Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
no more user changeable cpu from intel???
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clad in Sky wrote:
I want to live where dmitchell lives. The world seem to be a better place there. People act rationally all the time, you don't need a government, just a free market that solves all problems. I'm intrigued by the concept of wasting because not wasting would be uneconomical. It means in essence, that they're not wasting at all.
Where does this Utopia lie?

There's room for all in Texas. :P

Consider taking a shower. You use far more water than the you actually need, right? I mean in principle you could experiment to determine exactly how much water you really need, measure it into a pail, and bathe with that. Why do you waste so much water? I propose two reasons. First, because you work so that you can afford the pleasure of a shower. Hard to consider it waste when you realize that you are working for the privilege. Second, because you know there are far more productive uses of your time than measuring your bath water into a fucking pail. There's an opportunity cost involved. You've decided it's uneconomical not to waste.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2031
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

we shower because taking a bath is too wasteful. So there falls your pseudo argument apart.
_________________
AidanJT wrote:

Libertardian denial of reality is wholly unimpressive and unconvincing, and simply serves to demonstrate what a bunch of delusional fools they all are.

Satan's got perfectly toned abs and rocks a c-cup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
Buying luxury items isn't waste. At least not in the sense the term is being used here.

Let me go meta for a moment and say it might be helpful to pin down what exactly is meant by waste. Because when I start thinking about specific examples of waste, it seems pretty subjective.

I agree.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 8:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

energyman76b wrote:
we shower because taking a bath is too wasteful. So there falls your pseudo argument apart.

Taking a shower uses far more water than taking a bath, unless you have one of those huge garden tubs and only take three-minute showers (as the beloved Prince of Wales recommends).

Furthermore, the fundamental flaw in your logic becomes apparent if we expand upon it: what is not waste? Is not everything unnecessary? Why are you not sleeping on a bed of straw in a tent? Why should you be alive at all?
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The bottom line is that the optimal amount of waste is nonzero. Conservation efforts have diminishing returns; at some point additional conservation efforts are themselves wasteful. Once this is recognized we see that we aren't debating a principle, just what the right level of waste is. And of course the only sensible way to answer that question is the market, where people and usages must bid against each other in competition for scarce resources. In other words, I was right all along.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
Buying luxury items isn't waste.
I made no such claim, and unless I missed it, neither did anyone else.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You missed it.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, OK, the Bugatti post? I didn't miss it, I just didn't perceive it to be "all luxury purchases are waste" since it also mentioned leaving lights on, which I'm sure even poor people do.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I'm sure he didn't mean to single out Bugatti. Rather Bugatti was meant to be representative of some class of goods, which I called luxury items.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I interpreted it to be referring to behavior. "leaving lights on", "dumping garbage" and "drinking champagne from cans." Those all seem to be pointing out behaviors, though I don't understand what the last one involves (other than champagne), and dumping garbage isn't wasteful, just inconsiderate and potentially a hazard.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 1:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If there wasn't utility in products and services (including champagne in cans, if it exists), then people wouldn't pay money for them. Enjoyment is a form of utility, and when you really boil things down all the way, it's the ONLY form of utility.

Now, trade-off decisions between relative marginal utility rates, that's a bit more complex than this black-and-white worldview, and it is essentially a recognition that the concept of "waste" is relative. You may throw a dime in a fountain, and I might consider that waste, and you'd disagree, and we'd both be right, but since it's your dime, I should shut the fuck up because none of my business.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Clad in Sky
l33t
l33t


Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 778
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know what the champagne in cans is supposed to mean. But since cans are mostly just disposed off as waste (as in waste basket), whereas glass bottles are more commonly recycled (at least in Germany), I think it was meant as an example of how people needlessly waste resources.
The Bugatti was rather picked for its fuel consumption, I believe. There are cars that use up less fuel as far as I know.
_________________
Kali Ma
Now it's autumn of the aeons
Dance with your sword
Now it's time for the harvest
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If it can be recycled and keep it sustainable, it is not waste. If it can't it is.

That being said, fretting about how much water you use for showering in say, Sweden, because Sahara lacks water is idiotic. You are better off fretting about do you really need that new iPhone, when your old one is still working.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1102
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 7:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prenj wrote:
If it can be recycled and keep it sustainable, it is not waste. If it can't it is.

That being said, fretting about how much water you use for showering in say, Sweden, because Sahara lacks water is idiotic. You are better off fretting about do you really need that new iPhone, when your old one is still working.
++

It's like politicians in Ireland talking about water shortage. To say it's a 'wtf?!' is a bit of an understatement.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
danomac
l33t
l33t


Joined: 06 Nov 2004
Posts: 818
Location: Vancouver, BC

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
energyman76b wrote:
we shower because taking a bath is too wasteful. So there falls your pseudo argument apart.

Taking a shower uses far more water than taking a bath, unless you have one of those huge garden tubs and only take three-minute showers (as the beloved Prince of Wales recommends).


Huh? The average bathtub is between 40-45 gallons. Around here you can't legally get a shower head that flows more than 10 litres a minute, or 2.5 gallons (roughly) a minute. 40/2.5=16 minute shower to break even, and that's the lower side, I'm pretty sure my tub is 44 gallons, or 17.6 minutes.

Most people I know take 10 minute showers - it's still cheaper than filling the tub.

Edit: We have meters here and we pay for the volume of water we use.

Edit2: How the hell did a thread about integrated cpu/motherboards turn into a shower and bath discussion? :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
padoor
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 30 Dec 2005
Posts: 4055
Location: india

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

as usual with any post here in OTW this thread also has moved to very unrelated subject though arguments and comments are interesting
for me i cannot afford to waste elctronics ckts or water as they are really costly here.
we used to repair ckts and fittings if possible and re use the same equipment as long as possible.
water is just enough for our regular uses.
ofcourse i take 20 mnts hot shower but flow rate is 3 4 litres/minute.[our shower heads are smaller]
:)
_________________
reach out a little bit more to catch it (DON'T BELIEVE the advocate part under my user name)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

danomac wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
energyman76b wrote:
we shower because taking a bath is too wasteful. So there falls your pseudo argument apart.

Taking a shower uses far more water than taking a bath, unless you have one of those huge garden tubs and only take three-minute showers (as the beloved Prince of Wales recommends).


Huh? The average bathtub is between 40-45 gallons. Around here you can't legally get a shower head that flows more than 10 litres a minute, or 2.5 gallons (roughly) a minute. 40/2.5=16 minute shower to break even, and that's the lower side, I'm pretty sure my tub is 44 gallons, or 17.6 minutes.

Most people I know take 10 minute showers - it's still cheaper than filling the tub.

Edit: We have meters here and we pay for the volume of water we use.

I don't think it's that clear one way or the other.
Quote:
“Take showers instead of baths to save energy,” is an oft-repeated adage of water and energy conservation advocates. But the Department of Energy’s water-heater-sizing pages now list the average shower as consuming 12 gallons and the average bath only 9 gallons of hot water.

http://news.consumerreports.org/home/2008/08/shower-or-bath.html
Now, that's going to vary depending on how conservative one is being, of course. If you just get yourself wet, turn off the water, lather up, and rinse yourself off, then you can take a shower that's even more conservative than a minimal bath. One can also save water by only bathing once a week or once a month. At what point does it become waste?

By they way, the U.S. has been using water meters since the 1800s, and I don't think you'll find a shared water system anywhere without them.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
but since it's your dime
But the materials to create dimes aren't solely yours. That's the point.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Someone should point out that no one completely fills his bathtub. Probably half full is common. It's beside the point though. The point was that you're using more water than you need.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
I thought BK would point out that no one completely fills his bathtub. Probably half full is common.

The government did that for me in the attached report, saying the average bath is only 9 gallons. Now, pjp might say that bath is "half empty", as opposed to "half full", but I'd have to disagree.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
danomac
l33t
l33t


Joined: 06 Nov 2004
Posts: 818
Location: Vancouver, BC

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:

The government did that for me in the attached report, saying the average bath is only 9 gallons. Now, pjp might say that bath is "half empty", as opposed to "half full", but I'd have to disagree.


Actually that report says 9 gallons of hot water. The quote I mentioned fills the tub to the overflow valve, which most people fill to unless you are kid or a midget.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16114
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
dmitchell wrote:
I thought BK would point out that no one completely fills his bathtub. Probably half full is common.

The government did that for me in the attached report, saying the average bath is only 9 gallons. Now, pjp might say that bath is "half empty", as opposed to "half full", but I'd have to disagree.
What matters is the 3 gallons you're wasting. :twisted:
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

danomac wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:

The government did that for me in the attached report, saying the average bath is only 9 gallons. Now, pjp might say that bath is "half empty", as opposed to "half full", but I'd have to disagree.


Actually that report says 9 gallons of hot water. The quote I mentioned fills the tub to the overflow valve, which most people fill to unless you are kid or a midget.


Archimedes disagrees.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

danomac wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:

The government did that for me in the attached report, saying the average bath is only 9 gallons. Now, pjp might say that bath is "half empty", as opposed to "half full", but I'd have to disagree.


Actually that report says 9 gallons of hot water. The quote I mentioned fills the tub to the overflow valve, which most people fill to unless you are kid or a midget.

Nobody fill the tub to the overflow hole, because then when you get in, it would overflow. The human body has quite a bit of volume, which needs to be subtracted from the volume capacity of the tub in order to determine how much water it takes to fill it when a person is in it.

But anyway, you digress.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eeyrjmr
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 38

PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

non-issue
The OP was probably in reference to an increase in intel chips in tablets and phones, but decided to twist a decrease percentage in socketed CPU as a downward trend to zero
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum