5 ms·

This is a cool, geeky project and I'm not trying to bust on it or be snarky, but I have to wonder how many continuos watts of power draw it would add to the wo

• alexhornbake 8y ago
  It’s a static site, so perhaps S3 (or any static cloud storage origin) and any CDN are a better comparison. What is the total power consumption of 1/nth of a large pool of cloud resources compared to the power draw of the router they are using in the office that is powered by the grid? Regardless, I must say I love the “offline is ok”, “slow computing” (ala slow food), “get off my lawn”, “sustainable beats schfnacy” attitude. Nice one!
• tyingq 8y ago
  At some level of popularity, it might use less power on a CDN, since you would avoid a lot of routers and links. The math on power savings for Netflix local ISP cached content might be interesting, even though that's not really the point.
• oceanplexian 8y ago
  I think it's kind of pointless. Humanity uses more kWh -equivalent of energy in 1 seconds of an airline flight than everyone who ever has, or ever will use viewing this website. Shit, just takeoff is something like an equivalent 90 MW or so worth of electricity: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/19569/how-many-kilowatts-to-get-an-electric-747-8-airborne https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/19569/how-many-... I think society would be better served by engineers learning and working on new technologies to extract and use energy, instead of pushing bits around on a website. Why not get a degree in Nuclear Engineering, or Oil and Gas Engineering? It would certainly benefit society more than this.