Bloody hell, I never thought that would actually go through .-.

Apparently petitions do work.

It's rare, but it's always great when they're actually successful.

So we've reached the point that making toys about power generation is immoral but making toys about the military is not? frack this gay earth.

Er...no. That's not what this is about. It's about LEGO financially supporting and being partnered with Shell, and having them break that contract because of Shell's practices. It's not about the toys themselves being immoral. That's just silly.

Quote from: Nuka on October 12, 2014, 01:06:36 PM

Quote from: Trojanlord on October 12, 2014, 06:06:18 AM

So we've reached the point that making toys about power generation is immoral but making toys about the military is not? frack this gay earth.

Er...no. That's not what this is about. It's about LEGO financially supporting and being partnered with Shell, and having them break that contract because of Shell's practices. It's not about the toys themselves being immoral. That's just silly.

The UK military got in bed with toy company and there was no protests.

So do something then if you don't approve? The way you're complaining is really childish. Plus this was in the US, not the UK.

Wow, that was beautifully made. Why did Lego even have a partnership with Shell? Kids really want a gas station Lego set or oil drilling Lego set?

Business that have very little relation to each other partner all the time. It's common practice.

I'm not seeing the success about all this.

Shell won't notice a hit on sales, seeing as LEGO still needs the by-product of oil to make Legos, plastic. If not Shell, it'll be someone else like BP, and we all know how different they are from Shell with their record of environmental disasters...

And I'm really struggling to see how a partnership and products could brainwash children for the future generation buying cars and fuel. Seeing as oil and petrol prices are constantly rising,over the next 20 years of price rises means brand loyalty for customers will be out the window (if not already, with fuel already over a £1 a litre for some time), and it'll be about going to the gas station with the cheapest prices, or even alternative transport.

I highly doubt they are going to market gas stations and oil drilling to children, so this partnership was all about money.

LEGO has an entire line of "City" sets.  A gas station fits right in there.  Shell also used to sponsor Ferrari's F1 team, and there were a few sets that had the Shell logo as part of the car liveries.

Of course, they can just make the gas station the generic made-up LEGO brand of gasoline.

Quote from: Flee on October 12, 2014, 05:35:27 AM

Those ridiculous laws are what's keeping us from ruining our planet and a possible Tsjernobyl 2.0. Nuclear energy is definitely promising, but it needs to be regulated well. Not saying we're at that point yet, but our current situation is better than allowing people and governments to take extreme risks with nuclear material.

Absolute nonsense. Nuclear power would be FAR more safe if we weren't using reactors from decades ago. If the government wasn't holding progress back we'd have plenty of energy and plants that never failed. Not to mention we're close to fusion energy. Even the waste can be recycled and rendered harmless with plasma.

Fucking fusion has always been a technology that's 20 years away. I don't think we'll see it implemented until 2050.

Quote from: Septy on October 12, 2014, 06:25:47 PM

Quote from: Camnator on October 12, 2014, 05:41:52 AM

Quote from: Flee on October 12, 2014, 05:35:27 AM

Those ridiculous laws are what's keeping us from ruining our planet and a possible Tsjernobyl 2.0. Nuclear energy is definitely promising, but it needs to be regulated well. Not saying we're at that point yet, but our current situation is better than allowing people and governments to take extreme risks with nuclear material.

Absolute nonsense. Nuclear power would be FAR more safe if we weren't using reactors from decades ago. If the government wasn't holding progress back we'd have plenty of energy and plants that never failed. Not to mention we're close to fusion energy. Even the waste can be recycled and rendered harmless with plasma.

Fucking fusion has always been a technology that's 20 years away. I don't think we'll see it implemented until 2050.

Fission is viable right now, and has been for over 50 years.There are already two functional fusion reactors in existence.

Yes and they don't output more energy than we out into them so right now they're practically useless. Call me when they reach ignition and become self sustaining.

Quote from: Septy on October 12, 2014, 06:34:07 PM

Quote from: E̲n̲g̲a̲g̲e̲d̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y̲ on October 12, 2014, 06:32:31 PM

Quote from: Septy on October 12, 2014, 06:25:47 PM

Quote from: Camnator on October 12, 2014, 05:41:52 AM

Quote from: Flee on October 12, 2014, 05:35:27 AM

Those ridiculous laws are what's keeping us from ruining our planet and a possible Tsjernobyl 2.0. Nuclear energy is definitely promising, but it needs to be regulated well. Not saying we're at that point yet, but our current situation is better than allowing people and governments to take extreme risks with nuclear material.

Absolute nonsense. Nuclear power would be FAR more safe if we weren't using reactors from decades ago. If the government wasn't holding progress back we'd have plenty of energy and plants that never failed. Not to mention we're close to fusion energy. Even the waste can be recycled and rendered harmless with plasma.

Fucking fusion has always been a technology that's 20 years away. I don't think we'll see it implemented until 2050.

Fission is viable right now, and has been for over 50 years.There are already two functional fusion reactors in existence.

Yes and they don't output more energy than we out into them so right now they're practically useless. Call me when they reach ignition and become self sustaining.

This is such a narrow-minded view of things. It's very typical of today's society that's so interested in exciting headlines but not in the actual process of science. Princeton has a functioning fusion reactor that is near break-even reactions. If that doesn't excite the hell out of you, you don't really care about the subject. It's so extremely wasteful to just disregard progress like this. Not to mention that this is just fusion — we could, right now, fulfill the entire world's electrical needs with fission. Fission is relatively simple, clean, and efficient.

Fission creates ungodly amounts of nuclear waste which we have to find places to store.

You don't know if I'm excited about it or not. Is it important that the gap is narrowing between the energy input and output? Yes. But until then the reactors are useless besides for research purposes.