|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:18 am
 |
|
|
 |
For the sake of this thread, I will assume the answer is "yes."
First things first:
1) Do you have internet access on your smartphone?
2) Do you have large amount of data that you don't mind using? (Or access to unlimited wifi?)
3) Can you go 10 minutes without your phone?
If the answer is yes to all of these questions, I have the perfect task for you to do!
UNICEF created a project that includes giving clean water to a child for a day for every ten minutes you go without your phone.
Link: http://tap.unicefusa.org/
Just go to the website from your phone, click "start" and set your phone down. The site will count the time you go without your phone, and, as previously said, every ten minutes equals a day of clean water for a child.
Warning:
1) Your phone must stay static. Any significant movement will reset your time count. I would just put it on the table, go off and do things, and just leave it there.
2) Your phone must stay on.
3) For every ten minutes, your phone's battery will get drained by approximately 3-5% depending on your phone.
What we can do: Plug in the phone at night before going to bed, tap to let it start, and just leave your phone on overnight. It kills your phone's battery, but since phones get replaced every two years or something, why not?
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 11:49 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:34 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 2:47 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 3:52 pm
|
|
|
|
*MADLY TEXTS YOU*
*sits and glares at you*
What about when you're in class?
Or are you the type who does't pay attention? D<
It would depend on what type of battery your phone has. In many smartphones, the battery is made so that you *have* to replace it every two or three years. *glances at her old one that drains its battery after 15 songs*
While with my dad's Nokia phone, that s**t lasted ten years, and would've kept going if not for being replaced by a smartphone.
Generally though, it's bad for your phone if you constantly drain its battery and recharge it. But ten minutes a day won't kill a phone. With mine, a phone call for 20 minutes drains approximately 4% of my battery, which isn't much different from spending 10 minutes giving clean water to kids.
So, it is entirely dependent on you.
(or, you know, you can donate 5$ every month--200 days of clean water for a child~) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 4:07 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 9:19 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 10:02 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Feb 21, 2014 1:27 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Feb 22, 2014 6:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2015 12:34 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 12:24 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 2:15 pm
|
|
|
|
There are a couple problems with this scenario, one of which is assuming that the country UNICEF is helping is a first world country, where water bottles are sold cheaply. While it is true that 10$ can sustain a person for six days (assuming 500 mL bottles), water bottles create an array of different issues:
1) How do you transport water bottles to a country in need of water (ie: Uganda)? The shipping fee would quadruple the cost of water, and hence it is an inefficient way of delivering water to people who only make little money. Remember that the average family living in countries where water is scarce makes roughly 1500 USD a year.
2) Plastic harms the environment. The cost of recycling is far more expensive than dumping the bottles in landfills, and overall it does more harm to the environment than good.
3) It is wasted materials for the first world country sending these water bottles. From an economics standpoint, plastic is a good that can be used in a wide variety of products, and sending these to countries in need to end up in a landfill only wastes potential. Shipping empty bottles back is a possible solution, but on a global scale, it is an extremely wasteful process, as oil becomes scarce and transportation becomes more expensive.
Also, keep in mind that the 24 bottles can only sustain a person six days if and only if we are talking about only drinking the given water. What about cleaning, cooking, and various other uses of water that is needed? In truth, the 24 bottles can only sustain a person only a couple days, and given the cost, it's extremely inefficient.
Hypothetically speaking, if you were to refuse to help people in need for the sake of being horrible, then from a morality standpoint you are probably either selfish or not a productive member of the society.
It is true, however, that nobody is required to donate their time and resources to help others. For instance, suppose I have a full box of pizza, and I walk past a hungry, homeless man. If I share my food with him, then it is from the kindness of my heart. If I don't share my food, then it is the societal norm, because it is assumed that I worked for my food, and sharing my food would be putting myself at a disadvantage by distributing my wealth to strangers I will probably never meet again.
Now let's step back and pretend I have unlimited resources. If I have unlimited pizza, would I be required to share with anyone? No. But from the society's point of view, it would be selfish of me, because as people are suffering from hunger I am at home surrounded by infinite goods, of which when kept are no use to me. This brings up the phrase, "If you can, you should," and by using "should" it is implied that it is expected of you to help, but you are not required to help.
Let's take a step back even further and look at why I added "for the sake of being horrible" into that sentence. All in all, we've only looked at simply not sharing any resources. What if, for instance, I have infinite wealth and a person is suffering in front of me, and I think, "It serves them right, and they should suffer more,"? In this case, it would be universally agreed upon that I am not a kind person, because nobody deserves pain: It is no longer a question of egocentrism, but rather, that of depravity.
i wrote a lot (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:･ﾟ✧
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
