3 ms·
Breathing also produces greenhouse gasses. :( Considering only the costs without the benefits is not a workable approach to moral analysis. What I think you co
by asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
Breathing also produces greenhouse gasses. :( Considering only the costs without the benefits is not a workable approach to moral analysis.
What I think you could say is that writing inefficient code when it would be exactly as easy to write efficient code is immoral, assuming you derive no other benefit from the code being inefficient, and assuming you believe that global warming is likely to increase net suffering, and assuming your moral system values net suffering. But even then it's very marginal unless your code is being run on hecka computers.
- blackflame7000 6y agoI agree with you except for one thing: slow programs do cause suffering
- lhorie 6y ago> Breathing also produces greenhouse gasses. :( Considering only the costs without the benefits is not a workable approach to moral analysis But then one needs to consider whether being alive is indeed a net positive (as opposed to just selfish self preservation). Then the question becomes much deeper in terms not only of whether writing code is efficient, but also a question of life choices in general, with regards to the utility the individual brings to the world as well as whether said utility advances moral goals (as opposed to e.g. growing a human economy in some unsustainable way). Going down the rabbit hole really illustrates the hypocrisy of this line of reasoning: what of the immorality of some small task when one can be judgmental of virtually everything in the same way to such an extent that civilized society as a whole might be considered immoral if put under the same level of scrutiny.