I'm hopefully a future physicist and the first to defend its importance but this kind of argument seems quite bad faith to me.
"Physics-based industries are those that rely heavily on expertise in physics. These include oil and gas extraction, nuclear fuel processing, and various forms of manufacturing like fibre optics, lighting equipment, office machinery, cars, ships and armaments."
Oil extraction, gas, and ships. Really? Sure, I get it, these areas wouldn't be possible without prior physics research, and present physicists will create new economic opportunities in the future; but blindly inhereting these fields' economic signifiance to physics seems incorrect. In other news, mathematics worth more than 80% of EU economy - these industries include finance, business, engineering, computing, and entertainment.
I was under the impression that carbon dioxide was largely a global problem. I don't have the knowledge to comment on that, or the other problems you brought up - in fact, I don't have much of an established opinion on the topic at all. I just wanted to present some math on how you could theoretically contribute to there being 62 times less CO2 in the atmosphere overall - if that's in your interests. I can't comment on the other intricacies (I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything, I hope you understand what I'm trying to say.)
You seem to be spot on. According to ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) the carbon footprint of a flight from Malaga -> Amsterdam for 1 person is about 0.161t (metric ton) [1]. One carbon credit gives you the right to release 1t carbon dioxide and according to the NYT (2019) one 1 carbon credit is worth no more than $30 [2]. So, in taking the plane you release 0.16t, but you can prevent the release of up to $300/$30 = 10t with the money you save.
So sure, the train releases less CO2, but if you instead fly and buy carbon credits you prevent 62 times your carbon footprint from the plane ever being released into the atmosphere. But I'm starting to wonder, does my math really check out here? These numbers seem kinda absurd.
Exactly. If the charterer has to pay less fuel for your ship because you put a kite on it, surely they will choose your ship over others? Is there no competition in this market or why does fundamental market principles seemingly not apply?
I can't remember the specifics, but with the certain model I wanted, at a reasonable price, and with shipping to Sweden I'd like to remember that Amazon was the best option. Regardless, although my last sentence might've been a bit dramatic, the point of the anecdote was to share how Amazon lost me as a customer because of their counterfeit problem.
A little while ago I was trying to get into Airsoft (paintball with plastic bullets as opposed to color) to have a reason to spend more time with my brother. The little bullets have quite decent momentum and can penetrate normal low-grade safety glasses, and so I was browsing around for glasses with a certain rating. Found the exact pair I wanted for a good price on amazon, but I just couldn't run the risk of getting fakes from China. Needless to say, I haven't played any Airsoft yet..
I just think it doesn't actually fit any purpose. For quick chats irc is faster and more accessible, and for long thoughtful discussions Slack is lacking a lot of features so that you might as well use email.
This is thankfully the case in 99% of situations, but I'd like to add on top of all the comments: technical proficiency is super important to me. Having a manager that doesn't understand the details (or even basics) of your work is super tedious to work with.
You have every right to think that Slack is amazing and that IRC is "complete trash" (although I completely disagree) - but please don't attribute it to UX.
UX isn't just graphical design, it's also feeling responsive, fast, and accessible. Something that Slack, in my opinion, gets horribly wrong.
Say you're out eating with mates and you want to split the bill, no one really carries cash anymore here so that's not an option (and also annoying to split). Writing a cheque is obviously ridiculous and a bank transfer requires a lot of needless information. A "swish" as we call it takes about 10 seconds, 5 if your friend is already in your phone's contacts.
It's just an ease of access / quality of life thing. Your question is more or less equivalent to: "What's the purpose of QR-codes? Just enter the URL!" - it's easy, fast, and frankly nice. A really really simple and great way to send small amounts of money between people.
See this seems to be a really fun and challenging part of IT.. the part that I don't want to have to deal with is the helpdesk, guiding a 60 year old lady to login onto her system or configure her company iPhone.
Maybe there is a job where you do only the former, I just haven't found it yet.
"Physics-based industries are those that rely heavily on expertise in physics. These include oil and gas extraction, nuclear fuel processing, and various forms of manufacturing like fibre optics, lighting equipment, office machinery, cars, ships and armaments."
Oil extraction, gas, and ships. Really? Sure, I get it, these areas wouldn't be possible without prior physics research, and present physicists will create new economic opportunities in the future; but blindly inhereting these fields' economic signifiance to physics seems incorrect. In other news, mathematics worth more than 80% of EU economy - these industries include finance, business, engineering, computing, and entertainment.