illari, Kiriko, and, Baptiste all saw very swiftly delivered, widely useful, and borderline, automated mechanics introduced with their kits that performed their Support duties for them, while their Damage outputs and options became the core elements of engagement and interaction.

The devs have gone on to suggest this was done to entice more DPS players into the Role and Supports, for the last year, did enjoy a very promising and popular (read: broken) status.

The question of whether this is a good philosophy, let alone a fair one, is another discussion.

The argument I'd make is that these might be well designed Heroes? But the veracity of them being well designed Supports, is pretty loose and unstable.

Switching over to the Tank Role, the demarcation becomes even more stark; Tanks with heavy DPS influence (Mauga, Junkerqueen, Rammattra, Roadhog) tend to deliver a minimal Tank experience in favour of an oversimplified

Lots of Health + Sustain with unique Damage applications.

which, again, brings up the value of the design and how it heavily leans toward the Hero aspect while leaving the Role, largely unconsidered, if not outright minimized.

And this goes back further than the newer releases/re-works, into Overwatch 1. Of all the Tanks that have been released, after the original cast, how many can actually be considered well designed?

Sigma's kit remains a bloated 'omni-answer' with no weaknesses and little variability.

Orisa's kit went from a delay-bot with little agency, to a "Press 1-button every 5s" playstyle between the two games.

Doomfist's Tank expression oscillates between delivering every known type of CC available in such short intervals that few options exist for responding

to

Interrupting his interesting movement for a poorly disguised "window of opportunity" that sees him standstill and let the enemy waste time/resources on a ridiculous damage reduction %, that neither side can garner any satisfaction from.

Zarya's bubbles are now unlocked and, most often, executed purely on a selfish level, especially when combined with the singular Tank format that demands maximum survival when playing the front line. A minimal change of her design that has drastically increased the pendulum of her gameplay, swinging from extreme to extreme depending on the numbers.

Only Wrecking Ball, seems to provide a semblance of unique Tank Design that demands particular skillsets and learning, but even then, how much of that is the Uniqueness of the Hero and how much is that he is an effective Tank?

The argument that Tank is an unpopular role has been carried around from original to sequel for quite some time and is a very well-recognized refrain within the community.

Where it comes into deep question, is just how the design has gone from Winstons, Dvas, Reinhardts, and (old) Zaryas to a dumbed down philosophy on what makes a Tank and what sort of interest there is to be found with designs that are only really just...more health, more damage, and less thought?

And many of the older designs have become not just outdated, but difficult to execute against newer models who carry all their power in their stats and high-value, minimal execution mechanics.

Who wants to play a Role that hasn't had any creativity since the Devs thought about putting a Hamster in a Ball, into the game?