I mean it sucks and I drink coke (it’s my mix for booze) but it’s a welcome change (price increase). Soda pop should not be drunk as frequently as it is by people and anything to make it less common is a welcome change IMHO. If becoming more cost prohibitive to people makes them drink it less that’s not a bad thing
Now the challenge becomes, because America is becoming a 3rd world shithole it’s possible that coke is the only safe drink because thanks to the EPA being gutted over decades water isn’t safe in many areas due to contamination. That’s not cool.
🤖take
You know that has a lot of sugar, which is a poison and will kill you right?
Everything will kill you in excess. Live life and don’t be a Debbie Downer.
Hey friend, I’m not the one complaining about the water or people drinking too much.
It’s friday and I’m going to have plenty of drinks, there will be no soda in sight.
I wish you a good weekend.It’s friday and I’m going to have plenty of drinks, there will be no soda in sight.
Um… congratulations?
Um…thank you
I wish you a good weekend too
with or without sodas
I’m surprised the new one isn’t something less than 12 ounces.
surely this uses more aluminum
It may use less aluminum, as the top and bottom surfaces are much thicker
I’m shit at math, but probably not? If both contain the same amount of liquid, are filled to the same point and both are round (which they are lol), I don’t see how those would require more material.
And even if, if they double the price per can, it’s absolutely worth it.
I found this same thought on this same post a year ago. Someone already crunched the numbers and it seems with the volume constant but height growing, the surface area increases
Original discussion: https://lemmy.world/comment/8371055
A further complication is that the aluminium is considerably thicker on the base and the top… so there’s more thin metal, and less thick metal.
Why don’t we just weigh them?
Shut up with your logic! I’m going to the grocery store…
You have never taken calculus.
Have you? AP calculus doesn’t count.
No, that’s what I said with my very first sentence.
To illustrate, imagine if we kept getting taller and taller - like trying to fit the same volume of soda in a pencil-thin can that’s about a meter long.
You use more and more aluminum the further away it gets from the minimum surface-area-to-volume container, which would be a sphere
The fuck is a fluid ounce?
1/8th of a cup
About 4.835 micro cubic fathoms.
Damn liberals and their woke-genderized measurements smh
Fluid ounce is volume, ounce is weight. Liters vs grams.
Ah wonderful, so I’m sure one fluid ounce of water weighs precisely one ounce weight wise?
Almost identical, my understanding is it’s slightly off since it’s such an old measurement. But for everyday purposes it’s the same.
So fluid ounces are just metric with extra steps :/
This cannot be a real question.
Because everyone on Reddit is American? Or that the entire planet is supposed to understand nuanced differences between ounces and fluid ounces that only… what, 3 countries on the planet use?
Ounces that are wet.
…two-thirds a dram of scotch whisky…
Common mistake. Its actually Florida ounces.
A few years back we literally had frito lay vendors come in before store open to reset the chip aisle, all the bag sizes shrank and they credited out the previous size.
People with vending machines aren’t going to be happy, those new ones won’t fit.
As a consumer you should have thought about the consequences of your habits. Because of you they now have to replace all the vendig machines.
Its the consumers fault. Companies have absolutely no responsibility.
Huge /S if there ever was any doubt.
Quick ‘proof’ the taller the can, the more material used:
Consider two cases ignoring the top and bottom only focussing on the surface area. In the first case, you flatten so much the can has no height. This forms a ring that when unwrapped makes a length of 2 pi R.
Now stretch the can to be ‘infinitely’ long. By construction, this is longer than 2 pi r. Given both are made of aluminum, and have the same density, the larger can has more mass requiring more material.
The total mass must be a continuous function ranging from the linear mass density times the circumference of the circle to the same mass density time times the ‘length’ of the infinite line. This must remain true for any small increase in length between the two.
I’ll leave this as an exercise to the reader. What if the circle has an infinite radius?
Isn’t the larger the can proportional to how does both top and bottom shrink? like, being the same amount of material, but with a different distribution.
No he’s right. The solution for an optimal surface area to volume ratio is a sphere. The farther you deviate from a sphere the less optimal you become. The actual math for this is finding deltaSurfaceArea in respects to cylinder radius for a given volume and then finding the maxima, which is a Uni physics 1 problem I really don’t feel like doing. Long story short, optimal is when height = diameter, or as close to a sphere as a cylinder can be.
Thanks fot the aclaration.
It’s not really ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ it’s under a fixed set of assumptions. You raise a valid point. What does happen to the top and the bottom? I was ignoring them considering only the sides in the two most extreme cases.
If I understand your case when the can is flatted the area gets much larger and when it gets taller it shrinks to a pin point. An equally valid approach
“shitflation”
This is a terrible meme
It has two red circles and bottom text, of course it’s a meme /s
So that’s why they changed the shape. I saw no valid reason so I just assumed they were trying to evade taxes in some way. I’ll admit I have no idea how much anything I buy at a convenience store costs.
This is over a year old and completely made-up.
If anything the taller cylinder will use more aluminum for the same volume, so they’re kinda shooting themselves in the foot here with aluminum and steel tariffs, lol
Seems pretty clear the only reason for this was to change the price without as many people noticing.
Regular cans are somewhat inefficient shapes as well, shorter and fatter would be more economical, but less ergonomical and for once that won out, for a while anyway. Now we get designed by marketing instead.
Yeah, there’s an awesome video on aluminum drink cans from TheEngineerGuy on YouTube. The ideal shape for holding pressure with minimal material is a sphere, but there’s 2 problems with that: They roll, and can’t be packed as efficiently as cylinders.
I’m not sure of the shape change reason, but I prefer the thinner cans. I have a candy store with soft drinks and I can put more of the thinner cans on the shelf. Usually one more can per shelf.
deleted by creator
Love it!
Make it happen, captain.
Prices go up up up Never come back down down down
The invisible hand job economy
Oil prices go up - petrol goes up.
Oil prices go down - petrol goes up.
Oil prices do nothing - petrol goes up.
Petrol is purposeful and independent.
Be like petrol!
when they do go down economist scream that its the worst thing to ever happen (deflation)
Yes! I love this comic (well, I guess it wasn’t originally) and reference it all the time. I was randomly very curious which shot glasses we own are the biggest and was trying to use this as an example because we have some tall skinny ones and short fat ones. “You know! The thing where kids think the tall one is bigger??”
This is Piaget’s conservation of volume test. I did this experiment at school (we went to the elementary school next door and ran tests on the kids). Most of the kids said the higher one held more liquid because it was ‘taller’, though some said the short one had more because it was ‘fatter’.
The liberal media wants you to think that the two volumes of liquid are equal using their woke science, but if you use your common sense, you can clearly see that the narrow tube is filled higher and therefore contains more liquid. There is nothing wrong with the economy, real Americans just need to use narrower glasses. Checkmate, leftists. /s
mm sugar water
Dickflation.
I think this falls under the term “merchandising”, which includes “family size” or “party size” things that cost more per ounce than regular size.
