this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
738 points (87.5% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35765 readers
617 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I bought 175 g pack of salami which had 162 g of salami as well.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.org 147 points 10 months ago (22 children)

Let me introduce you to tolerance in measuring instruments and measuring errors.

[–] 1111@lemmy.world 48 points 10 months ago

When was the last time OP performed a guage R&R with a traceable calibrated mass standard? πŸ˜‚

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com 133 points 10 months ago (42 children)

wouldnt weight slightly fluctuate with moisture content?

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 121 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

yeah. 8g is a tiny weight difference here and could easily be accounted-for due to humidity with pasta. it's about the weight of 3-4 strands of that pasta

[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 37 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Could also just be losing a strand or two in packaging. It happens. That's why they're allowed some wiggle room on the packaging weight, and 8 grams is a pretty reasonable margin of error for a product like this.

Shrinkflation is definitely a thing, but this isn't a good example.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (41 replies)
[–] skeeter_dave@sh.itjust.works 119 points 10 months ago (19 children)

Sup, I'm your local friendly USDA contractor who very much uses scales everyday. Consumer grade kitchen scales are terrible and will lie to you. The fact that it does not go out to the tenths or hundredths is a big flag for accuracy.

We check test our scales twice a year to make sure they are accurate. I once tried check testing my kitchen scale I use for canning for giggles and it failed miserably. It would only register weight on 2 out of 4 quadrants until I got to 10g or so. I'm sure my ohaus is going to show a different and more accurate result if I where to try it.

[–] Neon@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

please actually do it. Not for any real Reason but just because it's funny to use professional equipment to weigh Pasta

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] schnokobaer@lemmy.ml 112 points 10 months ago (4 children)

-2% is probably allowed and this is -1.95%. It's okay I guess. I'd probably trust my cheap, regularly used and never calibrated kitchen scale less than I would trust these companies to comply with such rules.

[–] danciestlobster@lemmy.world 44 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Actually it's usually closer to 5%, but to avoid consumers getting mad most companies have internal variance limits of less. Still, 2% is pretty tight for manufacturing equipment. Despite the mass prevalence of corporate greed, it does end up being better for most companies overall to be on the slightly heavy end of net weight rather than lower end and most manufacturing guardrails and in line weight checks are calibrated with that in mind.

This is entirely due to the risk of images like this going viral and causing blowback for the company. So, to keep products on average a little heavier, posting things like this is great

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ISometimesAdmin@the.coolest.zone 73 points 10 months ago (15 children)

The FDA regulation on Net Weight is found in 21 CFR 101.105. In this regulation FDA makes allowance for reasonable variations caused by loss or gain of moisture during the course of good distribution practice or by unavoidable deviations in good manufacturing practice. FDA states that variations from the stated quantity of contents should not be unreasonably large.

While FDA does not provide a specific allowable tolerance for Net Weight, this matter could come under FTC jurisdiction. FTC has proposed regulations that would unify USDA and FDA Net Contents labeling and incorporate information found in the National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) Handbook 133.

NIST Handbook 133 specifies that the average net quantity of contents in a lot must at least equal the net quantity declared on the label. Plus or minus deviation is permitted when caused by unavoidable variation in weighing and measuring that occur in good manufacturing practice. The maximum allowable variance for a package with a net weight declaration of 5 oz is 5/16 oz. Packages under-filled by more than this amount are considered non-compliant.

http://www.foodconsulting.com/q&a.htm

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 49 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

The maximum allowable variance for a package with a net weight declaration of 5 oz is 5/16 oz.

oddly, that's just over 8g, the difference noted in OP's example. so, OP's package is within he allowable tolerance, just.

[–] admiralteal@kbin.social 22 points 10 months ago (6 children)

And it would probably be more expensive to get precision-calibrated equipment to get you at the bottom end of the tolerance to save product cost than what it would cost to just aim for the correct value with less precise equipment.

This one is a conspiracy theory I struggle to get behind. It seems like the conspiracy would be less profitable than the "proper" behavior here.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 24 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (8 children)

5/16 oz

How many football fields to the gallon is that? On a serious note this is something far better expressed as a fraction than an amount of difference for one specific container size...

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 61 points 10 months ago (3 children)

On our packaging (Germany) we have a little "e" meaning it will be Β± the weight with a deviation of 1.5-9% depending on the volume.
https://www.payback.de/ratgeber/besser-leben/kleines-e-auf-verpackung

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] beerclue@lemmy.world 54 points 10 months ago (3 children)

It's a 2% difference. The cutting and packaging is done (most probably) by machines. I have clinically diagnosed OCD, and I wouldn't care about 8g of missing pasta... How much do you leave on the plate/in the pot/throw away? :)

Otoh, hitting exactly 410g (assuming the scale is calibrated, and you have the same temperature, air moisture and altitude as the factory), is very difficult. They could adjust their machines so the variation hangs a bit more towards the customer, but for them, 2% x millions of boxes = profit.

[–] CraigeryTheKid@lemm.ee 52 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Most of our packaging machines require < 1%, target <0.5% variance (both ways). Honestly in practice, over a whole batch the total variance is extremely tiny.

Add to this story the accuracy of a household, not-calibrated scale? Yeah I'd say this seems OK.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 53 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

I don’t see anything on the scale indicating it was not tared. Nor do I know whether or not you took a noodle or two out of the pile before weighing

For all we know, you tared this +20g and this is feel-good anti-corporate propaganda. Which is fine, we all hate the corporations…but propaganda is propaganda.

Op, please post a video showing a calibration weight on the scale followed immediately by your pasta taken directly out of a sealed box. For science.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world 51 points 10 months ago (2 children)

πŸ€”Hmm doubt it's humidity issue the issue. But more importantly why is it not in 500g packets like all the pasta in the world?

[–] JaN0h4ck@feddit.de 42 points 10 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 10 months ago (3 children)

uh probably lines up with freedom units or cause funny number

[–] scoobford@lemmy.zip 25 points 10 months ago (1 children)

More likely shrinkflation. Same as how a pint of hagen-daz is 14oz now, instead of a full pint.

[–] grozzle@lemm.ee 20 points 10 months ago (6 children)

americans really just have to remember a long list of random numbers like how many ounces a full pint is supposed to be, huh.

i'm imagining a whole day of school like, "when people say nickel, they mean 5 cents, a dime is 10 cents, 12 inches is a foot, 3 feet is a yard, water freezes at 32F and boils at 212F..." and the children just crying into their notebooks by the time they get to miles and tons and acres.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago (16 children)

How do we know your scale is right?

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] TheBig2023Meltdown@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago (3 children)

You've bought spaghetti Kelly, not cocaine.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 38 points 10 months ago

Get a better scale first

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I worked on a manufacturing line for 4oz pepper cans

They had a machine that weighed them and kicked out underweight ones.

The tolerances were horrible.

McCormick was 3.9 I think

Black and white can 3.5. !!!

Yes both were made on the same exact line

[–] cows_are_underrated@feddit.de 33 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Depending on where you live this is actually illegal. In Germany, as example, if you say that something contains 200g it means that there have to be at least 200g inside. If its less, that can cost the producer a lot if he gets fined for it.

[–] ZeldaFreak@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Except no. First issue it's messured wrong. You messure a full package and then an empty one in the factory. Losses during shipping and so on is the problem of the customer. Especially meat looses a lot of water. People don't weigh the water in the cloth.

Also the little e (estimated sign, 76/211/EEC) besides the package does specially allow variations. Only the entire batch must be correct on average. But there is a limit on how much variations is allowed. And big companies are closely watched.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SexyTimeSasquatch@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yes, it seems that way because your kitchen scale is faulty and measuring everything a bit on the light side.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LNRDrone@sopuli.xyz 32 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Could be worth checking your scale, if everything seems to be underweight. Low battery can show as lower result on some scales

[–] krellor@kbin.social 32 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I need to start using old batteries in my bathroom scale.

[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

I use no batteries and am very happy with what it displays.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] irotsoma@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago

If everything you're measuring is lower than expected, you should check the calibration of the scale. Weigh 2 or 3 things you know the weight of that are at different ranges of weights, light, heavy, medium, and see if any are off. Often a scale will be accurate at only within a certain range and get progressively less accurate as the weight increases or decreases from that range.

[–] JASN_DE@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago

I have the same scale. I wouldn't trust it too far, especially combined with the tolerances and humidity weight changes.

[–] NaoPb@eviltoast.org 20 points 10 months ago (2 children)

This is why in the EU they need to display net weight.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There are different factors. One being accuracy of the scale, then there is loss of weight due to moisture loss, and also there are greedy companies. It can be any of theese(or a combination of theese)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ramenshaman@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next β€Ί