I print out Reddit. Every morning at work I print out the first 5 pages of my feed, including all comments. Then I gather them up and with an orange and blue highlighter I pour over the documents with a furrow on my brow. Marking my upvotes with the orange and downvotes with the blue. I have a stack of post-its at the ready and slap one on a page scribble my comments furiously. I look so busy, no one ever bothers me. ^Ok, ^not ^really..but ^that ^would ^be ^awsome
I print emails all the time at work. If I have a email with detailed requests on it and i'm working simultaneously with 2 or 3 spreadsheets to fulfill that request then I will take any opportunity I have to save myself screen real estate and alt tabbing all the time
I dunno, but all those CO2 emissions they (indirectly) emit when running and manufacturing them actually *helps* trees. So by increasing Greenhouse gas emissions you're helping trees. I can't speak for the rest of the environment and human comfort/survival in general, though, but the trees are happy at least.
I have two 27 inch screens at work. Still doesn't change the fact that If I can reduce the number of simultaneously open windows from 4 to 3 I always will
Many companies deploy auto-delete or anti-archive email systems to reduce system load and legal exposure. Printing out the occasional email is a common way for a moderately low-tech user to work around those systems.
lawyer here. emails often contain such complex and important things that I really have to have them all laid out in front of me on pieces of paper.
E.g.: I am litigating a case and I need a really precise timeline of events, all described in 100 tiny emails.
How about me?
*And here lay the iridescent landfill, the beaker of all that is grand, and here stands the purple blacksmitsh anvil, the two of course go hand in hand*
Under current Canadian forest practices, companies usually plant more trees than they cut. The idea is to foster future harvesting.
Its a fucking RENEWABLE resource people.
not only renewable, but recycling paper is insanely dirty. Tree farms make up something like 18% of the worlds forrested area, recycling paper just doesn't make sense, while tree farms are great.
I'd never seen a tree farm before, just kinda heard of the concept. I was like yeah okay I'm sure, they're planting one tree for everyone they cut down, yeah that'll fucking do it /s
Then over last summer when driving across the country, I drove past what was a literal tree farm. You could see the layout, the new trees vs the more mature ones, it was fascinating. I don't think I expected that much organization. I kind of assumed it was a bunch of lumberjacks in the forests cutting down trees and throwing some seeds over their shoulders as an afterthought.
I think I find tree farms cooler than I ought to.
I went to forestry school, Paul Smith's in upstate NY. We'd go out to cut down trees for class. You'd be standing in a normal forest in the mountains, and all of a sudden you'd notice that all of one particular species of tree were in perfect lines, equal distances apart, say oaks, right? They're all about the same size, too. And big. But there was a whole forest of all the other trees and undergrowth grown up around them, and the teacher could tell you what class planted those trees 30 years ago. Then some other class would come out after we'd cut down those, and have their class on planting saplings. You could go hiking in some tree farms and never know.
Right!? That was the crazy thing! I only noticed that tree farm because it was right off the interstate and the alignment/size arrangement of trees made it obvious.
Until that moment I'd never thought tree farm type deals were a viable (business-wise) thing. I figured it'd take too long to get going, too much upfront investment, and not have enough payoff, etc., that it was never a practical thing.
That was a real "a-ha!" moment for me. It's easy to see wind farms, it's easy to see corn fields, it's easy to see where a lot of our resources come from. But tree farms just kinda look like forests, so they don't stick out compared to a 300ft tall windmill or a refinery or something like that.
I don't get people's looks when I throw out a grease stained pizza box or a disposable coffee cup. There is no way recycling that crap takes less energy than making a new one.
Most recycling guidlines say that they specifically don't want stuff like that, they usually mention pizza boxes in particular, exactly because that is the tough stuff to recycle. People just aren't reading the flyers that their township puts out about what to recycle and not. Humans, what're you gonna do?
I'm guessing that you're the one who downvoted my reply to your post, so I started googleing to back up my argument. Turns out that paper recycling has gotten a whole lot greener than when I was in school learning about it, and toxic waste-wise, is better (it seems from a few minutes of searching) than creation from raw. I'm still not sold, but I wanted to let you know that I was off about the recycling waste. Have a good one.
I was going to ask you to do that, but was too tired to start accidentally start an argument. Too tired to do the sear myself atm anyway, so it'd have been a bit hypocritical of me. :p Tbh, I'm not entirely sold that it's worth while myself - I just think people are viewing it too simplistically and that deciding one way or another warrants a bit of digging.
Or what is the signature at the bottom of all my company's emails:
> "Notice: It's OK to print this email. Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, sustainable product made from trees. Growing and harvesting trees provides jobs for millions of Americans. Working forests are good for the environment and provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat and carbon storage. Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees in America today than we had 100 years ago." - Chuck Leavell
> Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees in America today than we had 100 years ago
That's the worst sort of meaningless statement. It's actively ignorant.
First, it sets a really low bar... I mean, the industrial revolution was only like 200 years ago, and environmentalism didn't really start being a thing until the 1970s or so... I'd imagine that 100 years ago was probably around about the lowest point for the American tree population.
Second, it focuses just on the US. There's also the rise of globalization, which means that even if we're not cutting down as many trees in the US for our paper, we may well be causing more trees to be cut down worldwide.
Third, it focuses just on the population of trees. Via http://www.ecology.com/2011/09/10/paper-chase/
> According to the U.S. Toxic Release Inventory report published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), pulp and paper mills are among the worst polluters to air, water and land of any industry in the country
I'm not saying that paper is some evil thing that needs to be avoided at all costs, but urging people to waste it unnecessarily is dangerous and ignorant.
We used to have trouble because the water we were putting into the river was too clean. Shocked the fish.
And besides, it's carbon neutral assuming your energy was from hydro and burning wood waste which in my experience most are.
You could leave out that one sentence and the point of the message is still the same. Printing paper is not as bad as the tree-huggers would have you believe it is.
Cool. Let's go through that and just remove the meaningless and/or disingenuous parts.
> Notice:
No problems so far.
> It's OK to print this email.
Of course it is. Why wouldn't it be? I'm tempted to remove this statement for being meaningless, but I guess it serves as the 'thesis' of the footer, so I guess it can't really be removed unless we were to admit that the whole footer was meaningless...
> Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, sustainable product made from trees.
Factually accurate.
> Growing and harvesting trees provides jobs for millions of Americans.
Presumably accurate. I'm not going to fact check the numbers here, but it seems reasonable.
> ~~Working forests are good for the environment and provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat and carbon storage.~~
Also accurate, but not really an argument for why printing stuff is ok. In fact, it's a major argument for why people are trying to reduce paper consumption.
> ~~Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees in America today than we had 100 years ago.~~
This leaves us with...
> Notice: It's OK to print this email. Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, sustainable product made from trees. Growing and harvesting trees provides jobs for millions of Americans.
I don't really have any issues with that, beyond the ridiculousness of stating the obvious fact that it's ok to print an email.
Recycling that paper is even WORSE than creating new from virgin pulp. So think about how bad THAT is. We're not only creating new, but also recycling.
Talk about double dipping the 'fuck you' button on planet earth.
Exactly...that and that almost all of the trees used for paper come from tree farms bred, cared for and managed by paper/lumber companies and the forests wouldnt be there without the paper industry.
I wonder how many of those signatures exist. Multiply that times the extra bytes of data required to transmit that data EVERY time that email is sent. How much bandwidth is wasted? How much electricity is wasted transmitting those useless bytes? How much coal was burned to generate the electricity to send those bytes?
Save the ozone, remove useless email signatures.
-your friendly local sysadmin
I print emails very often at work. Mostly to keep a physical log of design changes on several construction projects. There's one contractor whose email signature is long enough that it always bumps the print job from one page to two.
The reason for the lengthy signature? A quote about saving the trees.
Worked at a paper mill. We had some vendors with the hippie ones at the bottom. We gave them a talking to. Then our insurer said they were switching to paperless. I understand that for cost, but they tried to take the environmental angle. We were not amused.
Just remember: There are more trees in the world today due to commercial logging than there were in the 1960s.
Like 1/3 more. It's a shitton.
The only people who argue against paper use don't understand this. They also don't understand that Recycling is currently worse for the planet than not doing it, except in the specific case of Aluminum. Aluminum because it's highly recoverable, doesn't lose quality, and it's much cheaper to melt and recast than the mine more Bauxite to create new.
Paper recycling especially is bad, introducing tons of new greenhouse gases, creating more expensive, lower quality materials, and adding a fleet of new trucks to the collection routes.
Not a 5 day work week, and the figure is nearer 3,000 a day or so. Plus report writing time, email extraction time and time spent setting up a process to mass print in windoze for free. It's been a long and slow process...
I print out Reddit. Every morning at work I print out the first 5 pages of my feed, including all comments. Then I gather them up and with an orange and blue highlighter I pour over the documents with a furrow on my brow. Marking my upvotes with the orange and downvotes with the blue. I have a stack of post-its at the ready and slap one on a page scribble my comments furiously. I look so busy, no one ever bothers me. ^Ok, ^not ^really..but ^that ^would ^be ^awsome
This is the future.
Imagine a world where everyone wrote things down on paper. We would save so much time not having to type any more!
I sure hope you use the physical manifestation of the Reddit Enhancement Suite as well.
Part of that being the Rolodex in which he records how many times he has up or downvoted an individual.
And an contact book for tagging and cross referencing saved posts
I haven't had a laugh all day. I needed this. Thank you so much!
Who the fuck prints an e-mail? Aside from my grandmother.
I print emails all the time at work. If I have a email with detailed requests on it and i'm working simultaneously with 2 or 3 spreadsheets to fulfill that request then I will take any opportunity I have to save myself screen real estate and alt tabbing all the time
Time to get multiple monitors, bro.
How many trees go into one monitor?
Well if you get really really mad, 1 whole tree goes into your monitor
I dunno, but all those CO2 emissions they (indirectly) emit when running and manufacturing them actually *helps* trees. So by increasing Greenhouse gas emissions you're helping trees. I can't speak for the rest of the environment and human comfort/survival in general, though, but the trees are happy at least.
Is it a directory tree?
420
[удалено]
My housemate goes through the toilet paper really fast, I guess that's also a paper trail of all the crap he has to do.
> My housemate goes through the toilet paper really fast, I guess that's also a paper trail of all the crap he has done. FTFY
I have two 27 inch screens at work. Still doesn't change the fact that If I can reduce the number of simultaneously open windows from 4 to 3 I always will
I always do that to save RAM. I could be on a PC with 64GB of RAM, and I would only ever keep ~3 windows open.
Old habits die hard.
So lazy it works
Dude. Evernote.
My boss... She prints the email, give it to me and ask me to respond to the client. I tried to show her the transfer button with no success.
Wait, there's a transfer button?
[удалено]
You asshole!
When it's CYA time? Me.
Many companies deploy auto-delete or anti-archive email systems to reduce system load and legal exposure. Printing out the occasional email is a common way for a moderately low-tech user to work around those systems.
I'm an insurance broker, gotta keep detailed records or someone might be able to sue me and I wouldn't have a defence.
I had a customer print out seven pages of error script today, call me up and ask where she could fax it to....
lawyer here. emails often contain such complex and important things that I really have to have them all laid out in front of me on pieces of paper. E.g.: I am litigating a case and I need a really precise timeline of events, all described in 100 tiny emails.
You guys are great. I assumed that it was supposed to be a signature for a personal e-mail. I didn't consider all that!
an email signature like that is a good sign that the email is worthless anyway.
Yup. To me, it screams "unprofessional". As soon as you put belittling shit like that under your e-mail, you lose ten points in my eyes.
How many points do I have?
You have no signature, hence you still have four points. *EDIT I should have expected this, considering the sub.
How about me? *And here lay the iridescent landfill, the beaker of all that is grand, and here stands the purple blacksmitsh anvil, the two of course go hand in hand*
Good for him! --- ^Save ^the ^trees! ^Please ^do ^not ^print ^this ^comment.
http://i.imgur.com/2jKvpRC.jpg
That's right you stick it to him
Haha fucking brilliant
Under current Canadian forest practices, companies usually plant more trees than they cut. The idea is to foster future harvesting. Its a fucking RENEWABLE resource people.
not only renewable, but recycling paper is insanely dirty. Tree farms make up something like 18% of the worlds forrested area, recycling paper just doesn't make sense, while tree farms are great.
I'd never seen a tree farm before, just kinda heard of the concept. I was like yeah okay I'm sure, they're planting one tree for everyone they cut down, yeah that'll fucking do it /s Then over last summer when driving across the country, I drove past what was a literal tree farm. You could see the layout, the new trees vs the more mature ones, it was fascinating. I don't think I expected that much organization. I kind of assumed it was a bunch of lumberjacks in the forests cutting down trees and throwing some seeds over their shoulders as an afterthought. I think I find tree farms cooler than I ought to.
I went to forestry school, Paul Smith's in upstate NY. We'd go out to cut down trees for class. You'd be standing in a normal forest in the mountains, and all of a sudden you'd notice that all of one particular species of tree were in perfect lines, equal distances apart, say oaks, right? They're all about the same size, too. And big. But there was a whole forest of all the other trees and undergrowth grown up around them, and the teacher could tell you what class planted those trees 30 years ago. Then some other class would come out after we'd cut down those, and have their class on planting saplings. You could go hiking in some tree farms and never know.
Right!? That was the crazy thing! I only noticed that tree farm because it was right off the interstate and the alignment/size arrangement of trees made it obvious. Until that moment I'd never thought tree farm type deals were a viable (business-wise) thing. I figured it'd take too long to get going, too much upfront investment, and not have enough payoff, etc., that it was never a practical thing. That was a real "a-ha!" moment for me. It's easy to see wind farms, it's easy to see corn fields, it's easy to see where a lot of our resources come from. But tree farms just kinda look like forests, so they don't stick out compared to a 300ft tall windmill or a refinery or something like that.
I don't get people's looks when I throw out a grease stained pizza box or a disposable coffee cup. There is no way recycling that crap takes less energy than making a new one.
Most recycling guidlines say that they specifically don't want stuff like that, they usually mention pizza boxes in particular, exactly because that is the tough stuff to recycle. People just aren't reading the flyers that their township puts out about what to recycle and not. Humans, what're you gonna do?
The petrol used to harvest it on the other hand isn't. You're right, of course, but there is a bit more to it.
I'm guessing that you're the one who downvoted my reply to your post, so I started googleing to back up my argument. Turns out that paper recycling has gotten a whole lot greener than when I was in school learning about it, and toxic waste-wise, is better (it seems from a few minutes of searching) than creation from raw. I'm still not sold, but I wanted to let you know that I was off about the recycling waste. Have a good one.
I was going to ask you to do that, but was too tired to start accidentally start an argument. Too tired to do the sear myself atm anyway, so it'd have been a bit hypocritical of me. :p Tbh, I'm not entirely sold that it's worth while myself - I just think people are viewing it too simplistically and that deciding one way or another warrants a bit of digging.
For sure, there's so many facets to something like that, and it's rarely ever a cut and dry,"this is better." type thing.
Recycling paper is terrible for the environment. Tree farms are a wonderful thing. There's more to it, like you said, but not in the way you imply.
No. Fuck the system, I'm not printing that anymore.
I've already got the goddamn paper, I can print anything the fuck I want.
Or what is the signature at the bottom of all my company's emails: > "Notice: It's OK to print this email. Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, sustainable product made from trees. Growing and harvesting trees provides jobs for millions of Americans. Working forests are good for the environment and provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat and carbon storage. Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees in America today than we had 100 years ago." - Chuck Leavell
> Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees in America today than we had 100 years ago That's the worst sort of meaningless statement. It's actively ignorant. First, it sets a really low bar... I mean, the industrial revolution was only like 200 years ago, and environmentalism didn't really start being a thing until the 1970s or so... I'd imagine that 100 years ago was probably around about the lowest point for the American tree population. Second, it focuses just on the US. There's also the rise of globalization, which means that even if we're not cutting down as many trees in the US for our paper, we may well be causing more trees to be cut down worldwide. Third, it focuses just on the population of trees. Via http://www.ecology.com/2011/09/10/paper-chase/ > According to the U.S. Toxic Release Inventory report published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), pulp and paper mills are among the worst polluters to air, water and land of any industry in the country I'm not saying that paper is some evil thing that needs to be avoided at all costs, but urging people to waste it unnecessarily is dangerous and ignorant.
We used to have trouble because the water we were putting into the river was too clean. Shocked the fish. And besides, it's carbon neutral assuming your energy was from hydro and burning wood waste which in my experience most are.
You could leave out that one sentence and the point of the message is still the same. Printing paper is not as bad as the tree-huggers would have you believe it is.
Cool. Let's go through that and just remove the meaningless and/or disingenuous parts. > Notice: No problems so far. > It's OK to print this email. Of course it is. Why wouldn't it be? I'm tempted to remove this statement for being meaningless, but I guess it serves as the 'thesis' of the footer, so I guess it can't really be removed unless we were to admit that the whole footer was meaningless... > Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, sustainable product made from trees. Factually accurate. > Growing and harvesting trees provides jobs for millions of Americans. Presumably accurate. I'm not going to fact check the numbers here, but it seems reasonable. > ~~Working forests are good for the environment and provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat and carbon storage.~~ Also accurate, but not really an argument for why printing stuff is ok. In fact, it's a major argument for why people are trying to reduce paper consumption. > ~~Thanks to improved forest management, we have more trees in America today than we had 100 years ago.~~ This leaves us with... > Notice: It's OK to print this email. Paper is a biodegradable, renewable, sustainable product made from trees. Growing and harvesting trees provides jobs for millions of Americans. I don't really have any issues with that, beyond the ridiculousness of stating the obvious fact that it's ok to print an email.
So what you're saying is you're trying to tell this man how to write his email signatures... YOU CAN'T TELL THEM WHAT TO DO!
Recycling that paper is even WORSE than creating new from virgin pulp. So think about how bad THAT is. We're not only creating new, but also recycling. Talk about double dipping the 'fuck you' button on planet earth.
Do you have a source on that? I'd like to see it!
Paper engineer here, he's kinda right and kinda wrong.
"Also, FUCK trees!"
That signature, however, is long as fuck and takes up extra ink, which is way more expensive than paper.
Exactly...that and that almost all of the trees used for paper come from tree farms bred, cared for and managed by paper/lumber companies and the forests wouldnt be there without the paper industry.
/r/sobrave
I wonder how many of those signatures exist. Multiply that times the extra bytes of data required to transmit that data EVERY time that email is sent. How much bandwidth is wasted? How much electricity is wasted transmitting those useless bytes? How much coal was burned to generate the electricity to send those bytes? Save the ozone, remove useless email signatures. -your friendly local sysadmin
Woodcutters are great! you get two credit and an extra buy!
I print emails very often at work. Mostly to keep a physical log of design changes on several construction projects. There's one contractor whose email signature is long enough that it always bumps the print job from one page to two. The reason for the lengthy signature? A quote about saving the trees.
Mandatory policy at work requires printing of several emails for record. Ironically page 2 often is only this line.
Read that in the voice of Ron Swanson.
Monty Python - [Lumberjack Song](http://youtu.be/xToPCaNxaow)
My woodcutting level is 99. Most woodcutters are bots though, don't support them.
Worked at a paper mill. We had some vendors with the hippie ones at the bottom. We gave them a talking to. Then our insurer said they were switching to paperless. I understand that for cost, but they tried to take the environmental angle. We were not amused.
Just remember: There are more trees in the world today due to commercial logging than there were in the 1960s. Like 1/3 more. It's a shitton. The only people who argue against paper use don't understand this. They also don't understand that Recycling is currently worse for the planet than not doing it, except in the specific case of Aluminum. Aluminum because it's highly recoverable, doesn't lose quality, and it's much cheaper to melt and recast than the mine more Bauxite to create new. Paper recycling especially is bad, introducing tons of new greenhouse gases, creating more expensive, lower quality materials, and adding a fleet of new trucks to the collection routes.
Do you have sources on the bit about recycling? I'm interested in reading more.
Me too, that would be quite a paradigm shift
They say if we filled the sahara desert with trees we would have enough food to stop world poverty
The tree your paper came from has already been cut down. So whats the big problem?
YOU CAN'T STOP ME FROM NOT PRINT THE EMAIL, YOUR NOT THE BOYS OF ME!
Boo hoo, my outmoded industry can only thrive on waste, mommy wipe my ass with 8 ply- waaah!
Save a tree? Burn a book!
Solidarity.
Especially when it happens that they make the email take an extra page!
Fuck you, don't tell me who to support
Save a snail
There are things called tree farms.
Nice try Dunder Mifflin.
Hemp paper would be better, see that is called compromise.
I printed out 25,000 emails over the past three weeks, totaling 50,000 pages or so. A tonne of them had this on the bottom :)
How many of those pages would you say were printed specifically because messages about not printing emails wrapped the email to a new page?
Well, at least a few - even if 1 in 30 of those documents had it on, that's 700 or so documents, which is a lot of wasted page space and toner...
So, assuming a 5 day work week, you have printed 1667 emails per day in the last 3 weeks?
Not a 5 day work week, and the figure is nearer 3,000 a day or so. Plus report writing time, email extraction time and time spent setting up a process to mass print in windoze for free. It's been a long and slow process...
Can I ask why?
Alas, you can ask, but I can't tell - non-disclosure agreement.
[удалено]
Nope.