Greenpeace targets games industry

You can call me a hippie or a tree hugger but we only have this one planet. The Earth is getting more and more over populated and lets admit it, we humans can be pretty wasteful and inefficient. The environment is only getting more polluted, climate change such as warming is rapidly changing, and valuable nutritious food supplies like Tuna, Salmon, etc. are diminishing.

We as the most intelligent and capable species on the planet need to come together and start caring about the Earth and what it will be like 20, 50, & 100 years from now.

With that all said, corporations with the money and technology to make a difference, should lead the way to better efficiency in the way of energy consumption, renewable materials, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veskgar

We as the most intelligent and capable species on the planet need to come together and start caring about the Earth and what it will be like 20, 50, & 100 years from now.

---

I don't want to start an argument or anything, but I do want to say something on behalf of corporate America...

I hate it when people try to argue that we need to "start" caring for the planet...we "started" caring for the planet a long time ago. If you don't think that's the case, then I have some serious questions.

Why did I have to get an e-check for my car last month? Why did I have to install more efficient air filters into the businesses my job covered over the past few summers? Why do I have to dispose of asbestos in a way that won't damage the environment? Why does the government insist on stricter dumping policies for waste materials than it did even five years ago? Why did my university install energy-efficient light bulbs into all of it's dorm rooms and houses?

Are there still problems? Absolutely, but nothing in this world will ever be perfect...The government and big-business are not always the big-bad guys everyone wants to make them out to be.

If you think humans are wasteful and inefficient, try talking to a carbon dioxide-emitting volcano, a rotting pile of leaves, or a methane-releasing cow...my car passes emissions standards...I bet mother nature doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by armyStrong

If you think humans are wasteful and inefficient, try talking to a carbon dioxide-emitting volcano, a rotting pile of leaves, or a methane-releasing cow...my car passes emissions standards...I bet mother nature doesn't.

---

I don't think any of those things spend any real portion of their day concerned about the habitability of the planet for our kind tomorrow or any day forward, nor have the capability to change. People do. Even talking to them can be quite difficult.
They are also natural processes to this planet; the digging up, refining (massively concentrating) and chemical manipulation that create industrial materials/chemicals, then leaving them to questionable disposal is not.

Yes this was written on a PC and yes it was purchased knowing all these things, I cant see Greenpeace putting PR pressure on companies to do better as anything but a positive if I'm unable to 'live' without these things.

I do in fact understand that none of those things can communicate or string together thoughts :-P ...my point there is that just because it's natural doesn't mean it's good for the environment, and just because it's man-made doesn't mean it's out to destroy the environment.

Yeah, I was just being a smartass :)

But nature doesn't 'care' if the planet is no longer habitable by human beings, human beings do. Some other species better able to adapt to the changes will survive and continue to evolve. The world will keep spinning.

So when a natural volcano eruption occurs, its pretty much out of our hands despite being negative. Just because a company has made some minor PR steps towards polluting less doesn't mean they couldn't/shouldn't do more.

Companies aren't out to be evil, they're out to make money. Medical insurance companies actively work to not cover things people need to be healthy or just live at all. That's acceptable in unaccountable capitalism.
So to are toxic chemicals that could be eliminated acceptable so long as they don't cause short term harm (during the devices life basically).
The companies aren't trying to destroy anything, they're trying to maximise profit and without oversight that often leads to really bad outcomes (Lead paint or glue that turns to GHB [the 'date rape' drug] when digested on kids toys, industrial chemicals in pet food killing pets to quote the most recent publicised cases).
These things didn't happen because the companies were trying to do bad, they were all results of the companies choosing a cheaper alternative to save on production costs without putting in the expensive work of making sure they were safe.

Free markets are the best system people have come up with, but they certainly need regulation and groups dedicated to protecting mostly non-monetized resources essential to human life like clean air, soil and water. Hell, even human life itself is often treated as a commodity for companies rather than the reason companies exist.

My point in short: I support Greenpeace's actions.

Oh no! Our games are spewing toxic wastes and wasting electricity!

Here's something Greenpeace should think about. The server their sites are on are on 24/7!

THINK ABOUT THE ENERGY YOU'RE WASTING FROM THAT!

God. They're worrying about game consoles when there's a war being waged in another country? Something tells me the time and effort they put into the games thing can be put to better use, perhaps by helping save the seals or something. Of course, saving seals is ending Inuit lifestyles and tons of trees and land not used for oil drilling and the like.

Great job, guys. Whining about video games while thousands of trees and animals die in Canada.

EDIT:

I don't hate Greenpeace, but environmentalists as a whole sometimes have backfiring plans.

For example, the Canadian north, which was once protected from companies logging illegally by trappers reporting it to environmentalist groups, is no longer protected due to the ban on furs in Canada and Europe from environmentalists not wanting the cruel treatment of animals. The Inuits who trapped for furs for the Fur Trade now must take jobs in the Oil industry, and to do that, land must be flooded. This will kill tons of moose, deer, etc. and anything else living in that land. So they saved one type of animal (Baby seals) but are keeping others dying.

[/rant]

I had heard about this, but not Nintendo's reply. Once I did hear about this though, I was quite sure that Nintendo would be the one who either already meets all standards on the issue, or would be the first to champion the initiative.

Anybody else have the same notion?