3 ms·
Interesting train of thought, but most of the example feel to me like overly-specific, "premature optimization". The thing is, software developers are already
by _bxg1 7y ago
Interesting train of thought, but most of the example feel to me like overly-specific, "premature optimization".
The thing is, software developers are already roughly incentivized to optimize for efficiency. And UX designers are already roughly incentivized to optimize for smooth interaction.
There are a few tragedy-of-the-commons cases; web ads being the obvious example, both in terms of bandwidth and in terms of client-side CPU usage. There's also the fact that developer time is so much more expensive than cloud hosting, which incentivizes companies to be careless with their server usage. These could possibly benefit from some kind of carbon tax, to help align incentive.
But the other thing is: the vast majority of this cost does not come down to what the author is talking about. Crypto mining is an enormous expenditure of energy for dubious purpose. I would wager it creates more carbon than the entire internet. And streaming is several orders of magnitude larger than regular web pages (though this is already strongly incentivized to be as efficient as possible). I cannot imagine that optimizing YouTube's logo even registers in comparison to its video streams.
All in all: it's a good lens through which to look at things, but most of the emissions sources are either a) already being made as efficient as possible, or b) created by parties who could not be bothered to care without an adjustment of incentives.
- kentdebruin 7y agoFair points! Thanks for the feedback. I wrote this article to let people at least consider sustainability when they make things for the internet. Before researching this I wasn’t aware that it could make an impact. I agree that stuff like steaming and crypto mining are the big polluters, but why not start small as well?
- johannesmutter 7y ago> “but why not start small as well” Starting small is fine, when potential for impact is high. Otherwise it’s pointless, especially when the primary KPI is efficiency. Unlike in construction or transportation, carbon footprint and potential efficiency gains for software are tiny. There’re are plenty reasons why iMessage and co don’t appear on the Project Drawdown list. There are much more effective leverage points that demand the attention of developers and designers. Check them out: https://drawdown.org/solutions/table-of-solutions https://drawdown.org/solutions/table-of-solutions The best thing small interventions can do, is raising awareness. But raising awareness won’t save our planet. A developer who codes for example a parametric design tool for CNC-made houses that can be disassembled after their end of life to reduce construction waste can achieve a magnitude more than the one who optimises a website to use 700KB less data or adds artificial friction to a communication tool. ––– Recommended reading on Leverage Points: http://donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Leverage_Points.pdf http://donellameadows.org/wp-content/userfiles/Leverage_Poin...