l_camacho84

7 ms·

1.
by l_camacho84 3y ago
What are the alternatives to audible?
2.
by l_camacho84 7y ago
Yes for me this is also the case. The WIP on the Kanban is very important. Is not a question of deadlines, is more a question of doing as little as possible at the same time.
3.
by l_camacho84 7y ago
This is good news but sadly they don’t talk about transportation as normally they are not considered as a problem of the manufacturer. Maritime and airplane transportation emissions not being considered in Paris agreement illustrate this p
4.
by l_camacho84 7y ago
The costs are tiny because right now they not internalize pollution and social injustice. Yes, “local” is not an end on itself but the same is true for “global”. Right now the cost of sending a banana to the other side of the world in a con
5.
by l_camacho84 7y ago
I agree, we can apply robotics but always thinking in small scale farming, otherwise the gains in production will be lost in distribution. Sadly right now we are not paying for externalities of distribution so there is no incentive for thin
6.
by l_camacho84 7y ago
To apply robotic berry pickers you normally need to produce in a large scale (many tons of berries). So you will need to distribute them. If you don’t apply the externalities of transportation and preservation of the food it would seem that
7.
by l_camacho84 7y ago
Every time I read about farm mechanization I remember the Ralph Borsodi work on the book "The Distribution Age". Every efficiency you gain in production scale you tend to lose in distribution efficiency. The key to sustainable far
8.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
We don't need to scale up if the developed countries agree to scale down consumption. Reducing commuting (working from home when possible), have taxes on airplane travel, tax goods that come unnecessarily from far away, invest in durab
9.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
The best negative carbon tech that exists are trees and plants. It's not future tech it's already here!
10.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
Every study that I know show that the dematerialization of economy will lead to a degrowth [1]. Moreover there are many non material things that we need but the majority used to be free. Having time with friends and family for instance. Do
11.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
We reading this kind of news we need to be concerned about survivourship bias. How many people did the same and lost everything? That people don't appear on BBC but they are far more than the success examples. https://xkcd.c
12.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
How about just building less houses? Even China has overproduction of houses. All comes down to our economic paradigm where we need to produce infinitly otherwise we colapse
13.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
Yes, and in the last 50 years carbon emissions have skyrocketed, while wages have stagnated. We are depleting the resources of the planet and polluting at an unbearable pace. We have to change the economy and protectionism for me can be a g
14.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
By reducing imports from China, China will need to invest in their local market too and by doing that they will need to improve chinese worker conditions.
15.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
We are starting to recognize that we don't need alf the things we buy. We are getting to the point that we don't own things, things own us. A sugestion, if you want to get rid of stuff, do it because you don't need the oject,
16.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
How many fossil fuels do we need to burn to accomplish all of this? The solution is to greatly reduce unnecessary consumption, decentralize agriculture, avoid private transportation. It's to do less not more
17.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
We cannot forget that this agriculture is based on fertilizers that are a finite resource.
18.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
Many people need this resources, including our children. That’s why we need to slow down our crave for things and enjoy what we have. We don’t need to change cars every 4 year, we don’t need to commute as we do, we don’t need all the clothe
19.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
The question is not how many resources we have, the question is how hard they are to extract. The more resources we extract from earth the more difficult they become to extract, that is, we need to apply more resources/pollution/e
20.
by l_camacho84 8y ago
Australia is not utilising only 14% of their resources, they have only 14% of the known world resources. More than 50% is based on Congo were the work is performed in miserable conditions. We are all happy that we still don’t reach peak oi
21.
by l_camacho84 9y ago
We commute because of our growth dependency. This is just another example of simple solutions that cannot be truly implemented because it does not make money/jobs. We need to reflect what are the objectives of our acts. Right now we a