Go back to your tea party and stop injecting you ignorance and politics in an Apple forum please.
The guy was 100% spot-on. Greenpeace is a bunch of insane eco-terrorists with ZERO credibility. Al Gore is the biggest fraud since Jessie Jackson. If you believe otherwise, then YOU are the ignorant one, not him.
If AI hadn't stuck it's usual Apple defense in this article Greenpeace's point might have come across a bit better. From what I read on BBC there was actual praise for work done by Microsoft and Facebook amongst others for the amount they've cut power consumption. The point is thing's like iPads mean data centers are going to grow and use more power to the extent that collectively they will use more power than countries the size of France! Getting the few companies running these data centers to demand renewable energy from suppliers is a lot easier than trying to convince a whole country to do it.
Nobody said anything about stopping technology. This is about getting a few companies to use there massive buying power to force engery suppliers to supply renewable energy.
Ummm... IMO, pmz's post added more information related to the thread discussion than yours.
*
Try discussing "I'm disgusted by the people who manipulate others into thinking that Carbon Dioxide is bad for the Earth or Humans." with a scientist (other than one looking for grants from oil or coal companies etc.). It is too silly to even respond to as the subject is so vast. I was at a lecture a few days ago given by Dr. Richard Komp, one of the world's leading experts on solar energy and his words were fresh in my mind when I read pmz's twaddle. I shouldn't have even responded, my bad.
Greenpeace is almost as big a joke as the now disgraced al gore. If GP really wanted to help the country and the world, they would concentrate their efforts on getting rid of the current crop of weasels pulling the levers in Washington. For God's sakes nancy pelosi's totally fruitless trip to the Copenhagen Climate Summit using 2 military jets for dozens of tag-alongers, spewed more CO2 in the air in a week than all the iPads and iPods will do in a millenium. Did Greenpeace bother to comment on that? The level of ignorance and hypocrisy from these left wing screwballs is breathtaking.
This is just silly. How much power does the iTunes data centre use compared to the CD, DVD and book printing factories it replaces? As someone else mentioned, how much power does a 10 minute movie download use compared to driving to the video store and back?
Actually, that's a point that most of us can't authoritatively answer. Same thing for replacing 'dead trees' with electronic newspapers/magazines. We all assume that its a net savings, but I for one can't say that I really know the answer. I've seen plenty of studies that say that the energy consumption for digital downloads outweighs the damage of paper printing.
Greenpeace is taking advantage of a publicity tsunami, and I suppose I can't really blame them. Looks like they're asking people to think about 'cloud' assumptions regarding energy. Don't really see the harm in that.
Go back to your tea party and stop injecting you ignorance and politics in an Apple forum please.
When you choose politically polarizing figures for your BoD, a by-product is a charged political atmosphere. Apple also plays into this polarization as a company. As long as the criticism is fairly respectful, I don't see a problem with it.
The guy was 100% spot-on. Greenpeace is a bunch of insane eco-terrorists with ZERO credibility. Al Gore is the biggest fraud since Jessie Jackson. If you believe otherwise, then YOU are the ignorant one, not him.
Wow... such well presented and logical arguments. I guess that settles it.
When you choose politically polarizing figures for your BoD, a by-product is a charged political atmosphere. Apple also plays into this polarization as a company. As long as the criticism is fairly respectful, I don't see a problem with it.
Well, I'll agree that 'smart' and 'well informed' are definitely polarizing in Fox land.
Greenpeace will not be happy as long as people inhabit the planet.
Also, gotta wonder what their carbon footprint looks like.
Who can be gotten to do a independent third party carbon footprint study on Greenpeace as an organization and also study the top tier executives... I wonder...
If AI hadn't stuck it's usual Apple defense in this article Greenpeace's point might have come across a bit better. From what I read on BBC there was actual praise for work done by Microsoft and Facebook amongst others for the amount they've cut power consumption. The point is thing's like iPads mean data centers are going to grow and use more power to the extent that collectively they will use more power than countries the size of France! Getting the few companies running these data centers to demand renewable energy from suppliers is a lot easier than trying to convince a whole country to do it.
Nobody said anything about stopping technology. This is about getting a few companies to use there massive buying power to force engery suppliers to supply renewable energy.
But in the larger scheme of things: Don't a few massive data centers (however wasteful), have a more positive impact than millions of individuals jumping in their cars to go get a book, movie, TV show (and do it all over again to return them)?
Further, these data centers, likely, contract for continuous, predictable power consumption with the utilities. This allows the utility to operate more efficiently and conserve power.
I agree that these large consumers of energy are likely candidates (not targets) for efficiency and conservation. I suspect that most, being for profit, try to reduce power and run as efficiently as possible. Where renewable energy is a competitive alternative, they, likely use it.
While renewable energy might offer further improvement, it has to be done in an economical way or the cost of delivering digital goods will be so high as to encourage the less-efficient alternative (more people in more cars driving wherever to buy whatever).
Lastly, there may be unintended consequences: Some claim that the use of corn in the US to manufacture a (more expensive) alternative to gasoline has resulted in a shortage of corn and an increase in the price of corn food products as well as imported corn, rice, etc. (and a rise in the consumption of energy necessary to import it)
I don't know if this is true, but it is worth consideration.
A friend once illustrated entropy as "anything you do to change a system makes it worse".
I'm an environmentalist too, I believe man-made GW is real, and I support Al Gore. I'm also a socialist who thinks we need Kucinich in the Whitehouse. But I think Greenpeace is only one step below PETA at the top of the liberal wacko list.
at what point did these idiots typo "CO2" instead of CO, and was it the same time the rest of you idiots decided to forget en masse that CARBON DIOXIDE IS WHAT PLANTS NEED TO SURVIVE.
CARBON MONOXIDE IS WHAT COME OUT OF FACTORIES AND ENGINES.
you goddamn socialist greentards aren't even trying anymore, are you?
We are not dissing apple, and maybe somone else can figure out how much they pollute? WTF? I am a supporter of green movement, but this sounds like an unfair and outright publicity stunt by greenpeace. They are attacking what is probably the greenest comp manufacturer.
I'm an environmentalist too, I believe man-made GW is real, and I support Al Gore. I'm also a socialist who thinks we need Kucinich in the Whitehouse. But I think Greenpeace is only one step below PETA at the top of the liberal wacko list.
Totally with you on Kucinich. Was (is) a man ahead of his time. And what a warrior.
Comments
Go back to your tea party and stop injecting you ignorance and politics in an Apple forum please.
The guy was 100% spot-on. Greenpeace is a bunch of insane eco-terrorists with ZERO credibility. Al Gore is the biggest fraud since Jessie Jackson. If you believe otherwise, then YOU are the ignorant one, not him.
This summer I'm barbecuing with coal only!! Brings out the real taste of the meat.
Nobody said anything about stopping technology. This is about getting a few companies to use there massive buying power to force engery suppliers to supply renewable energy.
Ummm... IMO, pmz's post added more information related to the thread discussion than yours.
*
Try discussing "I'm disgusted by the people who manipulate others into thinking that Carbon Dioxide is bad for the Earth or Humans." with a scientist (other than one looking for grants from oil or coal companies etc.). It is too silly to even respond to as the subject is so vast. I was at a lecture a few days ago given by Dr. Richard Komp, one of the world's leading experts on solar energy and his words were fresh in my mind when I read pmz's twaddle. I shouldn't have even responded, my bad.
Grrr...
Just slow down on the breeding you complete morons!
A couple dozen children will probably use more CO2 in their lifetimes than all the iPads Apple will ever sell.
Are you suggesting we each kill a couple dozen children?
This is just silly. How much power does the iTunes data centre use compared to the CD, DVD and book printing factories it replaces? As someone else mentioned, how much power does a 10 minute movie download use compared to driving to the video store and back?
Actually, that's a point that most of us can't authoritatively answer. Same thing for replacing 'dead trees' with electronic newspapers/magazines. We all assume that its a net savings, but I for one can't say that I really know the answer. I've seen plenty of studies that say that the energy consumption for digital downloads outweighs the damage of paper printing.
Greenpeace is taking advantage of a publicity tsunami, and I suppose I can't really blame them. Looks like they're asking people to think about 'cloud' assumptions regarding energy. Don't really see the harm in that.
Go back to your tea party and stop injecting you ignorance and politics in an Apple forum please.
When you choose politically polarizing figures for your BoD, a by-product is a charged political atmosphere. Apple also plays into this polarization as a company. As long as the criticism is fairly respectful, I don't see a problem with it.
The guy was 100% spot-on. Greenpeace is a bunch of insane eco-terrorists with ZERO credibility. Al Gore is the biggest fraud since Jessie Jackson. If you believe otherwise, then YOU are the ignorant one, not him.
Wow... such well presented and logical arguments. I guess that settles it.
When you choose politically polarizing figures for your BoD, a by-product is a charged political atmosphere. Apple also plays into this polarization as a company. As long as the criticism is fairly respectful, I don't see a problem with it.
Well, I'll agree that 'smart' and 'well informed' are definitely polarizing in Fox land.
Greenpeace will not be happy as long as people inhabit the planet.
Also, gotta wonder what their carbon footprint looks like.
Who can be gotten to do a independent third party carbon footprint study on Greenpeace as an organization and also study the top tier executives... I wonder...
I bet you'll find some major hypocrisy!
You ususally do with groups like these!
If AI hadn't stuck it's usual Apple defense in this article Greenpeace's point might have come across a bit better. From what I read on BBC there was actual praise for work done by Microsoft and Facebook amongst others for the amount they've cut power consumption. The point is thing's like iPads mean data centers are going to grow and use more power to the extent that collectively they will use more power than countries the size of France! Getting the few companies running these data centers to demand renewable energy from suppliers is a lot easier than trying to convince a whole country to do it.
Nobody said anything about stopping technology. This is about getting a few companies to use there massive buying power to force engery suppliers to supply renewable energy.
But in the larger scheme of things: Don't a few massive data centers (however wasteful), have a more positive impact than millions of individuals jumping in their cars to go get a book, movie, TV show (and do it all over again to return them)?
Further, these data centers, likely, contract for continuous, predictable power consumption with the utilities. This allows the utility to operate more efficiently and conserve power.
I agree that these large consumers of energy are likely candidates (not targets) for efficiency and conservation. I suspect that most, being for profit, try to reduce power and run as efficiently as possible. Where renewable energy is a competitive alternative, they, likely use it.
While renewable energy might offer further improvement, it has to be done in an economical way or the cost of delivering digital goods will be so high as to encourage the less-efficient alternative (more people in more cars driving wherever to buy whatever).
Lastly, there may be unintended consequences: Some claim that the use of corn in the US to manufacture a (more expensive) alternative to gasoline has resulted in a shortage of corn and an increase in the price of corn food products as well as imported corn, rice, etc. (and a rise in the consumption of energy necessary to import it)
I don't know if this is true, but it is worth consideration.
A friend once illustrated entropy as "anything you do to change a system makes it worse".
*
CARBON MONOXIDE IS WHAT COME OUT OF FACTORIES AND ENGINES.
you goddamn socialist greentards aren't even trying anymore, are you?
Are you suggesting we each kill a couple dozen children?
a 21st century modest proposal
I'm an environmentalist too, I believe man-made GW is real, and I support Al Gore. I'm also a socialist who thinks we need Kucinich in the Whitehouse. But I think Greenpeace is only one step below PETA at the top of the liberal wacko list.
Totally with you on Kucinich. Was (is) a man ahead of his time. And what a warrior.