I'm a professional CRT recycler with experience with the companies in the article. The leaded silicate in CRT glass can actually be valuable as a fluxing agent. It's basically the same as anglesite, the leaded quartz that's mined worldwide. But because of e-waste alarmism (e.g. original article said they were full of "toxic gases", still says the CRTs "explode"), the primary copper and lead smelting industries stopped accepting the material. I personally managed several hundred tons of cullet from one on the companies in the article, but the smelter didn't like the regulators and environmentalists poking around, or the red tape. So they went back to mining lead and silica from the ground. Here's an article I wrote about the "no good deed goes unpunished" aspects of CRT glass recycling. resource-recycling.com/pdfs/Ingenthron0316e.pdf Previously I wrote one - also published in Motherboard - about how Asian refurbishers stopped buying CRTs from America for the same reason (they were being cast as "primitive wire burners). motherboard.vice.com/2011/3/26/e-waste-recycling-exports-are-good
A good rule of thumb is that the worst forms of recycling are better for the environment than the best forms of hard rock metal mining. But "waste" policy says the opposite, waste is a "liability" for the consuming industry, mined material is subsidized.
The authenticators are to be paid by the Sellers, not by ebay or the buyers. It's offering the service to someone who already owns the piece and wants to sell it, and presumably is willing to take the risk that what they are selling isn't faked, in order to give buyers more confidence. This "certification model" paid for by the businesses in the hopes that enough will adapt it and it will become mandatory "professional licensing". Ebay is already in that business, via "Powerseller" status.
It appears too general. If I pay to ask ebay to "certify" that a photo I took of a duck was really taken by me, does ebay turn down the money, or admit that they have no expert qualified to determine it was my duck photo.
The story I had always heard from friends in Taipei's Tech Sector was that Apple had long subcontracted the iPod production to Taiwan (Hon Hoi Precision Tech Group, owned by Terry Gou, aka Foxconn) and that the display geeks in Taiwan - who had been trying to improve touch screens for ATM machines moving from CRT to LCD - introduced it in the model. According to my pals (now retired) Apple realized how important the multi device implications could be and hired an insider from the Taiwan shop to move to a Vancouver subcontractor.
The touch screen technology, according to Taipei geeks, was originally German origin, but the German company had never succeeded in finding a profitable use for it, and they had bought it in a bankruptcy and tried applying it to ATM displays. This article doesn't prove this story, but it does appear to fit the iPod demo story. Maybe someone at
Things equal to nothing else are equal to each other.