"Oh, sorry, was the subject of electronic part swapping off topic to your rant? Just like your bicycle rant was off topic to the original article, which dealt with electronic repairs and had nothing whatsoever to do with bicycles?"
The headline of the OP contains the word "greenwash" as I commented earlier. This is El Reg
and despite ever so many commentards like yourself appointing themselves as comment police, it remains what it is. FWIW, my comments in this thread garnered 50 upvotes and 42 downvotes and I'm more than happy to concur with the majority.
"I assumed you didn't mind if your parts are glued and non-serviceable. That's where "that came from". My bad. Btw, to me, external drives are not necessarily the greatest solution for laptops."
You can assume anything you want to, but that won't make it so. And I never said that external drives were a great solution for laptops. I merely pointed out that my possessing an external drive that contains a backup of all my data and all my software works for me. The Gitling's work machine has an SSD and an HDD and I believe both are replaceable, so such machines must still be available for them that needs 'em.
"I suggest, since you seem to think of yourself as a clever chap, that you investigate the distinction between anecdotes and statistically sound data. I have no doubt there are tons of stupid cyclists doing stupid things. With you so far. However, you decided to jump feet first onto a gross generalization from that point on."
AFAICT the traffic simulations that show when the average speed for a car normally travelling at 60 km/h drops below 40 km/h, fuel consumption increases significantly, as do emissions of NOx, CO, and HC are statistically sound. Logically, you wouldn't optimise the vehicle's IC motor for very low speeds, but the speeds the vehicle would usually be travelling at, presumably 80–100 km/h.
From there I infer that bicycle riders who hold up traffic such that motor vehicle speed drops significantly are therefore adding the extra NOx, CO, and HC. This is not statistical, it's logical inference. There are cyclists who do this, but I did not address the issue statistically. Frankly I have no idea of the number or percentage of cyclists who set about deliberately angrifying car drivers, nor do I understand regular cycle riders who condone this behaviour.
A Monash U researcher discovered that 63% of cyclists in Victoria happily obey the rules of the road. The remaining 37% regularly disobey the road rules, mainly in regard to traffic lights. The majority of the rule-breakers claim it's safer to run a red light rather than wait for the green light. This rather obviously puts pedestrians crossing the road at some increased risk, and has led to several fatalities here in the Land called Under, mostly elderly though that may be mere coincidence. I suspect however that it has much to do with our reduced physical abilities. Further, a Melbourne U researcher monitored students leaving the uni car park and discovered that 25% had no lights.
So I concur that the majority of cyclists obey the rules, but I wouldn't be too complacent about the minority. It's a big enough minority to have all cyclists perceived to be evil since them who aren't are less noticeable.
Another thing that angrifies drivers is that they have to pay motor vehicle registration. This is used to fund road maintenance and to pay compensation to motor accident victims' medical expenses. Cyclists pay no registration so those who are the victims of cyclists' bad behaviour are paid no compensation.