nkaullr ckaarl umayma

0 views

Skip to first unread message

Beverly Denmark

unread,

Aug 2, 2024, 9:49:02 AM8/2/24

to histcimerva

This rumor has recently resurfaced as a screenshot of a tweet and a response. The original tweet, from @BigThink in 2019, has been deleted, and the article that it was promoting has been corrected to remove the error.

A popular screenshot of a tweet claims, "Your Netflix binge-watching is making climate change worse, say experts. The emissions generated by watching 30 minutes of Netflix is the same as driving almost 4 miles."

The correction says the article originally "relied on data produced by the The Shift Project," which is a French think tank advocating a shift to a post-carbon economy. The article, which is about the carbon impact of streaming services, no longer contains any comparison between driving and Netflix.

According to its website, the specific claim about the half-hour of viewing came from an oral interview, quotes from which were published in AFP, a French cooperative news agency. The original statement on AFP was:

Finding the exact comparison between driving and Netflix is difficult, as all kinds of data fluctuate. As Kamiya wrote, watching on different devices and driving different cars affects the comparison. Even the year makes a difference, because energy efficiency for data transfer is growing rapidly, as is the efficiency of cars and the availability of electric cars. Driving at different speeds or using energy from different countries can influence these numbers, too.

The claim is attributed to The Shift Project, which describes it as an "error" that "appeared during an interview." Carbon emissions are complicated to gauge across different people who use different devices, drive different cars, get energy from different sources, and so on. However, an estimate from the International Energy Agency estimated that when this claim was made in 2019, 4 miles of driving had more similar carbon emissions to streaming 45 hours of Netflix.

The payload is riding aboard the Psyche probe, which is headed for an asteroid of the same name. On December 11, when the spacecraft was 19 million miles (30 million kilometers) away, it reached 267 Mbps, which NASA described as "comparable to broadband internet download speeds."

However, as Psyche has continued on its trajectory, the distances have become greater, and the rate at which data can be transmitted and received has tumbled. At 140 million miles, the project's goal was to reach a lofty 1 Mbps. Instead, engineers managed to get 25 Mbps out of the demonstration.

"We downlinked about 10 minutes of duplicated spacecraft data during a pass on April 8," said Meera Srinivasan, the project's operations lead at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Southern California.

"Until then, we'd been sending test and diagnostic data in our downlinks from Psyche. This represents a significant milestone for the project by showing how optical communications can interface with a spacecraft's radio frequency comms system."

"We've learned a great deal about how far we can push the system when we do have clear skies, although storms have interrupted operations at both Table Mountain and Palomar on occasion," said Ryan Rogalin, the project's receiver electronics lead at JPL.

Relatively clear skies are required for optical communications, whereas slower radio communications are less weather-dependent. In one recent experiment, engineers arranged an antenna in one location and a detector in another to receive the same signal in concert. The approach could also be applied to ground stations to handle a receiver being forced offline by weather conditions.

The roughly 90 minute documentary is directed by Rory Kennedy. It provides background on the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX crashes that eventually caused the plane to be grounded globally. It also interviews aviation experts, pilots, former Boeing employees, families of the crash victims (even the wife of the Lion Air 610 captain), and Representative Peter DeFazio, who headed up the congressional investigation into the Boeing 737 MAX.

Boeing had everyone in its pocket. The FAA and the government. Corporate America is about the dollar-people don't matter, the bottom line does. A good Aircraft, with a good reputation after 50 years of flying, was the companies cheap way to catch up with the A320. Threw two big engines onto an 50 year old design and tried to compensate by using electronics, and to save even more money, only one electronic component.
My RAGE stems from the two CEO'S culpable, walked away with over 60million dollars in front of all the relatives of the dead people. The shear arrogance of Corporate America- they should have got the death penalty 300 times over.
if for no other reason, to show America cared, and as warning to the rest of "Corporate America" where they stood. None of this happened. Many Airlines bought the "repaired"737max on the cheap, there is a least one, that changed the aircrafts name, so that passengers would not know. There is now, a travel agent, who make sure, that non of your flights contain the 737max. What does that tell you?

By pausing the film when memos were shown, I found the name of the lead flight test engineer who emphasized the need to maintain the "no new training" facade. His name is Mark Forkner and his trial is scheduled to begin next month: -dropped-former-boeing-737-max-chief-technical-pilot-mark-forkner/
The company paid a fine to avoid further criminal prosecution. Does anyone know the status of any suits brought by victims' families?

From what I read the settlement was in response to the suits brought by victims' families. $500 million form the settlement was kept aside for the families. Victims' families have now lawyered up to fight against this decision. They are claiming that the crime-victims law was violated because they were not told anything about this settlement. However, the justice department is claiming that this was not a crime.

I felt the same, that they could have delved more into the Boeing-FAA relationship and how Boeing was self to self-certify. I also would have liked more insights into the CEO and the Boeing board and their background as the finger was pointed at them for growing shareholder value.

The Netflix documentary was an insightful look into the many flaws that evolved within Boeing and the FAA to lead to the tragic accidents. Another potential contributor to those flaws was overlooked - the US airlines. Some have considerable influence over Boeing by having set expectations to minimize training or risk losing purchase deals to another manufacturer. The Max buyers aren't culpable but they had a part to play by demanding minimal differences training.

What I though find missing in the documentary is the fact that how on earth the FAA got to ceritfy this aircraft to be fly-worthy? Had read in some other reports that FAA is/was having some of the retired Boeing employees in its ranks, no wonder then there was collusion. Wouldn't be surprised if thas the case, there had to be some sort of corrupt practices involved in getting to push this aircraft through ceritfication. Fail to understand that from a safety perspective, how come FAA had no inkling to any of the issues discussed in there and they just passed the certification. Were there no tests done prior? How come flight control issues "suddenly" appear on commercial flights? Lots os questions still unanswered I believe.

I was taken back with the disregard of human life vs profit. I have worked at a few companies that stated 'customer and quaity first' but it was really profit first.
Hopefully, the problems with the management and oversight have been corrected. Not until a tragic event(s), things like this don't change for the better.

A system to automatically control the horizontal stabilizer, or pitch of the aircraft had nothing to do with making the aircraft safer or more efficient, rather, was a band-aid approach to the issue of putting new engines on old planes not designed for them as an offering to the god of greed on the altar of compromised engineering by corporate executives. 10 seconds to make a life or death decision about a system for which no training was provided? Really? No, the system was installed toward a deliberate catastrophe - someone didn't want these planes to fly. We need to acknowledge the elephant in the room - the interests of the fossil fuel industry.