[redeeman]

> Many people do purely use these cars for no purpose besides them being a status symbol, or to be more secure on the road (which could be suggestive of a non-confident or bad driver).

In the same way me configuring which interfaces to bind to also could be suggestive of a non confident or bad firewall configuration ability.

And sure, most of the time the car gets used for other purposes, because people have to WORK atleast 5 days a week, and government policies (amongst cost of actual car ofc) makes it unfavorable to have a big car for when you need that, and a small car for daily commute.

Most of the time you dont need a big computer, so I now demand, and Demand the government legislates it, that ANY computing purpose you do that could be served with a sub 2W arm device, be done so. Leave those filthy amds and intels to those who run 24/7 workloads. The climate commands you!

[JambalayaJim]

I think you’re missing the point here. Operating a powerful computing device doesn’t negatively impact other people.

On the other hand, SUV drivers directly make my life less safe every single day.

This shouldn’t even be thought of primarily as a climate issue - pedestrian and cyclist fatalities are up simply because of the size of cars on the road today.

It’s simply not worth it, and cities should tax SUV drivers accordingly.

[redeeman]

your fancy electronics devices have polluted this earth during their manufacture, and most certainly will during their probable end of life in a landfill. Who gives you the right to say that this is okay but an SUV is not? what if I want to live a primitive life without electronics. Your electronics takes precious time away from my life. Your shoes deposit microplastics in the environment that is most probably harmful. The electricity you consume to read this comment spews pollution into the atmosphere. Even if you are "co2 neutral", you arent really. What about the infrastructure required to keep it running? cars for service personal driving down the highway putting rubber particles in the air, reducing some peoples life.

[JambalayaJim]

SUVs are a nuisance to city streets period beyond environmental impact. They take up lots of space and our dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists and people in smaller vehicles.

*That* is the negative externality that isn’t really discussed (or dealt with by government bodies).

We can talk about the climate some other time. But yes, you’re correct - everyone living in the modern world has comforts with negative environmental impact. There is no middle ground, either I go feral or I start killing Polar Bears.

[psd1]

The poverty of your argument is showing.

If the SUV rabies won't abate, we need stronger measures.

[redeeman]

yeah I see it perfectly, the stuff you want to do is protected by divine power, but the stuff others do, not so much.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150402-the-worst-place-...

"toxic, nightmarish lake created by our thirst for smartphones, consumer gadgets and green tech"

Hmm interresting, I dont see "created by thirst of land rovers". Funny how the car manufacture do not create dystopian nightmarish lakes, right? When did this begin to happen? What is it? was it perhaps when everyone wanted the fancy new ipads and smartphones? whats that I hear, a smartwatch? perhaps some IOT crap?

Its so easy to condemn what you do not like yourself, but just remember, when you are pointing one finger out, 3 are pointing back.