I wrote an article about the need for low-carbon and and the path towards zero-carbon computing.

In short, we need to dramatically limit the growth in emissions from computing, or by 2040 emissions from computing alone will be close to half the emissions level acceptable to keep global warming below 2°C.

And it is possible to do this.

wimvanderbauwhede.github.io/ar

@wim_v12e @cstanhope Holy fuck this is grim.

"by 2040 the energy required for computing will exceed the estimated world's energy production."

And that's just the energy after you buy the device, which is swamped by the cost of production.

I know how to make phones last longer: force Google and Apple to stop writing so much code! More software updates → greater power consumption → phones that don't last even the contracted 2 years.

@akkartik just less webshit would go a long way. for 95% of applications a classic form submission would be fine, compared to 20M JS bullshit and fullhd video backgrounds to.. fill in a form. we need to finally go back to native applications, not everything as web application. for that to happen we'd need to fix software development _and_ the debacle which NAT is though. that way you could host your stuff reliably at home.. @wim_v12e

@bonifartius @akkartik In terms of the energy cost of networking, video is currently the main component. But with augmented reality this could become a lot worse because it requires sending voxels instead of pixels, so the data would grow enormously in size.

@wim_v12e Suddenly my choice of a single 1024x768 screen resolution in my computer seems like it may be on the right side of history.

github.com/akkartik/mu

Follow

@akkartik In the abstract, more resource constrained devices would be ideal. But I am always reminded of Asimov's novel "The Gods Themselves". Basically, once people are used to a certain level of comfort, they don't want to sacrifice for anything: "they want it enough to refuse to believe they can't have it."
However, I believe maintaining the current level for longer would be more easily acceptable.

· · Web · 1 · 4 · 1
@wim_v12e @akkartik It might also be possible to change people's ideas about "levels of comfort" just like it's possible to change people's ideas about "what is trendy" etc. Make the big look ugly.

I personally feel anxiety about too big screens and too high resolutions. Moderate and low resolutions feel more homely, tangible and down-to-earth.

@viznut
I don't understand why so many people want these huge TVs in their homes. It's scary. Though I assume you refer to screens for computing.

I think it is definitely worth trying to change people's attitudes towards computing. Using things for longer would actually be convenient. And "make the big look ugly" is a great idea for a campaign!
@akkartik

@wim_v12e Big TVs = software updates = more vulnerabilities. If they require an app, that's more loss of privacy. And after all that you won't get HD because you have the wrong cable. It's all so incredibly user hostile. @viznut

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Octodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!