Eco-activist gets tougher with gadget makers Sony and Sony Ericsson (SE) may have topped Greenpeace’s latest Guide to Greener Electronics, but almost all manufacturers saw their scores plunge thanks to new, more stringent marking criteria. Greenpeace_guide_to_greener_electronics_version_eight Greenpeace's Guide to Greener Electronics: how the vendors rated Greenpeace …
... that all those naughty, bad & evil companies will be weeping into their collective pints and pacing their way through sleepless nights after that Greenpeace external spanking session.
FFS - this is Greenpeace, an organisation noted less for policies of caring for the Earth and more for it's f**king dodgy science, willingness to ignore facts and bent political adgenda.
Of course everyone scores badly. The instant any company that's not owned by Greenpeace members get's halfway decent scores, these clueless politicos will change the scoring criteria again so they can attempt to go around scaring the sheeple who listen to their braying!!!
Paris, because frankly, even she knows better than to pay attention to those arses.
In an age when we are meant to be cutting down on our use of 'leccy, in order to ease the pain on us all and postpone Ghia's Judgement Day upon our slovenly, self-centred and self-important existance, I am incredulous at two gadgets advertised recently on UK telly.
These are; An electric fence sprayer and an electric domestic painting kit! Surely both these activities can be concluded with the employment of a paint brush (remember them) and some elbow grease. Additionally inducing a nice warm feeling as the result of modest excersise and a healthy appetite for beans on toast, with cheese and a coulpe of tinnies from the Double-A rated fridge.
The amount of hot air and bullshit these lot produce surely has to have a higher CO2 level then the others combined. Heck we just need to look at those muppets who got onto that plane at Heathrow, to complain about people doing flights they don't overly need (as lets face it work to them isn't necessary) they flew there from Manchester.
Urmm they got a flight to protest about unnecessary flights, when they could of got something like a train to London, or even better phone up a get a muppet in London to protest for them!
Green peace are only telling it how it is, if you idiots all want to slate greenpeace thats ok, but the message they are telling you and the manufacturers is the current human activity is not sustainable.
They are not telling you not to use your wii if you have no friends to actually play tennis with, they are just saying enjoy it now cos its not sustainable. Perhaps if people were a little less selfish then we would not be in this situation.
I'm glad Greenpeace is taking the initiative on scoring the key manufacturers. It seems a good idea considering how many electronics will end up in landfills.
It's good to see Greenpeace spending more time chasing corporates and less time chasing whaling ships (I would prefer no whaling, but I think working to reduce pollution should take a higher priority)
It's an interesting new take on Microsoft whose founder has spent huge piles of cash on health and education, but seems they are happy to invite in planetary catastrophy. Still, since Bill is taking a back seat in Microsoft, his charity can be considered relative to him personally - and we can all show additional hatred to the company itself for ripping us off and killing our planet at the same time.
...the execution of that chart is TERRIBLE!
As a graphic designer and a follower of the work of Edward Tufte ("The Visual Display of Quantitative Information"), I have to take exception with the format of that chart. According to the numbers, for example, Nokia had one point deducted -- from a score of 5.8 to 4.8. On a scale of 1 - 10, that is a 10% loss. However, because of the way that Greenpeace presents the scale -- some sort of bizarre double-ended-logarthmic thingie -- the arrow showing the start and end points takes up about 25% of the span of the dial, making the drop LOOK much more severe.
The majority, even if they read the article and look at the numbers, the immediate impression of the graphic will take cognitive precedence over the numeric text.
This is a badly designed misleading graphic. (Whether it was intentionally badly designed to give a particular impression is left as an exercise for the reader.)
Err, no.
Nintendo told Greenpeace to fuck off, so the Greenpeace threw their toys out of the pram gave them a low rating out of pique.
The *correct*, and mature, response by Greenpeace should have been to give Nintendo an "unknown" rating and lambaste them for not supplying data. Instead they act like spoiled teenagers and crudely try to portray Nintendo as eco-criminals.
"... but the message they are telling you and the manufacturers is the current human activity is not sustainable."
Human activity is sustainable, provided we do what we have always done.
People like you were probably sitting around when man first invented fire, complaining that was "unsustainable" too, and could we all go back to the caves and freeze?
Some things don't change with greens: superstition, primeval
earth-worship, hatred of science, and hatred of people. Greenpeace just wear more clothes today. They're just as miserable as they always have been.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
