• 148 Posts
  • 1.27K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 2nd, 2023

help-circle







  • As the article mentions, many of the things not able to be put in kerbside recycling can be collected and dropped off at collection centres (different things depending on where you are in the country).

    Not mentioned is Terracycle. Various stores or companies that sponsor this have dropoff points, or you can collect up your toothpaste tubes or razors or whatever else is supported and send them in using prepaid shipping labels.

    For things not covered under a sponsorship, Terracycle let you to pay to have it recycled. But for lack of a better term, it’s fucking expensive. A small all-in-one box (put anything in it that they accept - which is almost anything) will set you back $315.

    One big problem is that while many things are technically recyclable, but it’s not a long term plan. Most plastics are no longer useful after being recycled a couple of times, glass and metals are much more recyclable. However, they are also heavier, so e.g. glass may end up using more oil overall because of the extra weight that needs to be transported. Aluminium is super recyclable and also light, we should use it more, though mining it is not cheap.

    Really what we need is closed loop systems. Instead of making stuff from the cheapest product available then asking how to recycle it, we should work out what is the most reusable or recyclable and then make stuff out of that.




  • It’s interesting that some people find that to be the case. Personally I download transactions from my back account at the end of each month and track what money was spent on. Cash is untraced and free to spend!

    Also, after some bank greed we now have 2% surcharges at most places for tap to pay (we call it paywave), and credit card transactions in general. Knowing this goes straight to the bank, it’s basically “would you like to make a donation to the bank?”. No thanks, I’ll insert my card and pay that way.





  • Nah, this is a relatively new public holiday that we’ve only been observing since 2022. It’s called Matariki. Here’s the summary:

    Historically, Matariki was usually celebrated for a period of days during the last quarter of the moon of the lunar month Pipiri (around June). The ceremony involved viewing the individual stars for forecasts of the year to come, mourning the deceased of the past year, and making an offering of food to replenish the stars. Some Māori use the rise of Puanga (Rigel) or other stars to mark the new year.

    Celebration of Matariki declined during the 20th century, but beginning in the early 1990s it underwent a revival. Matariki was first celebrated as an official public holiday in New Zealand on 24 June 2022.

    It was originally proposed to replace our Queen’s Birthday public holiday, but in the end we got both.





  • It’s not that they are heading towards the moon. The overhead moonlight tells them that towards the light is up. They aren’t trying to head towards the light, I think one of the articles mentioned insects facing their back to the light. No matter how far they travel, the ground is dark and the sky is slightly lighter, so they can keep themselves level.

    With an outdoor light, if they come near it then moving a metre away drastically changes the direction of the light. If they try to keep their back to the light, they end up curving up and around and back towards the light.

    It’s just a primative orientation system getting messed up by something that wasn’t around when they evolved.



  • Part of their job is to respond to OIA requests.

    On thinking about this, this is relevant for another reason: they know that the chat information will be provided, so they have no excuse for their comments regardless of context.

    She likey was looking for evidence that some of her requests were not properly responded to… instead she found a personal attack.

    I don’t think I quite got this on my first reading. But on scanning through the article again, I think you’re right. My bias is that people ask for all information about themselves as a sort of punishment for staff not doing what they want. I have this bias because it happens all the time. But this case is different, it’s about a feeling that the information provided may not be correct, which is important when it’s for research.


  • Yeah, I fully support government transparency and see the need for it. I guess I’ve only seen this from one side, which is the side where you’re being ask for this info but you’re unable to correct the media because you can’t give out personal information, so the media gets a one sided story.

    I guess my main feeling was that the headline “Ministry of Justice workers call researcher a ‘bitch’ in online conversation” sounds really bad, but the sentence it’s used it to me feels a lot softer.

    On the other hand, there’s really no excuse for a staff member whose job it is to respond to OIA and Privacy Act requests to not recognise that these chat conversations would be part of what is returned to her.