[HN Gopher] Email a Dumpster Fire
___________________________________________________________________
Email a Dumpster Fire
Author : bschne
Score : 558 points
Date : 2020-11-24 19:04 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (hey.science)
(TXT) w3m dump (hey.science)
| mulmen wrote:
| The ramp got wet and now everything gets stuck, that almost makes
| it better.
|
| Kinda fun to watch them try and figure it out. I wonder if
| machine revisions/hacks will happen live on stream as well.
| grumio wrote:
| This is great. This is the new Yuletide log channel.
| totaldude87 wrote:
| nice automation, just got one paper stuck though!
| totaldude87 wrote:
| and a dude walked right in and put that in! NICE!
| ralfd wrote:
| The paper just jammed! To bad there is no chat.
| iandanforth wrote:
| The fire got blown out by the wind as I watched. Now it's email a
| gas leak!
| Supermancho wrote:
| Doesn't work all the time. Saw one get stuck on the conveyor. Oh
| well.
| crb wrote:
| One just went past that said "everything is fine". It was
| committed to the fire, flew up, and landed back on the conveyor
| belt. A guy in a mask ran into the frame and picked it up and put
| it in the fire by hand.
|
| I found it very in keeping with the theme.
| arthurcolle wrote:
| I saw that one too. Hilarious.
| treve wrote:
| I sent an email and was waiting for something to happen, was just
| staring at a blank screen... Once I disabled privacy protection
| my mind was blown. Super funny.
|
| But it does make me wonder if people test their stuff with
| firefox and privacy protections ON. I think(?) it's the default
| now.
|
| Either way, funny as hell. Well done!
|
| Also funny that for every piece of paper someone has to walk up
| and help them get into the dumpster.
| jasoneckert wrote:
| This is possibly the first example of Dumpster Fire as a Service
| (DFaaS)
| dom96 wrote:
| I always admire these kinds of things, it's a genius marketing
| strategy and reminds me a lot of the sort of things that the
| people behind Cards Against Humanity have done. Anyone aware of
| others doing similar things?
| danans wrote:
| I love the old school pixelated desktop GUI - especially with an
| HD video stream embedded in it. It's like a classic car with the
| engine swapped out for an electric drivetrain.
|
| It would have been awesome if windows were movable, too.
| Paul-ish wrote:
| Is there any way I can get a recording of my document getting
| burned?
| bschne wrote:
| When you send in an email, the confirmation you get back says
| you'll get a clip once it's been burnt
| vandahm wrote:
| What's the best way to incinerate a `pom.xml` file?
| geocrasher wrote:
| I built an email > print gateway once using procmail and an
| OpenOffice library that would convert anything into PDF. It
| worked well, and I could print to it just by sending an
| attachment of most any document or image kind. It ran on a cron
| job, and worked really well. The difference? I didn't publish the
| email address, and there were no flames invovled.
| odiroot wrote:
| I wonder if the content is escaped at all. Could be fun to do
| some PJL injection to spook the operator.
| chucky wrote:
| Whoever is running marketing at hey.com seems to be _very_
| inspired by the marketing that Cards Against Humanity has been
| doing.
| ve55 wrote:
| I actually am really enjoying the music, any chance anyone has a
| source for it?
| scrooched_moose wrote:
| I've checked a couple with Soundhound and they seem to be on
| "Healin' in the City Night, Vol 3" now
|
| https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=OLAK5uy_nqWGydjKlLOvGr...
|
| Edit: Hm, seems to be some chillhop playlist. "Stan Forebee &
| Kyle McEvoy - Kensington" now.
| tewt23542 wrote:
| :(
| joering2 wrote:
| - The printer prints out paper and it goes on a belt, but the
| printout is on the other side! Now we need to engineer how to
| reverse a page. Oh, screw it! We are hackers, after all! Just
| print the same thing on both sides.
| mlyle wrote:
| Is it on both sides, or is it just on the "back"? I thought
| using the duplexer was a clever hack. It heightens the drama,
| too.
| mr_ndrsn wrote:
| Just the back, you are correct!
| mr_ndrsn wrote:
| Yes, that's a simple way to handle it! As it is, I just make
| sure it's a 2-pager, and have the first page be blank.
|
| The thought there was to reduce toner usage, but printing the
| same thing reduces issues due to wind flipping the sheets over.
| +1
| ccccccccccccccc wrote:
| Anyone remember the Microsoft manual burning ceremony at CCC ?
| brundolf wrote:
| As an aside: the web design for this page is super novel and
| cool. And I love the (somewhat random) ability to "close" the
| different windows and open them back up, as if it were a desktop
| environment. I wouldn't want this on every website I visit but
| it's certainly neat.
| philshem wrote:
| have you seen https://poolside.fm/ ?
| [deleted]
| asimjalis wrote:
| Emails torched count is not updating.
| recursive wrote:
| If you reload the page, it will increase.
| bdamm wrote:
| Just saw a pic of Lindsey Graham go by! Perfect!
| SheinhardtWigCo wrote:
| Basecamp sure knows their funnel. First the App Store drama, now
| this - hats off to whoever is marketing this thing.
| valzam wrote:
| Am I the only one who initially thought the whole set up was very
| small? I.e. it prints A6 pages and the dumpster is a box. But
| then a guy ran into the frame because the paper got stuck and I
| realised it's actually a full sized dumpster...
| driantembulg wrote:
| Somebody just burned "TRUMP"
| mr_ndrsn wrote:
| It's not the first time, and it won't be the last time that
| gets sent thru.
| tpmx wrote:
| Now.. this is the kind of performance art/marketing scheme I can
| get behind.
| cyrialize wrote:
| Man, a lot of emails are queued up. I haven't seen mine yet, but
| I appreciate that they'll send you a clip of it burning.
|
| For reference, here's what I sent: + / * O * / + "help they
| trapped my soul in this piece of paper!"
| actuator wrote:
| It would have been nice if you got a queue number back after
| sending over an email with the video displaying the current
| message number being processed.
| das_keyboard wrote:
| Somehow the Stream-Window just kept black with Firefox.
|
| But I dug up the direct link for the stream:
| https://video.ibm.com/embed/23996224
| sp332 wrote:
| Firefox's "Enhanced Tracking Protection" blocks video.ibm.com
| by default. Not sure why.
| das_keyboard wrote:
| Yeah. You are right. That fixed my problem.
| arthurcolle wrote:
| Does Hey.com use IBM Cloud?
| t3rabytes wrote:
| We don't, but streaming on YouTube/Twitch have some caveats
| that ruled them out for this.
| hajhatten wrote:
| Like what?
| mr_ndrsn wrote:
| Content restrictions/moderation decisions that would be
| out of our hands.
|
| In this case, we're a paying customer of the provider,
| not the product.
| worldmerge wrote:
| I would love to know your streaming setup for this. I did
| an interactive project using Twitch/YouTube chat a month
| back, controlmylights.net, and I found the delay on both
| of services was pretty bad. And you can't use Twitch's
| low latency mode on Safari/Edge. Also, unless you can
| monetize on YouTube you can't embed a live YouTube
| stream.
|
| If you are interested in how I made it:
| https://edwarddeaver.me/portfolio/control-my-lights/
| mr_ndrsn wrote:
| Nope. Separate infra for this project. I know, because I'm
| on the team that built both.
| gibspaulding wrote:
| It's working for me right now on Firefox / Windows.
|
| Still waiting on my email to show up though. Apparently it's
| awaiting review.
| smexxymoose wrote:
| This idea is cool! How long do you plan to run the project?
| siltpotato wrote:
| Why not support the printer so that it has more elevation than
| the fire?
| mburns wrote:
| Tom Scott did a similar stunt, where Youtube comments were
| printed in real time and fed directly into a paper shredder.
|
| https://youtu.be/SpNlp6AtTOE
| ohazi wrote:
| I love how it has one of those big honking emergency stop
| buttons.
|
| Like, 2020 may indeed be a dumpster fire, but at least we can be
| confident that this particular installation is going to be a
| relatively safe, _controlled_ dumpster fire.
| musingsole wrote:
| This looks like a laser printer, right? Could that be what's
| sometimes causing it to stick to the metal chute (i.e. leftover
| charge from the toner transfer process)? Or maybe an inkjet would
| just have different issues from slight dampness.
| Spare_account wrote:
| It looks like the rain is getting onto the conveyor and the
| chute, they just tried to dry it off
| something2 wrote:
| My thought was that the metal part of the chute is now holding
| on to more heat. So when the paper touches the metal is kinda
| burn-attaches itself to the chute. But your idea sounds more
| plausible!
|
| Edit: I do appreciate the dude's commitment to burning our
| messages though!
| Fiveplus wrote:
| Is someone handpicking the ones to be printed or is this
| automated?
| t3rabytes wrote:
| They're screened for content, but there is a pretty deep queue
| currently.
| grishka wrote:
| Hm. I sent one 20 minutes ago and it still hasn't appeared. I
| thought that if there would be a queue, there won't be this
| much of a delay between them. It would just print them enough
| time apart so they don't pile up on the belt.
| sand500 wrote:
| With 5 thousand viewers right now, they probably have 10k+
| in the queue and they are printing what,one page every 20
| seconds? They could definitely speed up how fast they print
| though.
| grishka wrote:
| > and they are printing what,one page every 20 seconds
|
| Yeah that's what I meant. If this was made for maximum
| throughput, the bottleneck would've been the conveyor
| belt stopping to show the printed page to the camera
| above.
| codeulike wrote:
| Didnt really get the scale of what I was looking at until the guy
| ran over with a stick to move a stuck piece of paper
| slowwriter wrote:
| I can't believe they actually use IBM Video for this thing. I use
| this terrible, terrible platform every day at work at the moment.
| kowlo wrote:
| Fun idea! Would be nice to get an email back with "You are
| position x in the queue, ETA y minutes".
|
| Patiently waiting to see my attachment meet its maker...
|
| I did just get an email letting me know you will send a video of
| my submission though, that's nice!
| Paul-ish wrote:
| How long did the wait end up being?
| throwaway888abc wrote:
| Save the trees! Version without printing please. Cool idea
| sethammons wrote:
| Like an animated fire that eats the digital email for all to
| see? Meh. I love that this is real world. Trees are farmed for
| paper. At full speed, this is likely to burn less trees than I
| do heating my house every day.
| carterparks wrote:
| 52k views, 268 emails torched.... ruby doesn't scale :)
| mr_ndrsn wrote:
| Hah! More like physical constraints on physical objects doesn't
| scale!
|
| The decision was made to not horizontally scale out the
| dumpster operations to match expected queue uptake. ;)
| walrus01 wrote:
| time to attach a twelve year old HP laserjet with ethernet
| interface, those things can churn out thousands of pages in a
| day in a law office environment.
| koolba wrote:
| Is the font for this fixed width?
|
| One could have a lot of fun with ASCII art or even some good ol'
| fashioned figlet.
| sdmike1 wrote:
| Just tried ASCII art and it doesn't work, I'll have to try
| playing with the width.
| boogies wrote:
| figlet -f banner 'foo' | sed 'y/# //'
|
| (should work with `tr '# ' ''` too, but I only have the
| busybox version which only works with ASCII)
|
| _EDIT_ : and I forgot what a pain Unicode can be on HN as
| well. Unbutchered here: https://pastebin.com/jVSUwVCS
| bogwog wrote:
| You could just send an actual image as an attachment.
| nitwit005 wrote:
| I was thinking that a paper jam would result in the whole machine
| burning down, and I just noticed someone wander on to intervene
| when a print out got stuck at the end.
| priyadarshy wrote:
| I'd been wondering if Hey.com was taking off after so much
| fanfare and drama when they released. The fact that they're doing
| this for an inherently viral product which had a massive launch
| probably means interest has now subsided?
| fishtoaster wrote:
| This reminds me of a Burning Code celebration my team once had at
| ocean beach in SF.
|
| We'd been slowly migrating from Angular 1.X to React (internally:
| the Angularpocalypse) for a few years and we'd finally migrated
| over our last few pages. The result was about 100k lines of JS
| and Rails code that could be safely deleted in a single PR. It
| had been such a long slog, though, that we felt the team deserved
| some catharsis.
|
| We took a team-offsite day to gather on a nearby beach and burn
| the deleted code. In the interest of not wasting that much paper,
| we burnt a complete list of the deleted files in super-tiny font
| on a couple pages. We also each grabbed our least-favorite areas
| of the codebase to print out, including several dramatic
| readings. My selection was a section of code from about 4 years
| prior with a comment like //TODO: replace this asap.
|
| I highly recommend it to anyone facing a long, clearly-delineated
| migration. Gift your old, shameful code to the flame.
| [deleted]
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| We made a cake and stabbed it to death and then ate it.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| I think this sort of thing, while cheesy in some respects is
| great for the team morale. A lot of companies do social things,
| which is great, but they are disconnected from the work. It's
| like stop work, do something social, and back to work. But with
| this ritual it's connected and a real celebration.
|
| I hope React is better for you and you don't need to burn again
| in 5 years! Luckily hooks and non-hooks code works together
| nicely enough.
| robbyking wrote:
| I'm curious, how many people got the reference to the first
| Burning Man, held on Ocean Beach in 1986?
| thedanbob wrote:
| This reminds me of one time when I finally got to shut down a
| particularly hated internal web app. For a few hours before the
| PHP server was taken offline, visiting the site would only
| return this image:
| https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6OWKZqvvPh8/UjBJ6xPxwjI/AAAAAAAAO...
| justin_oaks wrote:
| That's awesome. What made the app so hated?
| pixl97 wrote:
| I'm going to make an assumption that it was a PHP app
| written internally by people that didn't know what they
| were doing, with no documentation, and that was fragile as
| all hell. Also probably written in some ancient php version
| that could not be upgraded and was a huge security risk.
|
| At least that's what I tend to see in the field.
| thedanbob wrote:
| Check, check, and check. Add to that no version control,
| no tests, no development environment, a custom ajax
| frontend framework, and the fact that it was mission
| critical. About the only thing it had going for it was
| daily database backups (which came in handy).
|
| I did my best to clean up the code so it was at least
| somewhat maintainable, but there were sections (the most
| important ones, of course) that I just wouldn't touch
| because it was impossible to tell what they did -- oh
| yeah, I forgot to mention the global variables, didn't I?
|
| So happy that app is dead and buried.
| BolexNOLA wrote:
| Brilliant
| markdown wrote:
| Every since The Crown S4, I've lots of references flying
| around. I must say that she was superbly played by Gillian
| Anderson.
| colordrops wrote:
| Have you started on the Reactocalypse effort yet?
| fishtoaster wrote:
| Not gonna lie, I've been waiting for that to start to seem
| like a good idea. :) React seems to have more staying power
| than previous trends, though. Off the top of my head, the
| frontend library supremacy* went something like:
|
| - 2008 to 2012: Jquery
|
| - 2012 to 2014: Backbone
|
| - 2014 to 2016: Angular
|
| - 2016 to present: React
|
| And although there are serious contenders, React still seems
| like it has a solid lead over all others. If it lasts another
| couple years, it's been the dominant tool for longer than
| most.
|
| * Based entirely on "what I was hearing the most about at
| that time," not on any rigorous methodology. There was still
| plenty of Jquery code being written last year and there are
| large, mature codebases out there in Backbone and Angular.
| wwweston wrote:
| > there are large, mature codebases out there in Backbone
| and Angular.
|
| When it comes to large long-historied Angular codebases, I
| prefer the term "metastasized" over "mature," though now
| that we're in the 2020s we can almost use "legacy."
| breck wrote:
| The core React design pattern is nice, and the community is
| great, but the _noise_ in the code.
| kelchm wrote:
| What do you mean by noise?
| anonymouse008 wrote:
| Sh*t that sounds nice, but when stretched outside the
| simple documentation, has no purpose or meaning and ruins
| your life.
|
| I'm looking at you -> { blah && }
| savanaly wrote:
| What's the matter with that notation? I work in a code
| base many millions of lines large, see those every day,
| and think nothing of it.
| ricardobeat wrote:
| The noise is the code.
| dmitriid wrote:
| This is just personal opinion: The one-way flow has made
| functional React components very noisy in terms of state
| and effects management.
|
| For examples, here's a comparison implementing the same
| functionality using React hooks and Svelte:
| https://github.com/joshnuss/react-hooks-in-svelte
|
| Now, there are ways to handle all this with less code in
| React as well (for example, MobX), but the current de
| facto defaults with hooks and Redux create so. much.
| boilerplate. for. every. little. thing.
| hising wrote:
| Backbone never got really popular here (Sweden). I still
| see some legacy apps running Angular but React took over
| from jQuery quite fast in 2015 or so. What I have noticed
| thouhg is that people who like MVC-frameworks tend to like
| using libraries similar to Vue and those who have more of
| an application approach to web apps tend to like React.
| Personally I think I got a bad first impression from Vue
| and have had a hard time trying to get to like it (I know
| it is popular). I think libraries such as Svelte and dev
| environments similar to Snowpack will gain traction the
| coming years. Focus on Developer Experience and doing the
| heavy lifting in the dev environment.
| rektide wrote:
| I keep wondering what everyone is going to complain about
| when it becomes clear React and Vue & a couple other decade
| old offerings are what everyone in JS land is using. The
| jokes about new JS frameworks being invented daily have
| started to fall off already. Stagnancy & ossification are
| setting in. Although functional components in React have,
| fairly recently, re-simplified/re-writeen the DX again.
|
| Backbone was the first time there was framing at all. So
| long ago & so not that long ago!
| eggie5 wrote:
| you forgot prototype before jquery
| anthonysarkis wrote:
| 2021 - *: Vue
| hajhatten wrote:
| Everything needs to be rewritten in phoenix live view now.
| jamil7 wrote:
| No no no it's all about Svelte now /s
| vsareto wrote:
| I swear, front end just invents this stuff to keep us all
| confused :(
| bigblind wrote:
| s/confused/employed
| edoceo wrote:
| Here I am server side PHP and vanilla JS, one or two
| RiotJS components. LOB apps tho - different game I guess
| rvense wrote:
| I have to say, Phoenix Liveview is one of the most exciting
| things to me, although it's not a match for what I'm
| working on right now. But my previous job it would have
| been a perfect fit (a big SPA for monitoring a bunch of IoT
| devices that had web socket connections to a backend). We
| were two frontenders and two backenders and we spent so
| much time implementing and maintaining, not to mention
| _arguing_ over the API between the SPA and the backend, and
| that API would've basically gone away if we'd used Phoenix
| Live. I really hope to get to use it at some point.
| sethammons wrote:
| We've done code burnings before. Throughout the year, any tech
| debt fixed or code repos removed could be printed out and
| burned in a bon fire at an annual gathering. Burning old chef
| code that made life pain every day? Put a smile on many faces
| haha.
| jtchang wrote:
| This is fantastic! I just saw one paper sheet stayed in the
| printer tray. But the next one pushed it out.
|
| This is the kind of automation I can get behind.
| Alupis wrote:
| > P.P.S. We're offsetting by 3x every bit of CO2 this creates via
| Cool Effect.
|
| Is this really how this carbon offset thing works?
|
| You release a bunch of greenhouse gases - but it's "OK" because
| you pay money to some organization that might eventually plant
| some trees (or use your money to buy/rent fossil-fuel-burning
| machinery to orchestrate the planting of trees)?
|
| Seems like guilt-avoidance to me.
| landryraccoon wrote:
| This is a counterproductive attitude.
|
| If you pit climate responsibility against people living their
| lives, climate responsibility will lose, full stop. In the
| short term, human beings are the way they are, and you won't be
| able to change human nature before the climate is destroyed.
|
| People offsetting their consumption is way, way better than
| people saying "If you just want me to suffer, fuck it. I'm
| going to embrace being an asshole and do what I want."
|
| For example, I'm going to throw some logs on the fireplace over
| Christmas. I can either find a way to offset my emissions
| elsewhere, or just say fuck it, those environmentalists are
| assholes so screw them. It's probably better for both of us if
| I donate, because not having a fire is off the table.
| savanaly wrote:
| I see this comment all the time and I'm never sure which of the
| two stances (or a third? don't want to pigeonhole you) people
| hold:
|
| a) Offsets don't do what they claim to do, as in the earth in
| the universe where you give the offset has the same carbon
| problem as the one in the universe where you don't make the
| offset, or
|
| b) Offsets are bad even if they do work. There's something
| morally repugnant about them even if logically they are moral.
|
| From your wording and most of the responses I assume you hold
| a, but the tone and comparisons to indulgences, etc. make me
| think you actually (also?) hold b?
| [deleted]
| zacmps wrote:
| Something like https://teamtrees.org/ or https://trees.org/
| seems like a more direct approach to me.
| Alupis wrote:
| Seems exactly the same to me. You pay some other organization
| some amount of money, and now you get a free pass to do
| whatever you want.
|
| I had no idea this was really what everyone was talking about
| with carbon offsets.
| danans wrote:
| This:
|
| > You pay some other organization some amount of money,
|
| contradicts this:
|
| > and now you get a free pass
|
| and you aren't allowed
|
| > to do whatever you want.
|
| You pay for a specific amount of carbon offsetting, so you
| don't get to claim carbon neutrality if you exceed the
| amount you offset.
|
| Of course given that this is all voluntary someone could
| lie, but that would be asshole behavior, and if you did it
| at scale (i.e. if a corporation lied about it), you would
| be discredited - in reputation and potentially be facing
| civil lawsuits.
| boston_sre87 wrote:
| Yep, it is.
| jacobwilliamroy wrote:
| Carbon offsetting is different from indulgences, because the
| offset is actually calculated and verifiable. You pay some
| money to cover some materials and labor, that labor will result
| in x amount of carbon-dioxide being sequestered over a certain
| amount of time. You can actually go and research this stuff if
| you're so skeptical. There are actual explanations for how
| everything works, so it is in absolutely no way like a catholic
| indulgence, where you never actually know if the money you're
| spending is doing anything. You can actually go on the web and
| find answers to all your questions. Yes, I mean you,
| specifically.
| eat_veggies wrote:
| Yes, it's more than a bit like paying indulgences to the church
| to absolve yourself of sins. That's how a lot of companies can
| be "carbon neutral" by purchasing offsets and credits. I
| believe Tesla makes a significant amount of its money by
| selling these offsets to other companies.
| Alupis wrote:
| Really? Even though the lithium for Tesla batteries is
| incredibly damaging to the environment to mine?
|
| Are we all buying into 21st Century Snake Oil here?
| bpodgursky wrote:
| It's really not, compared to uh, oil.
|
| And battery recycling technology is always improving. By
| the time the current Model 3s are retired, the vast
| majority of Lithium batteries will be recycled into new
| cars:
|
| > By 2025, it is estimated that about three-quarters of
| spent electric batteries will be reused and then recycled
| to harvest raw materials.
|
| https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/the-
| aft...
| ianlevesque wrote:
| There are actual standards for the credits so that people
| don't buy snake oil.
| jackdeansmith wrote:
| If sin were a globally distributed problem where:
|
| 1. the aggregate amount of sin in the world caused suffering
|
| 2. indulgences actually reduced the aggregate amount of sin
| in the world
|
| then the indulgence system would make perfect sense. I agree
| there are problems with offsets and many of them aren't
| credible, but this indulgences metaphor has never made sense
| to me.
| core-questions wrote:
| That's the gist of carbon credits and taxation, yes. The idea
| is that the finances work as a disincentive at scale, but in
| reality if your business has no other way to operate, you're
| just going to pay the tax and live with it.
|
| The airshed is, of course, indifferent to our financial
| games...
|
| Now, if it actually works to change your behaviour so that you
| don't emit as much carbon because you can profit on the
| difference, well, hey! That's a good thing! But I don't think
| most industries can just stop on a dime and pivot like that....
| it may provide incentives in the long term, or it just might
| end up with all the costs passed back to the consumer, who may
| or may not actually have a choice where to spend their money.
| This is basically the worst case scenario, where it just ends
| up being a financial game and doesn't improve anything. I hear
| that the solution in this case is just to ramp it up higher so
| that it eventually forces people to demand change; but they
| might just demand a change to the tax if no other options are
| forthcoming.
|
| There's also the matter of catabolic processes, i.e. where
| something that emits less carbon is only financially feasible
| because of subsidies / taxes / etc. and in reality does not
| make economic sense to do. Any energy-generating technology
| that is not actually profitable without this is arguably taking
| in more energy than it produces, in the form of the
| externalities needed to enable it (i.e. fossil fuels that go
| into the building and maintenance of green energy projects).
| Minor49er wrote:
| Penn and Teller came to the same conclusion on their show
| "Bullshit" back in 2008:
|
| https://ptbs.typepad.com/penn_teller_bullshit/ep_606_being_g...
|
| It's basically this millennium's version of the Catholic
| Church's indulgences.
| UncleMeat wrote:
| Penn is at least a partial climate change denialist. He is an
| entertainer, not an expert.
| dwaltrip wrote:
| From your link:
|
| > There is evidence for global warming, though there's
| considerable reason to believe this is simply part of a
| natural cycle. There is some evidence that humans may
| contribute at least a bit to the change (though many sources
| suggest that human pollution is insignificant compared with
| forest fires, volcanos, etc.).
|
| This is underhanded, weasel-word denialism. "Many sources
| suggest" my ass... Let's not give any credibility to this
| kind of bullshit.
| La1n wrote:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_%26_Teller:_Bullshit!#
| L...
|
| The show pretends to be just about calling out "bullshit",
| but sprinkles in a lot of politics and opinions.
| yreg wrote:
| They also did an episode about recycling being bullshit,
| which was full of misinformation.
|
| Great magicians, but dishonest skeptics.
| savanaly wrote:
| But doesn't everyone sort of agree now that it really is
| bullshit? Were they right but for the wrong reasons?
| MCOfficer wrote:
| Yes, it is. But it's still a LOT better than silently ignoring
| it, which is the standard today.
| read_if_gay_ wrote:
| Ignoring burning a few sheets of paper. The horror.
| dwaltrip wrote:
| You are implying that carbon-offsetting is some sort of sham
| that doesn't do what it says it does. Can you please provide
| sources to backup your claims?
| smarx007 wrote:
| Carbon Offsetting is a practice frequently applied to go Carbon
| Neutral or Carbon Negative. For some reason, Net Zero is
| considered "more comprehensive" than Carbon Neutral according
| to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_neutrality. What you
| are expecting is what many call Zero Carbon (and obviously the
| right path to aim for).
| greenshackle2 wrote:
| It is basically self-imposed carbon credits, since carbon
| credits are not politically viable or something.
| danans wrote:
| > You release a bunch of greenhouse gases - but it's "OK"
| because you pay money to some organization
|
| It's about cleaning up after yourself. Clearly in the case of
| this machine, whose carbon impact is tiny compared to nearly
| every other combustion based machinery we use, the intent is
| symbolic.
|
| > ...that might eventually plant some trees (or use your money
| to buy/rent fossil-fuel-burning machinery to orchestrate the
| planting of trees)?
|
| For a reputable carbon offset, those carbon costs are accounted
| for in the offset, so even with them, it's a net-negative
| carbon transaction.
|
| > Seems like guilt-avoidance to me.
|
| That's besides the point. If it offsets the carbon produced,
| then it works, and it doesn't matter what the psychological
| motivation is.
|
| But I agree that there is a problem with offsets: In a saner
| world we'd be imposing carbon taxes instead of this, but this
| is where we are today, with CO2 mitigation effectively taking
| the form of "donations".
| Alupis wrote:
| Many organizations with good intent and survive on donations
| end up astray - see Red Cross and Haiti.
|
| Donating money to some organization that claims they will
| plant trees to offset some amount of greenhouse gas emissions
| is a lot like trusting the American Red Cross to build houses
| and schools after a disaster. You're hoping they do what they
| promise (and instead of doing that, the American Red Cross
| billed majority of the donations as "Administrative
| Fees"[1]).
|
| So, in reality you may or may not be "cleaning up after
| yourself". Actually, you're not cleaning up after yourself...
| you're outsourcing that job (and don't actually care if it
| gets done) so you can feel free to release more greenhouse
| gases.
|
| [1] https://www.npr.org/2015/06/03/411524156/in-search-of-
| the-re...
| markdown wrote:
| > see American Red Cross and Haiti.
|
| FTFY. The _Red Cross_ is a reputable organisation that does
| wonderful work across the developing world. The _American
| Red Cross_ is the corrupt one.
| Alupis wrote:
| My mistake in conflating the two. Updated - Thanks for
| pointing out the distinction.
| teraflop wrote:
| You could apply the same logic to any economic activity.
|
| You mean I can just take a book from a bookstore, depriving
| others of the chance to read it, and it's somehow "OK" because
| I paid money to some organization that might eventually use it
| to print another copy?
| abraae wrote:
| Not the same.
|
| Stealing books from a bookshop - ILLEGAL.
|
| Pumping CO2 into the air and contributing to the global
| ecosystem's destruction - LEGAL.
| young_unixer wrote:
| > Seems like guilt-avoidance to me.
|
| Isn't that what 99% of people, companies and governments are
| doing anyway? Doing things that look or sound _green_ , while
| (voluntarily or not) ignoring the actual damage we're doing.
|
| For example, my country banned plastic bags on the supermarket
| and everyone rejoiced, but no one has any intention to talk
| seriously about environmental problems. It's all a bunch of
| empty slogans and feel-good discourse.
| zelly wrote:
| very great for the environment
| ljnelson wrote:
| Part of what I love about this is that periodically it doesn't
| work and a dude comes in from off camera and manually makes
| _sure_ your email is torched. Very 2020.
| grishka wrote:
| And cameras sometimes go out of focus.
| felideon wrote:
| It seems like this is the dude:
| https://twitter.com/thatdetroitandy/status/13313143780969717...
| SteveNuts wrote:
| An allegory to all those deployments with just one manual step.
| sixstringtheory wrote:
| Or AI (with some human intervention required)
| aresant wrote:
| After submitting a note I got a marketing email eg "PS: We made
| this experiment for fun, but we made HEY to make email better.
| Give it a try at HEY.com."
|
| Just in case not obvious this is a marketing campaign by Hey.com
| (I was 90% sure) and they've got my email now :)
| natchy wrote:
| oh! i thought it was merely trying to create buzz but I didn't
| think about building up an email list. pretty smart.
| t3rabytes wrote:
| Not the case, we're not keeping any of the email
| addresses/data. We'll add a note.
| aresant wrote:
| Thanks for the fast and appropriate response!
| csomar wrote:
| I think they need Terms/Privacy Policy and your consent if
| they are collecting emails. There is none of that.
| gfody wrote:
| hey.com claims to have "fixed" email - I tried to find out what
| exactly they do to justify the claim but hit my timeout at
| about 5 minutes wading through vague testimonials. there's a
| 37min video that supposedly breaks it all down, I bailed about
| 5min in, afaict it's a just polished client.
| crispyporkbites wrote:
| It's not an email client- it's a gateway to a proprietary
| messaging service that happens to support email
| geocrasher wrote:
| Which is exactly what Gmail is.
| dewey wrote:
| Except that you can use Gmail through any IMAP/POP client
| (https://support.google.com/mail/answer/7126229?hl=en)
| while that's not possible with Hey where you always have
| to use their apps.
| geocrasher wrote:
| Yes I do suppose that's true, but I don't think that
| makes it any less proprietary in nature. The same could
| be said of many mail providers such as Gmail,
| Outlook.com, etc. They have their own way of doing it
| that, externally, looks like mail. Internally it's
| something altogether different.
|
| This is proven by sending an email from one Gmail account
| to another. It is all but instant. I swear once the email
| arrived before the Enter key had debounced! SMTP can't
| move things quite that fast.
| dewey wrote:
| I don't think it matters how it's implemented internally,
| just like the end user doesn't have to care about which
| language the IRC/web/Jabber server is implemented in. As
| long as it speaks the correct protocol to the outside it
| doesn't matter and that's the beauty of standardized
| protocols.
| geocrasher wrote:
| Right which is kind of my point. They say they've
| reinvented email or whatever, but haven't they all? The
| difference is that this provider forces you to use their
| client.
| bogwog wrote:
| I've learned to distrust services with rare/valuable domain
| names by default.
| switz wrote:
| Could one turn it into an infinite loop by sending an email
| with a reply-to at the same address?
| psim1 wrote:
| Way to go, Dumpster Fire Operator Guy. Nothing gives me more
| anxiety than waiting for an inevitable printer jam or mechanical
| failure to occur.
| orliesaurus wrote:
| the autofocus is killing me
| dboreham wrote:
| Assumed this was about how spammers have made the whole concept
| of e-mail into a dumpster fire.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-11-24 23:00 UTC)