TechCrunch had a few articles that approached the original Google Carbon Emission claims with a much more reasonable approach, basically, it costs a lot more in Carbon Emissions to drive to a library and to produce books etc…
Unfortunately, it’s more sensational for the media to say “we’re dying! we’re killing everything! it’s all bad!” rather than look into it and get some perspective.
I am glad Wired is doing their part to put things into perspective.
As far as calculus and it’s development/credit goes, to me it doesn’t really matter what anyone did, it surely was a subject that others have observed or used throughout history to some extent, but the reason Newton deserves all the credit for it is because it put it into a functional framework, using it to explain the environment, he didn’t just develop it as a mathematical curiosity.
TechCrunch had a few articles that approached the original Google Carbon Emission claims with a much more reasonable approach, basically, it costs a lot more in Carbon Emissions to drive to a library and to produce books etc…
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/11/are-we-killing-the-planet-one-google-search-at-a-time/
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/12/revealed-the-times-made-up-that-stuff-about-google-and-the-tea-kettles/
Unfortunately, it’s more sensational for the media to say “we’re dying! we’re killing everything! it’s all bad!” rather than look into it and get some perspective.
I am glad Wired is doing their part to put things into perspective.
As far as calculus and it’s development/credit goes, to me it doesn’t really matter what anyone did, it surely was a subject that others have observed or used throughout history to some extent, but the reason Newton deserves all the credit for it is because it put it into a functional framework, using it to explain the environment, he didn’t just develop it as a mathematical curiosity.
Comment by John — January 26, 2009 @ 1:34 am