Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Celebrity Flights

celebrityflight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 151 posts

Re: Celebrity Flights

#81

Post by monero-xmr »

mcbrienollie wrote: post #75
monero-xmr wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your goal is to cause a revolution, then limiting freedom by “carbon emission limits” is an effective way to do it.

There are multiple ways to travel. You can have a bike to commute into work rather than taking your car. This is not a freedom limitation. It is just a different perspective. Greta Thunberg travels everywhere freely by keeping emission in mind.

Just tax externalities and let people pay for the privilege. Banning things - literally using the force of the state to prevent traveling too often by plane or banning cars or making everyone ride bikes - is only a green fantasy, and a terrible authoritarian unworkable one.

Re: Celebrity Flights

#82

Post by mcbrienollie »

mrshadowgoose wrote: post #79
mcbrienollie wrote: post #22

Since 99.9% of the flights and the people are already registered, there should be a worldwide limitation per each of the person for CO2 emissions.

No thank you. There's no need for that. Instead of this petty, divisive and hostile nonsense, how about we just acknowledge that our civilization is fundamentally based on energy use, and work towards making all our energy use carbon-neutral? Our planet receives enough harnessable solar energy to allow every single human being an energy allocation far in excess of a typical American. There's absolutely no need to be…

I totally agree with the fundamental changes. Rest is bullshit.

What would be your suggestion on Kardaishan's energy consumption levels? Having a crash course?

Re: Celebrity Flights

#83

Post by Ylpertnodi »

echelon wrote: post #31
cj wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at her flight log, my guess is the jet she owns is run by a company that rents it out to other people. If that’s not the case, I have no idea why anyone would fly from Atlanta to Savannah and then depart again 2 hours later. Must be rented out to others

> Atlanta to Savannah and then depart again 2 hours later Savannah is such a hidden and unique gem, and truly one of the most beautiful cities in the country. It's not hard to imagine taking a quick meeting there. Lots of important people flow through the city. I'm hoping we get high speed rail on the Atlanta-Savannah corridor one day. The drive is a real slog and it's filled with deceptively unfair speed traps from…

I'll take a guess you got caught speeding.

Re: Celebrity Flights

#84

Post by monkeywork »

warent wrote: post #74
monkeywork wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is some high-level authoritarian nonsense right there. Should there also be limits on how many KM's a person can drive a year? How many often the BBQ in their backyard? What is the penalty for exceeding said limit in your fantasy? edit Just out of curiosity I took what seems to be the "average" of the reported number of billionaires in America as 800, and the average yearly CO2 from flying via the linked article…

Not sure why you're so deeply triggered by this; is your name on that list of top consumers that you would be personally affected? Your comment comes across as yet another average joe randomly defending billionaires wrecking the world while we take the consequences of it. Meanwhile yet another daily disaster in nature, 100s of dolphins are dead today from record temperatures https://www.insider.com/dolphins-dead-braz…

>Not sure why you're so deeply triggered by this; is your name on that list that you would be personally affected?

Your only response to someone finding this a gross overreach is to try and strawman them by suggesting I'm personally on the list?

I'm not defending billionaires any more than I'm defending an average person. Going down the road suggested (putting yearly or lifetime caps on how much CO2 you can produce) is frankly terrifying.

Tax the hell out of the fuel, charge larger landing fees, etc etc are all better options than having some sort of invisible countdown over everyone's head that for CO2 emissions.

Re: Celebrity Flights

#85

Post by victorbjorklund »

mcbrienollie wrote: post #22

Since 99.9% of the flights and the people are already registered, there should be a worldwide limitation per each of the person for CO2 emissions.

"Sorry, the president of country X cant come to UN and discuss a ceasefire because he already ysed up all his emissions so the war has to keep going until the next CO2 reset"

Re: Celebrity Flights

#86

Post by jdietrich »

sublinear wrote: post #29
icpmacdo wrote: post #20

Pointing towards this to help reconcile some of the hypocrisy from celebrity messaging seems productive towards better discourse on climate change imo

What's missing here is a sense of scale. Routine private jet flights are nothing compared to last mile freight such as Amazon. Short frequent trips by delivery drivers from your local warehouse to your doorstep should not be so wasteful. The largest source of pollution is freight in general. Hating on individuals solves nothing at all.

My friendly neighbourhood Amazon driver fills his vehicle with packages, then drives a highly optimised route to deliver those packages to many destinations along the fastest/shortest route. Often when I'm tracking my package, I see that the twenty or thirty deliveries before me are all within a mile or two of my house.

At some point soon I expect he'll get an electric van, but other than that, I'm not sure how anyone could get stuff from businesses to people in a more efficient manner.

Re: Celebrity Flights

#87

Post by pests »

warent wrote: post #74
monkeywork wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is some high-level authoritarian nonsense right there. Should there also be limits on how many KM's a person can drive a year? How many often the BBQ in their backyard? What is the penalty for exceeding said limit in your fantasy? edit Just out of curiosity I took what seems to be the "average" of the reported number of billionaires in America as 800, and the average yearly CO2 from flying via the linked article…

Not sure why you're so deeply triggered by this; is your name on that list of top consumers that you would be personally affected? Your comment comes across as yet another average joe randomly defending billionaires wrecking the world while we take the consequences of it. Meanwhile yet another daily disaster in nature, 100s of dolphins are dead today from record temperatures https://www.insider.com/dolphins-dead-braz…

These rules would not effect the truely rich. It would turn into a burden or inconvenience for the masses while the elite have loopholes or ways around the system.

Re: Celebrity Flights

#90

Post by monkeywork »

mcbrienollie wrote: post #72
monkeywork wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is some high-level authoritarian nonsense right there. Should there also be limits on how many KM's a person can drive a year? How many often the BBQ in their backyard? What is the penalty for exceeding said limit in your fantasy? edit Just out of curiosity I took what seems to be the "average" of the reported number of billionaires in America as 800, and the average yearly CO2 from flying via the linked article…

I'm just saying there should be a "regulation". A couple of years ago, everybody accepted the fact that people all should have 3 shots of vaccination to have a flight. Everybody got opposed to it. But got the shots eventually. I'm not the guy who has the golden law that will change the world. I'm just proposing that CO2 emission is a big problem and some of the people are exploiting it.

>A couple of years ago, everybody accepted the fact that people all should have 3 shots of vaccination to have a flight. Everybody got opposed to it. But got the shots eventually.

Which if you look back it logically now with all the evidence, we have in hindsight was an overreach that did very little good.

>I'm not the guy who has the golden law that will change the world. I'm just proposing that CO2 emission is a big problem and some of the people are exploiting it.

Which I get - however the problem with your comment (and much of the internet as a whole) is that people see a complex problem and toss out a twitter sized "obvious solution" to it without any actual thought behind it, this then causes all kinds of noise with very little signal and furthers divides. Just by replying to you some other person suggested I was "triggered" and must be on said list... That's the problem.

Post reply on HN