My opinion on Ubuntu cancelling Intel 80386/80386-clone processor support

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 12:38:17 +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote:
>hi,
>Am Samstag, den 10.09.2016, 12:05 +0200 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
>
>> As already pointed out, recycling or refurbishing for the poor
>> already
>> is the wrong approach, only using computers for a longer period of
>> time
>> and repairing components of computers, instead of replacing them
>> completely solves environmental and social problems. The poot should
>> use the same computers as the rich. Recycling does not mean that it
>> doesn't cause e-waste and waste by idiotic traffic there and back to
>> foreign country's slums and that workers aren't exploited. Just rare
>> earth elements are recycled and much e-waste remains. The complete
>> approach is wrong.  
>
>so you think it is better to not recyle and re-use the materials that
>were retrieved at the cost of the workers health but instead use them
>longer and buy then new stuff that was again retrieved at the cost of
>worker lives ? that's a strange statement.

It is good to recycle, but it's not good the way it is done now, for
still usable gear and by exploiting the poor.

>if they want computers in a country that does not produce them itself
>there will be transport costs and the related pollution in either case.
>the trick here is to sort out the crap *before* you cause transport
>costs and pollution, to actually get usable stuff to the people ...

Simply donate new computers instead of giving them your old, as an
excuse to buy a new one for yourself. They then need to do the same as
you should do, use those computers as long as possible.

>when i was still LTSP and edubuntu upstream i worked very closely with
>[1], they actually know what they are doing and make sure to only ship
>usable bits ... they ship it to places where people live that would
>never be able to achieve a computer at all ...

But why donating old instead of new computers? Greed?

>to places where there is
>partially not even power and where internet access means that once a
>week a guy with a moped comes by with a usb stick that proxies your
>mails and websites you want to read. following your logic would mean
>that all these people would never get access to wider information and
>education...

No, in a social, human world, we don't donate crap, we don't help the
rich, we help the poor.

>if you look at the US there are people that can hardly afford a living.
>yet [2] will enable the kids of such families to 
>a) actually learn how a computer works and 
>b) build their own one in courses to take home with them ... 
>again these are people that wouldn't have had access to a computer at
>all ...

Why wouldn't the have access to computers at all. The only way in you
mind is donating the computers that other people do not want to use?

>recycling is a matter of "done right", just saying "the whole approach
>is wrong" is very short sighted...

Inform yourself about how recycling is done and when recycling makes
really sense.

Regards,
Ralf