| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378312 is a reply to message #378277] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 05:58   |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 16:03:32 -0500, Andreas Kohlbach
> <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 11:51:10 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>
>>> On Friday, December 14, 2018 at 5:20:30 PM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>>>>
>>>> > Growing up, I lived in a city rowhouse and the suburbs weren't
>>>> > very crowded back then. Indeed, the old suburbs were still mostly
>>>> > dense and still served by transit. Indeed, today, a lot of
>>>> > companies have suburban offices not well served by transit,
>>>> > which forces people to drive.
>>>>
>>>> Things you don't like:
>>>>
>>>> Kids bragging about their LEDs.
>>>> No one meets your standards of numeracy.
>>>> Partial solutions.
>>>> Subsidies.
>>>>
>>>> The solutions are:
>>>>
>>>> Manual typewriters.
>>>> Hand-cranked duplicators.
>>>> Public transit.
>>>> More people in high density housing.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I see no problem with partial solutions.
>>>> As a developer, I found that big problems could be solved
>>>> in steps.
>>>
>>> There is no objection to partial solutions--they are usually
>>> better than no solution at all (usually, but not always).
>>
>> :-)
>>
>>> What is objectionable is the 'masking effect', that people
>>> think replacing a light bulb is gonna make a radical change
>>> in energy or pollution when in reality it will not.
>>
>> In some "modern" countries in Europe you cannot buy incandescent light
>> bulbs anymore. You only find FLD or LED on the shelves. Most countries of
>> the European Union put this law in place some years ago.
>>
>> But why would they? The Governments don't benefit from fewer taxes if
>> less energy is consumed. And since the consumer saves money (what they
>> save on energy is more than the higher price of the light bulb until it
>> burns out and needs to be replaced) they also don't benefit from taxes
>> due to the higher price.
>>
>> So it's to reduce CO2 emissions.
>
> More likely it's to put money in the pockets of the light bulb
> manfacturers.
>
> Don't attribute to virtue that which can be adequately explained by
> greed.,
>
> And the reduction in CO2 emissions is negligible.
>
> Residential energy use:
> Air conditioning 17%
> Space heating 15%
> Water heating 14%
> Lighting 10%
> TVs and related 7%
> Refrigerators 7%
> Clothes dryers 5%
> Itemized other uses 12% (I won't list them all here)
> "Not elsewhere classified" 13%
>
> A 100 watt incandescent is replaced by a 14 watt LED--saving there is
> potentially, if _all_ domestic lighting is incandescent takes the
> total down from 10% to 1.4%.
>
> I'm sorry, but that's peeing in the ocean.
>
Should also save money by reducing the need for replacement. I agree about
FLDs, they didn't last anywhere as long as advertised and dimmed
significantly over time. They were a stupid idea promoted in the name of
environmentalism that caused more problems than they solved.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378313 is a reply to message #378286] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 05:58 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 11:51:10 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed, among conservatives, it is an article of faith that
>>> recycling and energy consumption is just a silly liberal hoax.
>>> I see many conservatives disdainfully discarding cans in the
>>> regular trash, not recycling, because of that. (In reality,
>>> cans are fully recyclable and that is good). They see living
>>> on an acre of ground and driving a big fat SUV as a God-given
>>> right that they're not about to surrender.
>>
>> Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>> me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>> time washing trash to make the government happy.
>
> Put them in the dishwasher.
> Takes no effort at all.
>
>> Further, there's the matter of what can and can't be recycled. Like
>> you can recycle corrugated board except you can't recycle pizza boxes.
>> You can recycle plastic that has a recycling mark on it unless it's
>> styrofoam.
>
> Here they recently changed to accepting everything including bags then a
> few months later changed again to only 1 and 2 no bags.
>
> Pizza boxes inevitably have grease stains. That's why they don't want
> them.
>
>> They've given up on recycling light bulbs, they're either
>> regular trash or hazardous waste, and if they're hazardous waste you
>> have to take them to the hazardous waste facility that's only open 4
>> hours a month.
>
> At least we've stopped using tungsten, something in short supply.
>
> Some right wingers have bought cases of 100 watt incandescent bulbs.
> You know, they were going to be outlawed.
I did, when I thought we were going to be stuck with fluorescent, but now
LEDs are reasonably priced and do the job as well.
>
> LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue.
> Since you throw them away after 25 years, you don't create much
> waste.
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378314 is a reply to message #378245] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 05:58 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 08:18:30 -0700, Peter Flass
>> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2018-12-15, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>>>> > On 15 Dec 2018 08:31:48 GMT
>>>> > maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> 'Dear Sir/Madan'
>>>> >
>>>> > I think there should be an m in there - 'Dear Sir/Madman' perhaps.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> !
>>>>
>>>> Just wondering when the British Army takes over in the UK..
>>>> Imagine, martial (or Marital? :)) music is played on BBC, an neverbefore
>>>> seen person with lotsa medals comes on camera, and reads a prepared script.
>>>>
>>>> "My fellow citizens. yaddo, yaddo"
>>>>
>>>> Everything seems possible at the moment, even the above happening in the US.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Non-sequiter? Yes, it does, and it might be better than the current
>>> situation.
>>
>> It's sad that that appears to be the case, but democracy seems to be
>> putting stupider and more venal people in charge with every election.
>
> With the notable exception of a recent president.
>
I assume you're not talking about the current incumbent. Yes, I don't think
anyone has accused him of being corrupt, although, like all presidents, he
seems to have left office significantly richer than he started. I would
definitely agree with the stupid part. When he was first elected there were
lots if things he could have done which would have brought the parties
together rather than pushed them apart, and instead he wasted thime,
energy, and political capital on a stupid health-care plan. I agree
health-care needed fixing, but some tweaks around the edges rather than a
grand scheme that is failing would have made more sense and antagonized
fewer people. (sounds like a lot of failed grand IT projects)
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378315 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 05:58 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 12/15/2018 2:12 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 2:29:52 PM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>>
>>>> Democracy requires a certain minimum intelligence among the populace
>>>> to enable sensible choices to be made. I fear that the median intelligence
>>>> of the peepul is falling below that level.
>>>
>>> It most certainly has in one political party.
>>> Nation wide we are barely hanging on.
>>
>> Sadly, in the US the extremists, on both sides, are taking over.
>>
>> All we seem to hear these days are rants from the far right and
>> far left. Listen to Fox's Hannity for example, very disturbing
>> (or anyone from talk radio). Likewise from the lefties.
>
> Frankly, I cannot think of any US TV network that compares to Fox on
> the left. In fact, it's hard to think of any media personalities on
> the left. In the US, "the left" is what most industrialized countries
> would call "the center".
I don't watch Fox, but MSNBC is so far left as to make Karl Marx seem
conservative. CNN used to be able to present somewhat valanced news, but
now they're on a non-stop anti-Trump tirade. I can't find a source if
unbiased news any more, I've stopped paying attention to all of it, except
animal stories with happy endings.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378316 is a reply to message #378310] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 06:01 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
songbird <songbird@anthive.com> wrote:
> J Clarke wrote:
> ...
>> Doesn't matter why they don't want them. The Federal budget is 3.8
>> trillion dollars. If it was not run by FUCKING IDIOTS they've have
>> put _some_ of it into a research program to permit recycling of that
>> vast percentage of paper products that are "contaminated with food"
>> instead of just burning it all.
>
> worms will happily eat them up.
Stuff that goes into a landfill will last decades or more without decaying,
or are you talking about a composting program that doesn't exist?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378319 is a reply to message #378280] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 06:42 |
Andy Leighton
Messages: 203
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 18:09:07 -0500,
J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 15 Dec 2018 22:43:13 GMT, maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-12-15, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>> On Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 3:51:55 PM UTC-5, Andy Leighton wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Ironically, most kids in the scouts are too young to care about
>>>> > such things. The extremists scream about a non-existent issue.
>>>>
>>>> Really? Isn't scouts really aimed at 11-17 year olds then (with
>>>> Ventures going older and Cubs for those under 11). I would think
>>>> that most people become aware of their sexuality when they are
>>>> in that age range.
>>>
>>> The Cub Scouts start much younger.
>>>
>>> Kids lose interest in scouting as they get older, so they aren't
>>> as many older kids in scouts.
>>>
>>> While some kids are aware of their orientation at a young age,
>>> IMHO, most don't come to understand it until they are older
>>> and beyond the age of scouting.
>>>
>>> I still maintain the typical Scout is too young to be aware of
>>> that sort of thing or care.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I strongly disagree.
>
> Do the Boy Scouts in Ireland have a policy toward gays?
Most of the world doesn't use Boy - we just say Scouts. The female
analogue (in most of the world) is Guides.
I am sure that they welcome them like they do any other person. I am
not sure they have a specific policy as such it is just that it isn't
really needed. It is covered by the general equal opportunities policy.
In the UK the Scouts are a lot more accepting that the US - they
are co-ed for a start, LGBT members are fine, as are non-Christian
members (including atheists and humanists). Ireland isn't quite at
the same point yet (although the vast majority > 90% of its troops are
co-ed). I think they are OK with atheists too.
--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378320 is a reply to message #378312] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 06:30 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 03:58:16 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Should also save money by reducing the need for replacement. I agree
> about FLDs, they didn't last anywhere as long as advertised and dimmed
> significantly over time. They were a stupid idea promoted in the name of
> environmentalism that caused more problems than they solved.
They weren't quite such a stupid idea, but there were far too many
crap ones made - low quality electronics, inadequate cooling, poor quality
control ... The good ones weren't bad, the warm up time was fast enough not
to be noticable, they lasted and didn't dim and had a choice of decent
spectrums ... they were also rare. I was lucky with the first ones I bought
and didn't find out until later that they weren't all the same.
Had the high efficiency blue LED not been discovered (and that was
a Nobel winning feat) they would probably still be as good as it gets and
hopefully the crap ones would have been pushed off the market.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378322 is a reply to message #378316] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 06:32 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 04:01:34 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Stuff that goes into a landfill will last decades or more without
> decaying, or are you talking about a composting program that doesn't
> exist?
That "doesn't exist" bit depends where you are, there's one here
and brown bins to go with it - but they won't take pizza boxes, bits of
pizza yes but not the boxes.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378323 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 06:51 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 16 Dec 2018 11:28:13 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> Talking of which, I write the installation date on LED "bulbs" and I'm
> discovering that they have nothing like the advertised "burn time",
> so as they fail I'm returning them for refund/replacement.
Figures, the advertised burn time on LED lighting tends to be the
expected life of the LED chips when run in spec (in particular temperature
spec) before they drop to 80% (IIRC). For most LED fittings they are by far
the most reliable component.
My approach is to use LED strips, about half of the originals are
still in place (five years on) and working as well as they did when new. The
others (kitchen, hallway, office, bathrooms) were replaced because better
lower power strips became available which made it possible to replace short
strips in central locations with long strips for brighter and more diffuse
light at slightly lower power consumption. The others (bedrooms, lounge)
will get a similar treatment and dimmers when the rooms are next
redecorated.
I have always hated dangly light fittings and point source light,
my preference would be for gently glowing ceilings but that's not yet a
realistic option, meanwhile glowing strips are not a bad alternative.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378325 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 07:53 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 16 Dec 2018 11:35:11 GMT
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to buy.
> I'm getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been buying.
> And they're $10. I return them for a refund.
Wow, they are junk! Build quality easily on a par with the worst
CFLs.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378326 is a reply to message #378324] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 09:14 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2018-12-16, Gareth's was W7 now W10 Downstairs Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 16/12/2018 11:42, Andy Leighton wrote:
>>
>> In the UK the Scouts are a lot more accepting that the US - they
>> are co-ed for a start, LGBT members are fine, as are non-Christian
>> members (including atheists and humanists).
>
> But not repblicans AIUI.
>
> Only those who debase their own families to be second class
> citizens compared to another family are welcome.
>
I note that you are actually boasting of changing from W7 to
W19. How low can you go after that?.,
--
Maus@ireland.com
Opinions offered om any subject:
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378327 is a reply to message #378320] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 09:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 03:58:16 -0700
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Should also save money by reducing the need for replacement. I agree
>> about FLDs, they didn't last anywhere as long as advertised and dimmed
>> significantly over time. They were a stupid idea promoted in the name of
>> environmentalism that caused more problems than they solved.
>
> They weren't quite such a stupid idea, but there were far too many
> crap ones made - low quality electronics, inadequate cooling, poor quality
> control ... The good ones weren't bad, the warm up time was fast enough not
> to be noticable, they lasted and didn't dim and had a choice of decent
> spectrums ... they were also rare. I was lucky with the first ones I bought
> and didn't find out until later that they weren't all the same.
>
> Had the high efficiency blue LED not been discovered (and that was
> a Nobel winning feat) they would probably still be as good as it gets and
> hopefully the crap ones would have been pushed off the market.
>
Probably the other way 'round.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378328 is a reply to message #378322] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 09:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 04:01:34 -0700
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Stuff that goes into a landfill will last decades or more without
>> decaying, or are you talking about a composting program that doesn't
>> exist?
>
> That "doesn't exist" bit depends where you are, there's one here
> and brown bins to go with it - but they won't take pizza boxes, bits of
> pizza yes but not the boxes.
>
That's precisely the problem. As a previous poster indicated, they take
this but not that, something except... etc. To say nothing of the
annoyance of sorting, just trying to remember the rules is taxing.
Last week I read that Phoenix was sending all its recycling to China! Now
they're refusing to take most of it, so the city is scrambling for another
solution.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378329 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 09:41 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
> On 2018-12-16, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>> On 12/15/2018 2:12 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 2:29:52 PM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> Democracy requires a certain minimum intelligence among the populace
>>>> >> to enable sensible choices to be made. I fear that the median intelligence
>>>> >> of the peepul is falling below that level.
>>>> >
>>>> > It most certainly has in one political party.
>>>> > Nation wide we are barely hanging on.
>>>>
>>>> Sadly, in the US the extremists, on both sides, are taking over.
>>>>
>>>> All we seem to hear these days are rants from the far right and
>>>> far left. Listen to Fox's Hannity for example, very disturbing
>>>> (or anyone from talk radio). Likewise from the lefties.
>>>
>>> Frankly, I cannot think of any US TV network that compares to Fox on
>>> the left. In fact, it's hard to think of any media personalities on
>>> the left. In the US, "the left" is what most industrialized countries
>>> would call "the center".
>>
>> I don't watch Fox, but MSNBC is so far left as to make Karl Marx seem
>> conservative.
>
> Dear Lhord but you talk some crap.
Agree, I can't imagine what it's like to live in a world like that.
Every morning MSNBC runs a "Your Business" show. Can't get more
capitalist than that.
One of their frequent commentators is Michael Steele. A well known
Communist that used to be the Chairperson of the RNC. One of their
most popular shows is "Morning Joe", co-host Joe Scarborough who used
to be a Republican US Representative.
Reminds me of the South Park episode where everyone decides to shove
food up their asses and crap out of their mouths.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378330 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 09:54 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
> [10 lines snipped]
>
>>> Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>>> me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>>> time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>
>> Put them in the dishwasher.
>> Takes no effort at all.
>
> And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
This should be good.
Explain how a few additional items in the dishwasher use more
energy.
>>> Further, there's the matter of what can and can't be recycled. Like
>>> you can recycle corrugated board except you can't recycle pizza boxes.
>>> You can recycle plastic that has a recycling mark on it unless it's
>>> styrofoam.
>>
>> Here they recently changed to accepting everything including bags then a
>> few months later changed again to only 1 and 2 no bags.
>
> I have a simple rule; if it has a "recycling" symbol on it, it goes in the
> recycling. If the recyclers don't want it, that's their problem. If they
> don't want it marked as recyclable, then they need to talk to the producers;
> it isn't my problem.
This is why we can't have nice things.
>> Some right wingers have bought cases of 100 watt incandescent bulbs.
>> You know, they were going to be outlawed.
>>
>> LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue.
>> Since you throw them away after 25 years,
>
> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to buy. I'm
> getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been buying. And
> they're $10. I return them for a refund.
It's highly unlikely that I'm going to see any of my LEDs give up the
ghost. Going on 5 years now without any failures. I used to replace
lamps in my outdoor lamp post every 6 months. I replaced them with
CFLs and I must be approaching 10 years on them without a single failure.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378331 is a reply to message #378326] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 10:39 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On 16 Dec 2018 14:14:21 GMT, maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2018-12-16, Gareth's was W7 now W10 Downstairs Computer <headstone255@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 16/12/2018 11:42, Andy Leighton wrote:
>>>
>>> In the UK the Scouts are a lot more accepting that the US - they
>>> are co-ed for a start, LGBT members are fine, as are non-Christian
>>> members (including atheists and humanists).
>>
>> But not repblicans AIUI.
>>
>> Only those who debase their own families to be second class
>> citizens compared to another family are welcome.
>>
>
> I note that you are actually boasting of changing from W7 to
> W19. How low can you go after that?.,
For us leftpondians could you explain "W7" and "W19"? Google comes up
with something to do with Windows 7 and something to do with British
plant communities.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378332 is a reply to message #378310] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 10:42 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 21:11:31 -0500, songbird <songbird@anthive.com>
wrote:
> J Clarke wrote:
> ...
>> Doesn't matter why they don't want them. The Federal budget is 3.8
>> trillion dollars. If it was not run by FUCKING IDIOTS they've have
>> put _some_ of it into a research program to permit recycling of that
>> vast percentage of paper products that are "contaminated with food"
>> instead of just burning it all.
>
> worms will happily eat them up.
If worms happily eat up waste paper then why all the concern about
"filling up landfills" with it?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378333 is a reply to message #378330] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 10:46 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 09:54:36 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> [10 lines snipped]
>>
>>>> Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>>>> me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>>>> time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>>
>>> Put them in the dishwasher.
>>> Takes no effort at all.
>>
>> And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
>
> This should be good.
> Explain how a few additional items in the dishwasher use more
> energy.
Run it once for the dishes, take the dishes out and stack them, then
run it again for the trash. Or do you do so little eating that you
have room for both in your dishwasher at the same time? Or are you
the one in your family who even runs the dishwasher? I remember a
discussion with one knee-jerk liberal type who told me there were no
weapons in his home and then was rather shocked when I showed him what
was in the knife block in the kitchen.
>>>> Further, there's the matter of what can and can't be recycled. Like
>>>> you can recycle corrugated board except you can't recycle pizza boxes.
>>>> You can recycle plastic that has a recycling mark on it unless it's
>>>> styrofoam.
>>>
>>> Here they recently changed to accepting everything including bags then a
>>> few months later changed again to only 1 and 2 no bags.
>>
>> I have a simple rule; if it has a "recycling" symbol on it, it goes in the
>> recycling. If the recyclers don't want it, that's their problem. If they
>> don't want it marked as recyclable, then they need to talk to the producers;
>> it isn't my problem.
>
> This is why we can't have nice things.
>
>>> Some right wingers have bought cases of 100 watt incandescent bulbs.
>>> You know, they were going to be outlawed.
>>>
>>> LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue.
>>> Since you throw them away after 25 years,
>>
>> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to buy. I'm
>> getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been buying. And
>> they're $10. I return them for a refund.
>
> It's highly unlikely that I'm going to see any of my LEDs give up the
> ghost. Going on 5 years now without any failures. I used to replace
> lamps in my outdoor lamp post every 6 months. I replaced them with
> CFLs and I must be approaching 10 years on them without a single failure.
Personally I gave up on all the off brands--Philips and Cree seem to
hold up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378336 is a reply to message #378302] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 12:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On 16 Dec 2018 04:12:37 -0400, Mike Spencer
<mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> wrote:
>
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>
>> Modern policy has hit the traditional power companies hard. As a
>> result, they've cut back on maintenance. Power failures take
>> longer to repair, and they're not as well equipped to deal with
>> big outages. They fail to due to preventive maintenance. For
>> instance, in my area, they used to trim trees back away from their
>> lines every year. Now they only do that every five years. As a
>> result even minor storms result in failures since tree limbs fall
>> on the lines. It takes a long time to repair.
>
> Gee, I hadda check to make sure I hadn't written that. Only here they
> haven't done tree trimming for decades save in occasional small spots.
> Normal Nova Scotia inclement weather now predictably causes scattered
> or wide outages. People who should know the in-house gossip say the
> high tension towers are even more vulnerable, some of which will fail
> spectaclarly in the forseeable future.
Every place I have lived in the US does trim trees away from power
lines. There were law suits to stop it from time to tme, the law suits
lose.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378337 is a reply to message #378315] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 12:39 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 03:58:19 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 12/15/2018 2:12 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Saturday, December 15, 2018 at 2:29:52 PM UTC-5, Dan Espen wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Democracy requires a certain minimum intelligence among the populace
>>>> > to enable sensible choices to be made. I fear that the median intelligence
>>>> > of the peepul is falling below that level.
>>>>
>>>> It most certainly has in one political party.
>>>> Nation wide we are barely hanging on.
>>>
>>> Sadly, in the US the extremists, on both sides, are taking over.
>>>
>>> All we seem to hear these days are rants from the far right and
>>> far left. Listen to Fox's Hannity for example, very disturbing
>>> (or anyone from talk radio). Likewise from the lefties.
>>
>> Frankly, I cannot think of any US TV network that compares to Fox on
>> the left. In fact, it's hard to think of any media personalities on
>> the left. In the US, "the left" is what most industrialized countries
>> would call "the center".
>
> I don't watch Fox, but MSNBC is so far left as to make Karl Marx seem
Really ? I've read the crap written by dummy Karl. MSNBC does go after
both political parties when they see malfeasance. They don't compare
and Karl is significantly to the left of everyone, including MSNBC.
> conservative. CNN used to be able to present somewhat valanced news, but
> now they're on a non-stop anti-Trump tirade. I can't find a source if
> unbiased news any more, I've stopped paying attention to all of it, except
> animal stories with happy endings.
Because orange one is a big time criminal.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378339 is a reply to message #378333] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 12:50 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 10:46:42 -0500, J. Clarke
<jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 09:54:36 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> [10 lines snipped]
>>>
>>>> > Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>>>> > me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>>>> > time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>>>
>>>> Put them in the dishwasher.
>>>> Takes no effort at all.
>>>
>>> And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
>>
>> This should be good.
>> Explain how a few additional items in the dishwasher use more
>> energy.
>
> Run it once for the dishes, take the dishes out and stack them, then
> run it again for the trash. Or do you do so little eating that you
> have room for both in your dishwasher at the same time? Or are you
> the one in your family who even runs the dishwasher? I remember a
> discussion with one knee-jerk liberal type who told me there were no
> weapons in his home and then was rather shocked when I showed him what
> was in the knife block in the kitchen.
Some years ago I was appraised of two things, one I had already
figured out.
1) in horror movies you know something terrible is going to happen if
there is a block in the kitchen full of knives.
2) I figured it out at a young age, and it was mentioned later when I
went to Navy boot camp. The most dangerous weapon is the human mind.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378340 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 13:06 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> [10 lines snipped]
>>>
>>>> > Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>>>> > me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>>>> > time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>>>
>>>> Put them in the dishwasher.
>>>> Takes no effort at all.
>>>
>>> And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
>>
>> This should be good.
>> Explain how a few additional items in the dishwasher use more
>> energy.
>
> Over the course of a period of time, it means the dishwasher has to be
> run more often than otherwise, using more energy. OK, the difference is
> small, but so is the amount of energy saved by using LED lighting and
> unplugging wall-warts and other meaningless virtue-signalling efforts
> at energy saving.
Oh sure, I run the dishwasher just to wash recyclables.
Just to be clear, if I have recyclables to wash and the dishwasher is
otherwise full, I show just how clever I am, and save the recyclables
for the next load.
Not that I can remember that ever happening.
Why don't you just admit you are mistaken.
>>> I have a simple rule; if it has a "recycling" symbol on it, it goes in the
>>> recycling. If the recyclers don't want it, that's their problem. If they
>>> don't want it marked as recyclable, then they need to talk to the producers;
>>> it isn't my problem.
>>
>> This is why we can't have nice things.
>
> Nonsense. It's because the recycling strategy is poorly thought out and
> designed. And as a result, when there are problems, they are pushed back
> onto the users. And I'm not sure how useful name-calling is.
This is why we can't have nice things is name calling?
This reminds me of programmers criticizing other peoples code.
If you haven't done better yourself, you have no basis for criticizing
the work of others.
>>>> LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue.
>>>> Since you throw them away after 25 years,
>>>
>>> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to buy. I'm
>>> getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been buying. And
>>> they're $10. I return them for a refund.
>>
>> It's highly unlikely that I'm going to see any of my LEDs give up the
>> ghost.
>
> That's nice, dear. OTOH, I am *measuring* premature failures in LED
> "bulbs". It's not "highly unlikely" - it's actually happening.
Of course it happens. But your measurements don't agree with my
measurements, and neither measurements have anything to do with a
true average.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378341 is a reply to message #378333] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 13:13 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 09:54:36 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> [10 lines snipped]
>>>
>>>> > Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they
>>>> > want me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending
>>>> > my free time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>>>
>>>> Put them in the dishwasher. Takes no effort at all.
>>>
>>> And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
>>
>> This should be good. Explain how a few additional items in the
>> dishwasher use more energy.
>
> Run it once for the dishes, take the dishes out and stack them, then
> run it again for the trash. Or do you do so little eating that you
> have room for both in your dishwasher at the same time? Or are you
> the one in your family who even runs the dishwasher?
I'm living alone. Something increasingly common. It takes me days to
fill a dishwasher.
Back when there were more people in the house I still had room.
> I remember a discussion with one knee-jerk liberal type who told me
> there were no weapons in his home and then was rather shocked when I
> showed him what was in the knife block in the kitchen.
Well, that certainly showed that liberal type.
>>>> > Further, there's the matter of what can and can't be recycled.
>>>> > Like you can recycle corrugated board except you can't recycle
>>>> > pizza boxes. You can recycle plastic that has a recycling mark on
>>>> > it unless it's styrofoam.
>>>>
>>>> Here they recently changed to accepting everything including bags
>>>> then a few months later changed again to only 1 and 2 no bags.
>>>
>>> I have a simple rule; if it has a "recycling" symbol on it, it goes
>>> in the recycling. If the recyclers don't want it, that's their
>>> problem. If they don't want it marked as recyclable, then they need
>>> to talk to the producers; it isn't my problem.
>>
>> This is why we can't have nice things.
>>
>>>> Some right wingers have bought cases of 100 watt incandescent
>>>> bulbs. You know, they were going to be outlawed.
>>>>
>>>> LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue. Since you
>>>> throw them away after 25 years,
>>>
>>> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to
>>> buy. I'm getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been
>>> buying. And they're $10. I return them for a refund.
>>
>> It's highly unlikely that I'm going to see any of my LEDs give up the
>> ghost. Going on 5 years now without any failures. I used to replace
>> lamps in my outdoor lamp post every 6 months. I replaced them with
>> CFLs and I must be approaching 10 years on them without a single
>> failure.
>
> Personally I gave up on all the off brands--Philips and Cree seem to
> hold up.
Pretty sure most of mine are Cree.
I got some really cool ones that have a motion sensor in them to turn
themselves on. No more broken pull strings for lights in closets.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378344 is a reply to message #378332] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 13:22 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
R> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 21:11:31 -0500, songbird <songbird@anthive.com>
> wrote:
>
>> J Clarke wrote:
>> ...
>>> Doesn't matter why they don't want them. The Federal budget is 3.8
>>> trillion dollars. If it was not run by FUCKING IDIOTS they've have
>>> put _some_ of it into a research program to permit recycling of that
>>> vast percentage of paper products that are "contaminated with food"
>>> instead of just burning it all.
>>
>> worms will happily eat them up.
>
> If worms happily eat up waste paper then why all the concern about
> "filling up landfills" with it?
Paper is easily recycled, it saves energy to make paper from paper rather
than logs. Why do F'ing Idiots think they know more than people that
actually do this stuff?
Thousands of years from now, those land fills will have to be mined.
The lesser proportion of paper, the easier to find and recover the
tungsten.
:)
I've been running a compost heap since I moved here over 40 years ago.
Interesting how plastic from the prior owners will show up buried
somewhere in the backyard and still look like new. Recently found
wrapping from sticks of chewing gum. Double-mint I think.
Definitely not mine.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378345 is a reply to message #378340] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 13:38 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 13:06:42 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> [10 lines snipped]
>>>>
>>>> >> Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>>>> >> me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>>>> >> time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>>> >
>>>> > Put them in the dishwasher.
>>>> > Takes no effort at all.
>>>>
>>>> And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
>>>
>>> This should be good.
>>> Explain how a few additional items in the dishwasher use more
>>> energy.
>>
>> Over the course of a period of time, it means the dishwasher has to be
>> run more often than otherwise, using more energy. OK, the difference is
>> small, but so is the amount of energy saved by using LED lighting and
>> unplugging wall-warts and other meaningless virtue-signalling efforts
>> at energy saving.
>
> Oh sure, I run the dishwasher just to wash recyclables.
> Just to be clear, if I have recyclables to wash and the dishwasher is
> otherwise full, I show just how clever I am, and save the recyclables
> for the next load.
>
> Not that I can remember that ever happening.
>
> Why don't you just admit you are mistaken.
>
>>>> I have a simple rule; if it has a "recycling" symbol on it, it goes in the
>>>> recycling. If the recyclers don't want it, that's their problem. If they
>>>> don't want it marked as recyclable, then they need to talk to the producers;
>>>> it isn't my problem.
>>>
>>> This is why we can't have nice things.
>>
>> Nonsense. It's because the recycling strategy is poorly thought out and
>> designed. And as a result, when there are problems, they are pushed back
>> onto the users. And I'm not sure how useful name-calling is.
>
> This is why we can't have nice things is name calling?
> This reminds me of programmers criticizing other peoples code.
> If you haven't done better yourself, you have no basis for criticizing
> the work of others.
Yeah, the guy who can't build a car has no right to complain when the
brakes don't work.
The guy who can't do surgery has no right to complain about the
scalpel they left in him.
The guy who can't design a web page has no right to complain when the
one he's using won't take a zip code.
The woman who can't write a login script has no right to complain when
the one provided for her makes comments about her bodily functions,
keyed to a calendar.
Sorry, but the notion "if you can't do better yourself you have no
right to complain" is one of the major enemies of progress.
We've had mandatory recycling in parts of the US for nearly 30 years
and I see no evidence that anybody is making any kind of concerted
effort to improve the range of materials that can be recycled. We
just see more and more complicated rules that we are expected to
follow.
I wonder how much progress we could have made on that front if the
money spent on NASA producing an obsolete imitation of a 50 year old
space booster had been spent on improving recycling technology
instead.
>>>> > LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue.
>>>> > Since you throw them away after 25 years,
>>>>
>>>> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to buy. I'm
>>>> getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been buying. And
>>>> they're $10. I return them for a refund.
>>>
>>> It's highly unlikely that I'm going to see any of my LEDs give up the
>>> ghost.
>>
>> That's nice, dear. OTOH, I am *measuring* premature failures in LED
>> "bulbs". It's not "highly unlikely" - it's actually happening.
>
> Of course it happens. But your measurements don't agree with my
> measurements, and neither measurements have anything to do with a
> true average.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378346 is a reply to message #378344] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 13:43 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 13:22:12 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
> R> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 21:11:31 -0500, songbird <songbird@anthive.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> J Clarke wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> Doesn't matter why they don't want them. The Federal budget is 3.8
>>>> trillion dollars. If it was not run by FUCKING IDIOTS they've have
>>>> put _some_ of it into a research program to permit recycling of that
>>>> vast percentage of paper products that are "contaminated with food"
>>>> instead of just burning it all.
>>>
>>> worms will happily eat them up.
>>
>> If worms happily eat up waste paper then why all the concern about
>> "filling up landfills" with it?
>
> Paper is easily recycled, it saves energy to make paper from paper rather
> than logs. Why do F'ing Idiots think they know more than people that
> actually do this stuff?
>
> Thousands of years from now, those land fills will have to be mined.
> The lesser proportion of paper, the easier to find and recover the
> tungsten.
>
> :)
>
> I've been running a compost heap since I moved here over 40 years ago.
> Interesting how plastic from the prior owners will show up buried
> somewhere in the backyard and still look like new. Recently found
> wrapping from sticks of chewing gum. Double-mint I think.
> Definitely not mine.
However the immortality of plastic is something of an exaggeration. It
just hasn't been in the environment long enough for something to learn
how to eat it. The bacteria are working on it though, there's a
strain already that eats one fairly common plastic, no doubt there
will be others in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378349 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 15:05 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> >
>>>> > [10 lines snipped]
>>>> >
>>>> >>> Personally I don't have a problem with recycling cans, but they want
>>>> >>> me to wash them first and I do have an objection to spending my free
>>>> >>> time washing trash to make the government happy.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Put them in the dishwasher.
>>>> >> Takes no effort at all.
>>>> >
>>>> > And adds to the costs of running the dishwasher.
>>>>
>>>> This should be good.
>>>> Explain how a few additional items in the dishwasher use more
>>>> energy.
>>>
>>> Over the course of a period of time, it means the dishwasher has to be
>>> run more often than otherwise, using more energy. OK, the difference is
>>> small, but so is the amount of energy saved by using LED lighting and
>>> unplugging wall-warts and other meaningless virtue-signalling efforts
>>> at energy saving.
>>
>> Oh sure, I run the dishwasher just to wash recyclables.
>
> That isn't what I said.
>
>> Just to be clear, if I have recyclables to wash and the dishwasher is
>> otherwise full, I show just how clever I am, and save the recyclables
>> for the next load.
>
> Yes? And? If you're washing recyclables, then you are self-evidently
> washing more "things" than if you aren't washing recyclables. Ergo, over
> a time period (a year, say) you run the dishwasher more often. I don't
> know how much simpler I can make this.
Not simple enough for me.
Recyclables ALWAYS go along for the ride.
If I got into a case where the dishwasher was
fully loaded and I wanted to add dishes, I'd take
out the recyclables and do them later.
Surely most people have a little unused room in their
normal loads.
>> Not that I can remember that ever happening.
>>
>> Why don't you just admit you are mistaken.
>
> Why don't you just admit you're an idiot?
First we have to agree on a common reality.
Then, when I see the error of my ways, I'll admit
I'm wrong.
Meanwhile, I have plenty of room in my dishwasher.
I'm not wasting my time or water rinsing them.
Dirty recyclables go in the right side, top rack.
The recycling bin is to the right.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378350 is a reply to message #378346] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 15:17 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 13:22:12 -0500, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> R> On Sat, 15 Dec 2018 21:11:31 -0500, songbird <songbird@anthive.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> J Clarke wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> > Doesn't matter why they don't want them. The Federal budget is 3.8
>>>> > trillion dollars. If it was not run by FUCKING IDIOTS they've have
>>>> > put _some_ of it into a research program to permit recycling of that
>>>> > vast percentage of paper products that are "contaminated with food"
>>>> > instead of just burning it all.
>>>>
>>>> worms will happily eat them up.
>>>
>>> If worms happily eat up waste paper then why all the concern about
>>> "filling up landfills" with it?
>>
>> Paper is easily recycled, it saves energy to make paper from paper rather
>> than logs. Why do F'ing Idiots think they know more than people that
>> actually do this stuff?
>>
>> Thousands of years from now, those land fills will have to be mined.
>> The lesser proportion of paper, the easier to find and recover the
>> tungsten.
>>
>> :)
>>
>> I've been running a compost heap since I moved here over 40 years ago.
>> Interesting how plastic from the prior owners will show up buried
>> somewhere in the backyard and still look like new. Recently found
>> wrapping from sticks of chewing gum. Double-mint I think.
>> Definitely not mine.
>
> However the immortality of plastic is something of an exaggeration. It
> just hasn't been in the environment long enough for something to learn
> how to eat it. The bacteria are working on it though, there's a
> strain already that eats one fairly common plastic, no doubt there
> will be others in the future.
Interesting subject.
If these bacteria eat something as complex as plastic,
I wonder about their waste products. Oil? A poison?
I have about 40 years experience with the same compost heap.
Many years I'd just ignore the plastic I'd see in there,
wondering if I could evolve something that would eat it.
So far, each time I find something, it's pristine.
Lately I'm getting older and I figure I should move the
plastic into the waste stream (trash). Experiment failed
to get desired results.
If we evolve bacteria that eat plastic watch out for things
falling apart.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378351 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 15:23 |
Dan Espen
Messages: 3867
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> writes:
> On 12/16/2018 5:32 AM, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 04:01:34 -0700
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Stuff that goes into a landfill will last decades or more without
>>> decaying, or are you talking about a composting program that doesn't
>>> exist?
>>
>> That "doesn't exist" bit depends where you are, there's one here
>> and brown bins to go with it - but they won't take pizza boxes, bits of
>> pizza yes but not the boxes.
>>
> The program here takes pizza boxes, frozen food boxes, and the barely
> paper (grey felted) stuff they make some egg cartons out of here.
If they accept egg cartons for recycling, they've created an infinite
loop.
--
Dan Espen
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378353 is a reply to message #376693] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 16:00 |
|
|
Originally posted by: nobody
On 16 Dec 2018 11:35:11 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-12-16, Dan Espen <dan1espen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Here they recently changed to accepting everything including bags then a
>> few months later changed again to only 1 and 2 no bags.
>
> I have a simple rule; if it has a "recycling" symbol on it, it goes in the
> recycling. If the recyclers don't want it, that's their problem. If they
> don't want it marked as recyclable, then they need to talk to the producers;
> it isn't my problem.
That's pretty much what I've arrived at. I do basic sorting; clean
stuff goes in recycling, greasy stuff goes in the trash, but I'm not
cleaning or washing anything. At this point they don't actually
recycle any of it. They collect it in separate trucks, weigh it for
statistical purposes, and then put it in the landfill. But, you know,
optimism and all that.
>> LEDs pretty much make the recycling issue a non-issue.
>> Since you throw them away after 25 years,
>
> If you think they last 25 years, I have a bridge you might want to buy. I'm
> getting ~18 months out of the supermarket "bulbs" I've been buying. And
> they're $10. I return them for a refund.
I wonder if your unhappy experiences could be related to a dodgy
electrical supply?
I've been installing primarily LED lamps for maybe five years, the
only failures I've had were infant mortality. Every one that didn't
croak in the first week is still working today. But this tends to be
true of other lamp types as well.
Prior to that, when I bought my house ~17 years ago, I went through
and replaced every incandescent lamp with a compact fluorescent. I'd
guess 80% of those are still working, even the high duty cycle
locations.
One exception is the bath fixtures, in the marquee style with exposed
lamps. At the time the "pretty" CFLs were much more expensive than the
ugly helix types, so I left those incandescents as they were. The
previous homeowner left three spares as well. Today, every one of
those incandescent lamps is still working, and I still have those
three spares. Today the pretty CFL/LEDs are priced right, but those
lights spend so little time in use that I'm completely unmotivated to
be bothered with them.
Ceiling fan light fixtures, though, those are lamp killers no matter
what kind of lighting tech you screw into them.
Cost-wise, I can't really say but I'd be satisfied if it's a wash. If
I pay for the lamps or pay for the power to run them, I still benefit
if I spend less time on a ladder futzing with them.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378354 is a reply to message #378312] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 16:30 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 03:58:16 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>
> J. Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> More likely it's to put money in the pockets of the light bulb
>> manfacturers.
>>
>> Don't attribute to virtue that which can be adequately explained by
>> greed.,
>>
>> And the reduction in CO2 emissions is negligible.
>>
>> Residential energy use:
>> Air conditioning 17%
>> Space heating 15%
>> Water heating 14%
>> Lighting 10%
>> TVs and related 7%
>> Refrigerators 7%
>> Clothes dryers 5%
>> Itemized other uses 12% (I won't list them all here)
>> "Not elsewhere classified" 13%
>>
>> A 100 watt incandescent is replaced by a 14 watt LED--saving there is
>> potentially, if _all_ domestic lighting is incandescent takes the
>> total down from 10% to 1.4%.
>>
>> I'm sorry, but that's peeing in the ocean.
>>
>
> Should also save money by reducing the need for replacement. I agree about
> FLDs, they didn't last anywhere as long as advertised and dimmed
> significantly over time. They were a stupid idea promoted in the name of
> environmentalism that caused more problems than they solved.
Then replace FLD with LED. They last longer, no?
--
Andreas
My random thoughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378356 is a reply to message #378316] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 16:41 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 04:01:34 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>
> songbird <songbird@anthive.com> wrote:
>> J Clarke wrote:
>> ...
>>> Doesn't matter why they don't want them. The Federal budget is 3.8
>>> trillion dollars. If it was not run by FUCKING IDIOTS they've have
>>> put _some_ of it into a research program to permit recycling of that
>>> vast percentage of paper products that are "contaminated with food"
>>> instead of just burning it all.
>>
>> worms will happily eat them up.
>
> Stuff that goes into a landfill will last decades or more without decaying,
> or are you talking about a composting program that doesn't exist?
Thankfully. Wasn't it nice when they dug out old Atari cartridges a few
years ago from a landfill in New Mexico Atari couldn't sell? ;-)
--
Andreas
My random thoughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Is LINUX the inheritor of the Earth? [message #378358 is a reply to message #378338] |
Sun, 16 December 2018 17:25 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sunday, December 16, 2018 at 10:51:40 AM UTC-7, JimP wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2018 16:56:01 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
> wrote:
>> J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> For us leftpondians could you explain "W7" and "W19"?
>>
>> I never realised that 0 and 9 weren't adjacent on american keyboards.
>
> To use a Spockism, that response is highly ilogical.
I finally figured it out.
There is a post just earlier in this thread which has as its author:
"Gareths was W7 now W10 Downstairs Computer"
so the 9 was a typo for 0, and the comment meant: You are actually boasting of
changing from Windows 7 to Windows 10; how low can you go after that?
John Savard
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
