Fun fact: "inflammable" came first, from Latin "inflammare", "to set on fire".
After that came "nonflammable".
"Flammable" was a back-formation from "non-flammable".
Ever since people have been confused.
@noelle while reading the etymonline entry for "in-" this morning I came across some really crunchy contranyms based on it's dual usage: https://www.etymonline.com/word/in-/
@Paragate @noelle
this information is invaluable
@Paragate @noelle
this information is invaluable