Comment Why We Still Need OS! (Score 0, Offtopic) 108
wow, that would be a thought provoking discussion. ...wait, what?
Comment This is the best xkcd ever! (Score 1) 198
I'm obliged to post this.. unless binky is on slashdot too.
Comment $1 million fine (Score 4, Insightful) 144
Finally we make real money from SPAM!
Comment In Ancient Greece, the horse beguiles the Trojans (Score 1) 372
In America, the force exploits the Trojans.
Um, any ideas about Soviet Russia?
Comment Slashdot effect (Score 1) 284
My GPA at college was 2.6 when I didn't waste time on slashdot. Now, my GPA at gradschool is 4.0 while I waste a bunch of time on slashdot. ...maybe opportunity loss?
Comment no approach to measure carbon footprint? (Score 1) 302
Yes and no.
Various research and commercial projects are working on assessing environmental effects caused by commercial products and services in consideration of their whole lifetime, namely Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA). 'Environmental effects' here include resource consumption, carbon emission and other aspects of the production in every phase (e.g. factory installation, factory running, transportation and so on). Some researchers defined a framework to conduct an LCA in a systematic way so that the product or service is scientifically assessed and compared with equivalent product or service.
However, little efforts are done on assessing a company, not its products and services. This is probably because there is no fair way to compare companies. If you sum up all carbon emissions caused by all products/services of Google and GM, of course GM is much more to be blamed, but is it a fair comparison? Google and GM plays a very different role in our society, their products can't be replaced each other. The key of LCA is to compare 'equivalent' products. Are there 'equivalent' companies on the earth? No!
I don't agree with the tone that carbon footprint is not comprehensively measured, but agree that attributing environmental effects to companies makes no sense; it's currently used just for advocating a few specific companies with less emissions by their nature. Unfair.
Various research and commercial projects are working on assessing environmental effects caused by commercial products and services in consideration of their whole lifetime, namely Life-Cycle Assessment (LCA). 'Environmental effects' here include resource consumption, carbon emission and other aspects of the production in every phase (e.g. factory installation, factory running, transportation and so on). Some researchers defined a framework to conduct an LCA in a systematic way so that the product or service is scientifically assessed and compared with equivalent product or service.
However, little efforts are done on assessing a company, not its products and services. This is probably because there is no fair way to compare companies. If you sum up all carbon emissions caused by all products/services of Google and GM, of course GM is much more to be blamed, but is it a fair comparison? Google and GM plays a very different role in our society, their products can't be replaced each other. The key of LCA is to compare 'equivalent' products. Are there 'equivalent' companies on the earth? No!
I don't agree with the tone that carbon footprint is not comprehensively measured, but agree that attributing environmental effects to companies makes no sense; it's currently used just for advocating a few specific companies with less emissions by their nature. Unfair.
Slashdot Top Deals
Why don't you fix your little problem... and light this candle? -- Alan Shepherd, the first man into space, Gemini program
