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

Shipbreaking

edwardburtynsky.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 202 posts

Re: Shipbreaking

#161

Post by eru »

mschuster91 wrote: post #99
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that might put the EU at an economic disadvantage; it's hubris to believe the rest of the world will bend backwards to meet EU's rules. I mean they do, see cookie banners/GDPR, Apple, etc, but still. I'm of the unsubstantiated opinion that all the laws make the EU a less desireable market. But that's a policy based on morals instead of economics / relentless capitalism.

> But that might put the EU at an economic disadvantage; it's hubris to believe the rest of the world will bend backwards to meet EU's rules. Actually, it will. RoHS and the push for standardizing phone connectors ended up influencing the whole world and making it a better place for everyone. The EU is a sizable market, and unlike the US with its constant elections and government shutdowns, it's politically relativel…

> [...] the push for standardizing phone connectors ended up [...] making it a better place for everyone.

What's your evidence for that?

By default, we should assume that the engineers building phones and the consumers buying phones are the best placed to evaluate what connectors they want. And it would take considerable evidence to convince us that some unrelated third party bureaucrats know better.

Especially since even the best case benefits are so minuscule: it's already very easy to get charging cables that have multiple heads, for that people that own multiple phones with different connectors, but only want a single cable. (And everyone else can just buy one cable or the other.)

Re: Shipbreaking

#162

Post by eru »

gosub100 wrote: post #95
mschuster91 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, West should stop dumping their garbage to the rest of the world. Actually the export of ships to be wrecked in Asia already is banned under EU law and international treaties - and sometimes, even company owners can and do land in jail for violating them, as it happened to Georg Eide [1]. The difficulty lies in the fact that many ships aren't registered in the EU countries, but in small countries like Antigua…

To make matters worse, when these ships come under attack or get hijacked, suddenly they want the full backing of Western military forces. Strange they don't call on Panema or Antigua's military forces, since that's where they are registered.

> [...], suddenly they want the full backing of Western military forces.

Who is 'they'? Do you have records of the 'ships' (I assume their owners?), asking for that full backing directly?

Re: Shipbreaking

#163

Post by mistrial9 »

Retric wrote: post #146
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about when someone invents the concept of private property ownership, claims all the food as his own, hires a bunch of people by paying them with the food he has declared he owns to guard that food, and then demands payment for you to eat that food to survive? Maybe extortion isn't the right word, but it's certainly not voluntary exchange either.

In nature help isn’t freely available. Private property is the default, a crow picks up a stick and it’s theirs. Ants defend their nests etc. Plants will break out chemical warfare to defend themselves. Walk into a lion’s den asking for help and your going to get eaten. So what food do you expect to be freely available? Anyway a voluntary exchange doesn’t mean equal leverage for all parties. I’m not going to negotiat…

you throw so much of the real world out, in this simplistic rationalization. Economic niches could be related to ecological niches. Many ordinary animals have more than enough to eat for at least a season and a half, in so many places. What is the limitation? competition with your own burgeoning species for the physical space to occupy and, predation. Not everything is on the brink of starvation.

Predators evolve to exploit and kill those with abundance, and humans are expert predators. A vast portion of the civilized world it seems, was built directly from slavery and warfare. Slavery is very profitable, and wage slavery is alive today.

The simplistic example of food-scarcity is Reductio ad absurdum, to use the language of a top-line predator tribe from long ago.

Re: Shipbreaking

#164

Post by Retric »

mistrial9 wrote: post #163
Retric wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In nature help isn’t freely available. Private property is the default, a crow picks up a stick and it’s theirs. Ants defend their nests etc. Plants will break out chemical warfare to defend themselves. Walk into a lion’s den asking for help and your going to get eaten. So what food do you expect to be freely available? Anyway a voluntary exchange doesn’t mean equal leverage for all parties. I’m not going to negotiat…

you throw so much of the real world out, in this simplistic rationalization. Economic niches could be related to ecological niches. Many ordinary animals have more than enough to eat for at least a season and a half, in so many places. What is the limitation? competition with your own burgeoning species for the physical space to occupy and, predation. Not everything is on the brink of starvation. Predators evolve to…

First humans aren’t predators we’re omnivores which explains our teeth, intestines, etc. Most animals even things like horses will chow down on other animals given the opportunity, but plants don’t run away. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP6dvgo25Z8

Nature is brutal. Starvation is one of the most common ways for animals to die, though still behind being eaten. Humanity has largely improved upon this natural state as even being enslaved beats being consumed alive.

Re: Shipbreaking

#165

Post by jordanb »

paxys wrote: post #130
boringg wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those industries don't pay well to anyone involved but are a global benefit. Such a strange world we live in.

"Paying well" is relative. There are lots of industries that are rightly considered exploitative from the western eye, but people who are working these jobs would otherwise be starving or relying on meager government handouts if they went away.

What were the people of Alang doing before shipbreaking? Were they starving?

We know from the history of enclosure that the starvation was an intentional strategy to compel people into wage work. There were guides to how to do enclosure that advised lords against planting fruit trees, because the peasants would eat the fruit from the trees and therefore not want to engage in work.

Re: Shipbreaking

#166

Post by fifilura »

eru wrote: post #159
fifilura wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TL;DR 1. They travelled to the location (in Togo). 2. They found the guy who imported the jeans. He was about to try to resell them (along with huge bales of clothes), but most of the clothes are not sold. I dont think recycling was at the top of his mind. 3. The last signal was from a place where they use to make a fire of the clothes. 4. Most of the garments travel around the world as waste - not exactly good for t…

> He was about to try to resell them (along with huge bales of clothes), [...] Regardless of what else is happening, reselling the clothes as is seems to be the best form of 'recycling' to me. Or rather 'reuse'. > 4. Most of the garments travel around the world as waste - not exactly good for the environment. As long as they travel by boat, the cost for that is minuscule. Both in terms of dollars and in terms of emis…

The point is that you can say the same thing about the ships they sail to Bangladesh for breaking up.

Sail them to Bangladesh, they are responsible for "recycling", problem solved.

The problem is that the place they end up looks like a huge dump where clothes end up to die. And with huge environmental problems. And health problems.

I am aware that shipping has less environmental impact, but was it really the intention that the clothes should have the same transportation impact when being "recycled" as when they were first manufactured? I'll let you come up with the numbers.

Re: Shipbreaking

#167

Post by mschuster91 »

eru wrote: post #161
mschuster91 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But that might put the EU at an economic disadvantage; it's hubris to believe the rest of the world will bend backwards to meet EU's rules. Actually, it will. RoHS and the push for standardizing phone connectors ended up influencing the whole world and making it a better place for everyone. The EU is a sizable market, and unlike the US with its constant elections and government shutdowns, it's politically relativel…

> [...] the push for standardizing phone connectors ended up [...] making it a better place for everyone. What's your evidence for that? By default, we should assume that the engineers building phones and the consumers buying phones are the best placed to evaluate what connectors they want. And it would take considerable evidence to convince us that some unrelated third party bureaucrats know better. Especially since…

> What's your evidence for that?

Living in a world where I don't have a host of different power bricks in my travel bag any more, where one single Anker dual-port charger is enough to bring with me on vacation and get my stuff charged, and where when I lose my cable I can just walk into any random store and buy one for cheap.

> it's already very easy to get charging cables that have multiple heads, for that people that own multiple phones with different connectors

These multi-head cables almost all don't pass through the D+/D- pins of USB which means no way to get more than 500 mA charging current from them.

Re: Shipbreaking

#168

Post by 10ku1n »

aaroninsf wrote: post #127

My wife and I visited the shipbreaking yards near Chittagong on our honeymoon. It was remarkable. I make field recordings; I was able to do a fair amount of field recording before a nervous foreman invited us to tea, gave us a calendar from the shipbreakers' association, and politely escorted us off the property. Apparently there had been journalists by in months prior doing some investigative journalism into issues…

As soon as I saw the name "Aaron" and "I make field recordings" I knew I'd stumbled upon a "Quiet American" in the wild. How funny. I still listen to "maritime suite", "annapurna" and "rockets of the mekong" occasionally. Did you ever end up receiving that photo print of the goose I sent you back in 2009?

Re: Shipbreaking

#169

Post by eru »

mschuster91 wrote: post #167
eru wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [...] the push for standardizing phone connectors ended up [...] making it a better place for everyone. What's your evidence for that? By default, we should assume that the engineers building phones and the consumers buying phones are the best placed to evaluate what connectors they want. And it would take considerable evidence to convince us that some unrelated third party bureaucrats know better. Especially since…

> What's your evidence for that? Living in a world where I don't have a host of different power bricks in my travel bag any more, where one single Anker dual-port charger is enough to bring with me on vacation and get my stuff charged, and where when I lose my cable I can just walk into any random store and buy one for cheap. > it's already very easy to get charging cables that have multiple heads, for that people th…

> Living in a world where I don't have a host of different power bricks in my travel bag any more, [...]

Huh? I don't have to do that, either. I only have different cables, but the power brick is the same.

Re: Shipbreaking

#170

Post by eru »

fifilura wrote: post #166
eru wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He was about to try to resell them (along with huge bales of clothes), [...] Regardless of what else is happening, reselling the clothes as is seems to be the best form of 'recycling' to me. Or rather 'reuse'. > 4. Most of the garments travel around the world as waste - not exactly good for the environment. As long as they travel by boat, the cost for that is minuscule. Both in terms of dollars and in terms of emis…

The point is that you can say the same thing about the ships they sail to Bangladesh for breaking up. Sail them to Bangladesh, they are responsible for "recycling", problem solved. The problem is that the place they end up looks like a huge dump where clothes end up to die. And with huge environmental problems. And health problems. I am aware that shipping has less environmental impact, but was it really the intentio…

> I am aware that shipping has less environmental impact, but was it really the intention that the clothes should have the same transportation impact when being "recycled" as when they were first manufactured?

The transportation impact is minuscule either way, so I don't think it matters which side is slightly bigger or smaller?

Post reply on HN