But to write a bestseller, knowing at least one language is a prerequisite.
I do agree that an in-depth knowledge of a language(s) is not negotiable for writing good software. That was not the main point though.
I had to take a whole semester back at uni in "Introduction to OOP". That lecture was held by the CS department and i spent 4 months each tuesday at 7am in a lecture hall where someone waved around pictures of cars and planes and the respective stencils of cars and planes - their idea of explaining the concept without using a specific programming language.
Needless to say, i didn't get it.
A year later, a mechanical engineering professor summed up that whole semester in 5 seconds: "Classes are little more than structs with code inside".
Perhaps that original lecturer was not a very good teacher. OR, maybe it's true that some people are just not cut out to understand CS topics. OOP is in fact "slightly" more than just structs with code inside them. Unfortunately I have seen a lot of code in practice by people who "only" learned a language, or moved to IT from some of the engineering disciplines where some coding was done along the way, that use classes only as "structs with code".
(I take issue with teaching kids in the west about programming, though: it sets up a false hope that they'll someday get jobs in that field. and they won't. it will mostly go to india and china. teaching kids that they can earn a living in the thinking arts is false hope.)
At a stage I worked at a certain unnamed company as a contractor. The project manager (from the company itself) that I worked under once remarked in frustration to me: "You know what the problem is with this company? Too few chiefs and too many Indians!" Of course, he was of Indian extraction himself, so I suppose he could afford the criticism.
Which sort of illustrates my point: while it is nice to have a workforce of cheap coders on projects, you DO need more to see the bigger picture. This goes from managing such efforts, all the way down to people that understand how to read (and write) specifications and other documentation (in which I include code comments) - preferably containing all the required information but nothing more -, people who can reason about program correctness, people who understand the theory of testing and can apply it (even if it is just for writing unit tests for their own code), etc. etc. So currently I'm working at this rather large software company where they decided to occasionally have a fun code competition for the devs - turns out not even the guy drawing up the problems realizes that a certain data type is limited in size and his algorithm will generate wraparound errors rather soon.:-)
When are people going to realize "coding" != "computer science"? (or <>, or !.equals(), or ne, etc. depending on your flavor). Nothing against Java devs, but IT needs a little more than programmers in language X. There are millions speaking English, Spanish, etc., but not that many of them churn out bestsellers, or even mundane but usable prose. You're certainly not going to make good or even adequate writers by (only) teaching a language. You're not going to improve the IT industry by training a million more monkeys to (only) tap away at a million more keyboards.
But perhaps Oracle does like to see an increase in their user base.
I see this effect of electrons arriving before they departed as a bonus. Imagine a beowulf cluster of slashdot servers built on such tech.... Then they can post the dupe before the original fine article!
also if you have a yard, you could parcel off a small bit of it for a chicken coop for not too much money and grow your own eggs / chickens
Giving the chickens a free run of the vegetable garden will help in the control of slugs, crickets, and other insects that like to munch on your food, their scratching will control weeds to some extent, while depositing their fertilizer right where it's needed. This will also improve the color, omega3/omega6 balance, and general nutrient profile of the eggs (see, I do eat my insects). However, look out for your leafy veggies. My chickens discovered that they just LOVE brassica (cabbage, broccoli, etc.) leaves, and would leave only the leaf skeletons on the plants. Lettuce plants weren't that safe either. I haven't tried it yet, but some wire cage around the plant or bed with the favourite plants would probably help a lot.
A moveable/portable chicken coop (open-bottomed wire cage with nesting/roosting space) helps a lot in making the effects less random and more controllable:-) Simply put it over the bed where services are required for the day or few days, or leave the hatch open for completely free roaming. Requires less material (money) than a bigger coop too.
I have observed my rather tame chickens (bantam size) catching mice and frogs... seems there's still some dinosaur in them. Makes me glad they're'nt ostrich size, because then the neighbor's Doberman would not be safe either. But in general they are loveable animals to which one can get quite attached, and can make good pets for kids. The fact that mine have open outdoor space helps a lot with the smell and turning their droppings into harmless dry pellets. While it is not likely that they will come up with the Unified Theory, I am amazed in what they can learn and figure out (applicable to their environment and interest, of course).
Speaking of omega-3 essential fatty acids. Ruminants grazing the traditional way on green pasture have no way of avoiding the usual insect population and eggs in their diet. Traditional vegetarian societies (e.g. India) have before the advent of produce rinse and other ways of trying to rinse off pesticides, also ingested some insect matter with their vegetation. Omega-3 imbalance seems to be brought about in part by modern agricultural practices and feedlot feeding.
Disclaimer: I'm not a healthcare professional, but I sometimes do play one on the internet... (In fact, I do like to read a lot about keeping myself healthy, both from conventional sources and alternatives ones.)
What I believe (in other words, YMMV) about cancer follows along the following lines: All people have some cancer cells inside their bodies, floating around like "seeds". Mostly, people's immune systems are able to cope with these cells and dispose of them before they can develop. However, due to a variety of factors (genetics, diet, environmental pollution, etc.) immune systems in some people are not able to cope at some stage and the cells develop into a tumor.
It's a matter of statistics. Not all people following a modern western diet and lifestyle will develop cancer, as not all prehistoric people on a paleo diet would be cancer-free. But what is seen is that there is a substantial increase in cancer developing on certain aspects of modern "factory" diet and lifestyle.
So, no, cancer is not "man made", but modern greater susceptibility to it may well be "man caused".
One would assume that prehistoric people would be selected (micro-evolution) in such a way that they would perform best with their given environment and diet. (If one is a creationist, for the sake of the argument one can assume that people where created to function the best on specific types of food, also created for the purpose.) However, modern times have brought about great population movements, rapid urbanisation, and other environmental changes through industry, mining, chemistry etc. We have also seen a rapid change in diets and foodstuffs. The assumption is that innovation can be roughly quantified along exponential growth curves. I wonder if at a certain stage we have, or are bound to, pass the threshold where natural selection can not keep up with the pace of innovation for any given tech. In the mean time, people getting sick and dying from modern "lifestyle diseases" (or not getting out of the basements and producing offfspring) is simply natural selection for the newly changed environment that people find themselves in in their lifetimes. (Or the inevitable pre-programmed consequences of leaving God's ordained will as evident from natural creation.)
I, for one, am of the opinion that I should use the larger amount of control I have over resources and time, as brought about by modern tech (and a fairly good-paying job in IT), to back-modify my own environment to mitigate the effects of some of the rapid changes. In practice this involves acquiring a small parcel of land where I can raise food crops for my own use, use modern tech, e.g. irrigation timers and power tools, to remove a lot of the time consuming and back-breaking labor out of it (while still retaining some manual labour as my body does need, and thrives on, some amount of exertion), use modern information sources (Internet) to benefit this endeavour as well as to obtain seeds and other materials that would otherwise not be obtainable in my immediate vicinity.
Or they could just link to http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/, which does not ONLY display GMT, but times for other time zones/daylight savings schemes as well, along with some other country-specific information. It syncs every 15 seconds or so with their time server, and counts down the seconds using JavaScript (it looks like), which is accurate enough for me to set my watch to every now and then, it required.
... Or one could just hang around inside until the next user entered, then quickly get a foot in the door. Especially considering the scarcity of paper towels and/or receptacles, and the abundance of coffee:-)
Reminds me that the women's door was completely removed, ostensibly for repairs.
... complaints about dry skin,.... the tedium of hand washing
Reminds me of a workplace I worked at last year. Large open-plan office containing a lot of marketing types (seems they select for good-looking women) and some IT contractors like I was. The bathroom had this poster over the basin about how to properly wash your hands (photos with about a dozen steps to follow). (Obviously supplied for free by the soap supplier, but quite incongruous in a non-med environment.)
However, once you where finished washing, you had to pull open the bathroom door by a fairly greasy/grimy handle.... Made me glad to be able to knee the door open when entering, just before I was about to handle my privates.
People became more productive due to technology. Now you are able to produce enough for you and your family in 40 hours / week. Before this technology advancement, you needed to work 60-80 hours / week in order to produce enough.
Not so sure about this. A couple of decades ago, even when I grew up, it was not uncommon for a family to have 1 breadwinner (husband), while the wife was a housewife (not that that home front support does not involve labour, or is unimportant to the breadwinner's efforts). Nowadays most families have 2 working parents, and fewer children to feed and clothe to boot.
On one of my recent Wikipedia sorties (=going there to look something up, getting lost in all the interesting-looking liked articles) I read again about Gregor Mendel's experiments with peas (and I'm no authority on genetics....). But it was interesting to me to realize that the prevalent thought in his day was that heritable traits were a sort of continuous mix of parent traits (similar to an analog process) while he demonstrated that heritable traits were governed by discrete factors (=genes) (similar to, no, essentially a binary process).
Of course, where there are multiple genes governing the expression of a single trait, even 3 or 4, humans would probably not instinctively recognize discrete states and will be much more likely to see it as an analog process.
Not saying either digital or analog AI would be better, or is more accurately mimics the human brain. Just an observation.
On the other hand, I always thought the main reason for AI research is exactly to obtain techniques that are good at things that our organic brains are NOT as good (quick/accurate) at.
I would probably fit, started working as a programmer 17 years ago. I've always LOVED building stuff, so I never moved up the ladder.
A workplace makes a huge difference to learning new tech. One will be able to learn what one uses the easiest, else it just stays theoretical knowledge that gets rusty quite quickly. If a company insists on using an application server two versions back from current ("its tested, it works, we know its quirks") - well, learning what makes some other AS great will not be very easy in your private capacity as opposed to an enterprise environment.
When I started as a newbie, a lot of emphasis was placed on the "peripheral" stuff (version control, formal testing, modelling, design, documentation, code reviews, project management, etc. etc.) In other words, Software Engineering as opposed to just Coding. As years have progressed (and I have moved between jobs) it seems that the younger folks see the value of these activities less and less, as opposed to what is described in the post. Companies are looking to hire the Crack Cowboy Coders, to pull them through. Of course newfangled buzzwords are bandied about ("Agile" was the last one I paid attention to) but even those don't get done (and I don't even think it's a bad idea - but of course ideas are worth nothing if they don't get implemented).
All of this leaves me with a sense of dread and despair, since I have recently gone through a spate of interviews and eventually change jobs, but NONE of the companies I interviewed seemed to ask the right questions - all where just on about the "right" mix of new-version tech buzzwords. "You know JBoss? No, sorry, we want someone that knows Weblogic..."
At my current employer, a fairly biggish consultancy, I've been on three different projects in 6 months. Every one uses a different database, a different application server, a different version control system, a different app framework, different coding conventions, different customizations to the Eclipse IDE, no discernible SDLC, let alone any of the other Software Engineering concepts mentioned above. I'm one of the few more senior people. I really don't know what they teach people at college these days. It doesn't look as if they will learn it while working...
In the end, a company should be more than just a loose collection of (whipper snapper) coders. It should/could be an ORGANISATION that ORGANISES their resources along the lines of personal strengths and project needs, and can use economies of scale to make the work more efficient than what individuals could do.
On the positive side, they provide free snacks. And financial and time support for courses/learning.
I agree with the EFF's stance in the last sentence of the summary, because by the time it is "today" in the US, the day is pretty much over in the rest of the world (depending on). Especially on a Friday....
But if one wants to have a specific day to agitate for something, maybe give some advance warning? Also, a better though-out plan than "spread the word and make yourself heard" might also be useful.
It's not always the quantity of jostling, but the quality. If you had to handle bags of apples all day long, and you didn't pay for them, you'd probably also pack them similar to how you would do with bricks. Me, on the other hand, parts with some good money and have (say) one bag for a whole week, so I handle it like a baby.
No, I routinely observe grocery store personae actually not using reasonable care, but I'm glad for you it's different for you. Eggs in egg carton need quite a lot less care than fairly ripe tomatoes packed in a "resource-saving" (read: money-saving) plastic bag do, for instance.
Thanks for the reminder, not that I have eaten peas (fresh or frozen) in recent memory, but the pea plants in my garden are flowering nicely at the moment.
My groceries consist mostly of perishable goods (haven't bought cans or frozen foods in recent memory, rather low on boxes, packets or jugs). One has to wonder: how much do damaged fruit that rot before they can be eaten, contribute to carbon emissions (ok, ok, methane)? I often stop by the shop on my way from work to home, so not much extra fuel used there. But I select my produce for maximum freshness (so they last as long as possible). The more they are handled (unloading, packing, bagging,...) the more the quality is impacted, because it seems where I live most laborers doing these low-wage, low-training chores just don't care. I somehow doubt that the delivery truck will take the same extra care to get me the freshest stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
Will this cause my home-printed Liberator to BSOD?
No need to forgive much longer: http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/lambdaexpressions.html
Because as soon as someone is called a hater, there is no recourse to any rational discussion or compromise on an issue.
Yes, I know, I know - it has been done already. So why isn't it in the latest and greatest?
But to write a bestseller, knowing at least one language is a prerequisite.
I do agree that an in-depth knowledge of a language(s) is not negotiable for writing good software. That was not the main point though.
I had to take a whole semester back at uni in "Introduction to OOP". That lecture was held by the CS department and i spent 4 months each tuesday at 7am in a lecture hall where someone waved around pictures of cars and planes and the respective stencils of cars and planes - their idea of explaining the concept without using a specific programming language.
Needless to say, i didn't get it.
A year later, a mechanical engineering professor summed up that whole semester in 5 seconds: "Classes are little more than structs with code inside".
Perhaps that original lecturer was not a very good teacher. OR, maybe it's true that some people are just not cut out to understand CS topics. OOP is in fact "slightly" more than just structs with code inside them. Unfortunately I have seen a lot of code in practice by people who "only" learned a language, or moved to IT from some of the engineering disciplines where some coding was done along the way, that use classes only as "structs with code".
(I take issue with teaching kids in the west about programming, though: it sets up a false hope that they'll someday get jobs in that field. and they won't. it will mostly go to india and china. teaching kids that they can earn a living in the thinking arts is false hope.)
At a stage I worked at a certain unnamed company as a contractor. The project manager (from the company itself) that I worked under once remarked in frustration to me: "You know what the problem is with this company? Too few chiefs and too many Indians!" Of course, he was of Indian extraction himself, so I suppose he could afford the criticism.
Which sort of illustrates my point: while it is nice to have a workforce of cheap coders on projects, you DO need more to see the bigger picture. This goes from managing such efforts, all the way down to people that understand how to read (and write) specifications and other documentation (in which I include code comments) - preferably containing all the required information but nothing more -, people who can reason about program correctness, people who understand the theory of testing and can apply it (even if it is just for writing unit tests for their own code), etc. etc. So currently I'm working at this rather large software company where they decided to occasionally have a fun code competition for the devs - turns out not even the guy drawing up the problems realizes that a certain data type is limited in size and his algorithm will generate wraparound errors rather soon. :-)
When are people going to realize "coding" != "computer science"? (or <>, or ! .equals(), or ne, etc. depending on your flavor). Nothing against Java devs, but IT needs a little more than programmers in language X. There are millions speaking English, Spanish, etc., but not that many of them churn out bestsellers, or even mundane but usable prose. You're certainly not going to make good or even adequate writers by (only) teaching a language. You're not going to improve the IT industry by training a million more monkeys to (only) tap away at a million more keyboards.
But perhaps Oracle does like to see an increase in their user base.
[OK, rant over]
It's the edge of the simulation that has not been rendered properly yet. Cf. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Floor.
Today's NY Times advocated that guns can be used in drive-by shootings, so guns should be banned.
Yes, clearly they should have advocated that cars should be banned, as the actual cause of the problem is the vehicles that are used to drive-by.
I see this effect of electrons arriving before they departed as a bonus. Imagine a beowulf cluster of slashdot servers built on such tech.... Then they can post the dupe before the original fine article!
sorry, posting to undo a mod glitch
also if you have a yard, you could parcel off a small bit of it for a chicken coop for not too much money and grow your own eggs / chickens
Giving the chickens a free run of the vegetable garden will help in the control of slugs, crickets, and other insects that like to munch on your food, their scratching will control weeds to some extent, while depositing their fertilizer right where it's needed. This will also improve the color, omega3/omega6 balance, and general nutrient profile of the eggs (see, I do eat my insects). However, look out for your leafy veggies. My chickens discovered that they just LOVE brassica (cabbage, broccoli, etc.) leaves, and would leave only the leaf skeletons on the plants. Lettuce plants weren't that safe either. I haven't tried it yet, but some wire cage around the plant or bed with the favourite plants would probably help a lot.
A moveable/portable chicken coop (open-bottomed wire cage with nesting/roosting space) helps a lot in making the effects less random and more controllable :-) Simply put it over the bed where services are required for the day or few days, or leave the hatch open for completely free roaming. Requires less material (money) than a bigger coop too.
I have observed my rather tame chickens (bantam size) catching mice and frogs... seems there's still some dinosaur in them. Makes me glad they're'nt ostrich size, because then the neighbor's Doberman would not be safe either. But in general they are loveable animals to which one can get quite attached, and can make good pets for kids. The fact that mine have open outdoor space helps a lot with the smell and turning their droppings into harmless dry pellets. While it is not likely that they will come up with the Unified Theory, I am amazed in what they can learn and figure out (applicable to their environment and interest, of course).
Speaking of omega-3 essential fatty acids. Ruminants grazing the traditional way on green pasture have no way of avoiding the usual insect population and eggs in their diet. Traditional vegetarian societies (e.g. India) have before the advent of produce rinse and other ways of trying to rinse off pesticides, also ingested some insect matter with their vegetation. Omega-3 imbalance seems to be brought about in part by modern agricultural practices and feedlot feeding.
Seems like cancer is not so "man made" after all
Disclaimer: I'm not a healthcare professional, but I sometimes do play one on the internet... (In fact, I do like to read a lot about keeping myself healthy, both from conventional sources and alternatives ones.)
What I believe (in other words, YMMV) about cancer follows along the following lines: All people have some cancer cells inside their bodies, floating around like "seeds". Mostly, people's immune systems are able to cope with these cells and dispose of them before they can develop. However, due to a variety of factors (genetics, diet, environmental pollution, etc.) immune systems in some people are not able to cope at some stage and the cells develop into a tumor.
It's a matter of statistics. Not all people following a modern western diet and lifestyle will develop cancer, as not all prehistoric people on a paleo diet would be cancer-free. But what is seen is that there is a substantial increase in cancer developing on certain aspects of modern "factory" diet and lifestyle.
So, no, cancer is not "man made", but modern greater susceptibility to it may well be "man caused".
One would assume that prehistoric people would be selected (micro-evolution) in such a way that they would perform best with their given environment and diet. (If one is a creationist, for the sake of the argument one can assume that people where created to function the best on specific types of food, also created for the purpose.) However, modern times have brought about great population movements, rapid urbanisation, and other environmental changes through industry, mining, chemistry etc. We have also seen a rapid change in diets and foodstuffs. The assumption is that innovation can be roughly quantified along exponential growth curves. I wonder if at a certain stage we have, or are bound to, pass the threshold where natural selection can not keep up with the pace of innovation for any given tech. In the mean time, people getting sick and dying from modern "lifestyle diseases" (or not getting out of the basements and producing offfspring) is simply natural selection for the newly changed environment that people find themselves in in their lifetimes. (Or the inevitable pre-programmed consequences of leaving God's ordained will as evident from natural creation.)
I, for one, am of the opinion that I should use the larger amount of control I have over resources and time, as brought about by modern tech (and a fairly good-paying job in IT), to back-modify my own environment to mitigate the effects of some of the rapid changes. In practice this involves acquiring a small parcel of land where I can raise food crops for my own use, use modern tech, e.g. irrigation timers and power tools, to remove a lot of the time consuming and back-breaking labor out of it (while still retaining some manual labour as my body does need, and thrives on, some amount of exertion), use modern information sources (Internet) to benefit this endeavour as well as to obtain seeds and other materials that would otherwise not be obtainable in my immediate vicinity.
Or they could just link to http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/, which does not ONLY display GMT, but times for other time zones/daylight savings schemes as well, along with some other country-specific information. It syncs every 15 seconds or so with their time server, and counts down the seconds using JavaScript (it looks like), which is accurate enough for me to set my watch to every now and then, it required.
MY new Fugly DevMeth (still being developed) is gonna be the PLATINUM bullet!
People have kept crops safe for thousands of years by planting edible wheat and destroying the stuff that tasted bad or made people sick.
The people that plant this stuff do not seem to be the same people that eat it these days....
A tad OCD I'll admit
... Or one could just hang around inside until the next user entered, then quickly get a foot in the door. Especially considering the scarcity of paper towels and/or receptacles, and the abundance of coffee :-)
Reminds me that the women's door was completely removed, ostensibly for repairs.
... complaints about dry skin, .... the tedium of hand washing
Reminds me of a workplace I worked at last year. Large open-plan office containing a lot of marketing types (seems they select for good-looking women) and some IT contractors like I was. The bathroom had this poster over the basin about how to properly wash your hands (photos with about a dozen steps to follow). (Obviously supplied for free by the soap supplier, but quite incongruous in a non-med environment.)
However, once you where finished washing, you had to pull open the bathroom door by a fairly greasy/grimy handle.... Made me glad to be able to knee the door open when entering, just before I was about to handle my privates.
People became more productive due to technology. Now you are able to produce enough for you and your family in 40 hours / week. Before this technology advancement, you needed to work 60-80 hours / week in order to produce enough.
Not so sure about this. A couple of decades ago, even when I grew up, it was not uncommon for a family to have 1 breadwinner (husband), while the wife was a housewife (not that that home front support does not involve labour, or is unimportant to the breadwinner's efforts). Nowadays most families have 2 working parents, and fewer children to feed and clothe to boot.
On one of my recent Wikipedia sorties (=going there to look something up, getting lost in all the interesting-looking liked articles) I read again about Gregor Mendel's experiments with peas (and I'm no authority on genetics....). But it was interesting to me to realize that the prevalent thought in his day was that heritable traits were a sort of continuous mix of parent traits (similar to an analog process) while he demonstrated that heritable traits were governed by discrete factors (=genes) (similar to, no, essentially a binary process).
Of course, where there are multiple genes governing the expression of a single trait, even 3 or 4, humans would probably not instinctively recognize discrete states and will be much more likely to see it as an analog process.
Not saying either digital or analog AI would be better, or is more accurately mimics the human brain. Just an observation.
On the other hand, I always thought the main reason for AI research is exactly to obtain techniques that are good at things that our organic brains are NOT as good (quick/accurate) at.
I would probably fit, started working as a programmer 17 years ago. I've always LOVED building stuff, so I never moved up the ladder.
A workplace makes a huge difference to learning new tech. One will be able to learn what one uses the easiest, else it just stays theoretical knowledge that gets rusty quite quickly. If a company insists on using an application server two versions back from current ("its tested, it works, we know its quirks") - well, learning what makes some other AS great will not be very easy in your private capacity as opposed to an enterprise environment.
When I started as a newbie, a lot of emphasis was placed on the "peripheral" stuff (version control, formal testing, modelling, design, documentation, code reviews, project management, etc. etc.) In other words, Software Engineering as opposed to just Coding. As years have progressed (and I have moved between jobs) it seems that the younger folks see the value of these activities less and less, as opposed to what is described in the post. Companies are looking to hire the Crack Cowboy Coders, to pull them through. Of course newfangled buzzwords are bandied about ("Agile" was the last one I paid attention to) but even those don't get done (and I don't even think it's a bad idea - but of course ideas are worth nothing if they don't get implemented).
All of this leaves me with a sense of dread and despair, since I have recently gone through a spate of interviews and eventually change jobs, but NONE of the companies I interviewed seemed to ask the right questions - all where just on about the "right" mix of new-version tech buzzwords. "You know JBoss? No, sorry, we want someone that knows Weblogic..."
At my current employer, a fairly biggish consultancy, I've been on three different projects in 6 months. Every one uses a different database, a different application server, a different version control system, a different app framework, different coding conventions, different customizations to the Eclipse IDE, no discernible SDLC, let alone any of the other Software Engineering concepts mentioned above. I'm one of the few more senior people. I really don't know what they teach people at college these days. It doesn't look as if they will learn it while working...
In the end, a company should be more than just a loose collection of (whipper snapper) coders. It should/could be an ORGANISATION that ORGANISES their resources along the lines of personal strengths and project needs, and can use economies of scale to make the work more efficient than what individuals could do.
On the positive side, they provide free snacks. And financial and time support for courses/learning.
But if one wants to have a specific day to agitate for something, maybe give some advance warning? Also, a better though-out plan than "spread the word and make yourself heard" might also be useful.
No, I routinely observe grocery store personae actually not using reasonable care, but I'm glad for you it's different for you. Eggs in egg carton need quite a lot less care than fairly ripe tomatoes packed in a "resource-saving" (read: money-saving) plastic bag do, for instance.
Thanks for the reminder, not that I have eaten peas (fresh or frozen) in recent memory, but the pea plants in my garden are flowering nicely at the moment.
My groceries consist mostly of perishable goods (haven't bought cans or frozen foods in recent memory, rather low on boxes, packets or jugs). One has to wonder: how much do damaged fruit that rot before they can be eaten, contribute to carbon emissions (ok, ok, methane)? I often stop by the shop on my way from work to home, so not much extra fuel used there. But I select my produce for maximum freshness (so they last as long as possible). The more they are handled (unloading, packing, bagging, ...) the more the quality is impacted, because it seems where I live most laborers doing these low-wage, low-training chores just don't care. I somehow doubt that the delivery truck will take the same extra care to get me the freshest stuff.