3 ms·
About your first §: Your way of thinking is worrying to me. Global warming is no joke. About your second §: your example makes absolutely no sense, and additio
by p4bl0 10y ago
About your first §: Your way of thinking is worrying to me. Global warming is no joke.
About your second §: your example makes absolutely no sense, and additionally it's not at all an "all other thing being equal" case. But if I had to attempt to answer you anyway, I'd say that in that case the fact that the better environmental impact of the JS-driven version is an argument that it has for it, and at least lessen the difference in the overall evaluations of the two options.
- philh 10y agoI'm not treating global warming as a joke. I'm treating the environmental impact of javascript-driven webpages as not worth taking seriously. If you want to take it seriously, I recommend quantifying the impact as a first step. If your calculations show it's worth taking seriously, I'll happily change my mind. "lessen the difference in the overall evaluations of the two options" is not enough. "This is a serious factor that I care about and you should care about it too, but if it was completely reversed, that wouldn't actually change the outcome": I'm not buying it.