[NetBehaviour] Fwd: Re: Fwd: BLACKLE

Wed Jul 25 11:30:31 CEST 2007

Is it not people who play golf? Are they not consumers? Why not target
your campaign to the golf enthusiasts? Make them aware that golf lands
in Spain are a big problem for water consumption, they probably don't
know that. For example: How many glasses of water does it take per
year to water all the golf land in Spain? Would they give up their
domestic water for the sake of keeping the golf land going? What about
the companies that sponsor International golf events or famous golf
players? I bet that some Mineral Water company or brand does that.
What about the famous golf players themselves. Do Tiger Woods and his
pals know that their professional activities have a negative impact on
the planet. Are they prepared to do something about it? After all they
are millionaires and have an image to maintain, Tiger Woods is also
(or mainly) a brand?

I agree you should not feel guilty, but a lie is always a lie, does
not really matter where it comes from. You (and your NGO) are in a
position to change that, be brave.

G

On 25/07/07, b xperimënts <mediaidea at arkania.org> wrote:
> well, it goes interesting...
>
> :)
>
> i worked for an ngo, they made a campaign about the uses of water... and
> the designer and me discovered
> that
> the water that people uses is just the 20% of all the water consumption
>
> (sorry for my clumsy english again, ops)
>
> and industry, land, animals -cows, pigs...- and golf lands (?) consume
> the 80%
>
> so
>
> my friend and me didn't know if give that information to the people like...
>
> "it is not you, little consumer, who must save water: it must be golf
> land (in spain it is the first prize water consumer), industry and land"
>
> but
>
> we couldn't say that to the people, so we make the stuff with the usual
> stuff given to the people... -you have the fault of everything!!!-
>
>
> well, i don't feel guilty anymore for the lie, or the information
> manipulation, or for hidding information, i write here what we
> discovered, what the states knows perfectly...
>
>
> maybe with the energy matter is the same. who has got he real
> porcentage, the eficiency in the report, in the study...
>
>
> BUT
>
> this is not an excuse...
>
>
> we all try to do the <i>right</i> thing.
>
>
>
> colours
>
>
> kisses,
>
>
>
>
>
> Helen Varley Jamieson escribió:
> > phew, looks like we can all save our eyes & make no difference to the
> > planet as long as we're using lcd screens : )
> >
> >> i've read around a little about energy consumption, screens and colour.
> >>
> >> contrary to my superstitions it looks like LCD's shouldn't actually be
> >> considered in the equation after all. this really only applies to CRT
> >> displays.
> >>
> >> LCD's have a back-light that is continuously on. a 'black' pixel is
> >> merely just a crystal turned such that it blocks light from the
> >> backlight. for this reason it should make no difference whether a pixel
> >> is black or white.
> >>
> >> some people are reporting small reductions in power useage on LCD
> >> displays but most notice no change.
> >>
> >> i thought that there might be some sort of load calibration done as a
> >> result of whether a crystal blocks light or let's it through but apparently
> >> that is a design for LCD's not yet in the market.
> >>
> >> to summarise:
> >>
> >>   if you're using a CRT you shouldn't be.
> >>
> >>   LCD users can dress in white.
> >>
> >> some links:
> >>
> >>
> >> http://ecoiron.blogspot.com/2007/01/black-google-would-save-3000-megawatts.html
> >>
> >>   http://www.risingphoenixdesign.com/blackback.html
> >>
> >> julian
> >>
> >> --
> >> http://julianoliver.com
> >> http://selectparks.net
> >> emails containing HTML will not be read.
> >>
> >>
> >> ..on or around Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 09:51:26AM +1000, Helen Varley
> >> Jamieson said:
> >>>  >>Folks,
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>We probably all use google several times a day - here's something
> >>>  >>to consider:
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>When your screen is white, be it an empty word page, or the Google
> >>>  >>page, your computer consumes 74 watts, and when its black it
> >>>  >>consumes only 59 watts. An article about the energy saving that
> >>>  >>would be achieved if Google had a black screen, taking into account
> >>>  >>the huge number of page views, worked out at a saving of 750 mega
> >>>  >>watts/hour per year.
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>In a response to this article Google created a black version of its
> >>>  >>search engine, called Blackle, with the exact same functions as the
> >>>  >>white version, but with a lower energy consumption, check it out:
> >>>  >>
> >>>  >>http://www.blackle.com
> >>>  >
> >>>  >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  --
> >>>  ____________________________________________________________
> >>>
> >>>  helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst
> >>>  helen at creative-catalyst.com
> >>>  http://www.creative-catalyst.com
> >>>  http://www.avatarbodycollision.org
> >>>  http://www.upstage.org.nz
> >>>  http://www.writerfind.com/hjamieson.htm
> >>>  ____________________________________________________________
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  _______________________________________________
> >>>  Ada_list mailing list
> >>>  Ada_list at list.waikato.ac.nz
> >>>  http://aotearoadigitalarts.org.nz/
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>

-- 
Graziano Milano
M: +44(0)7970 071590