Fad or relevant?

  • markstos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    For all the comments that say “the real problem is…”: this is crisis and working on all emission sources contributes to a solution not just the biggest emitters.

    Everything we online has an impact in the real world and there’s some value in reminding people that. And yes, some sites could be causing a lot emissions than others.

    Some are powered by solar, others by coal.

    ARM chips are more energy efficient than x86 and so on.

    • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      You can invent the worlds most energy efficient CPU, put it on every server rack in the world, and all your progress will be undone by that one billionaire who decides they want international taco bell at 3 AM.

      • sudneo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        On the other hand, you can approach the dramatic cut of emissions from both angles, as in “you are not legally able to do what you want as long as you can pay for it, and you have the responsibility in minimizing emissions”.

        Internet does generate a lot of emissions. Streaming quality, website size. Whatever we do to reduce the energy demand is a good idea, as long as we don’t think of it as " The Solution", but as part of a wide range of actions aimed at slashing energy consumption.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      We can have a real impact by focusing hard enough on 0.00001% of the problem!

      Oh wait, no, we can’t.