3 ms·
> Less bytes sent -> less energy used -> greener planet So was their basis of choosing that low bundle budget solely around reducing carbon emissions? I’d real
by baron816 5y ago
> Less bytes sent -> less energy used -> greener planet
So was their basis of choosing that low bundle budget solely around reducing carbon emissions? I’d really like to see their math on that. I looked for a calculator that would try to estimate it, but couldn’t find one. If anyone know of one, please reply.
I imagine a lot will depend on how many users there will be for it, but how big of a difference could there be? If we’re talking 1 million users per month, what will the difference between 15kb and 150kb look like? Are we on the scale of emissions of a couple dozen cars, or pack of coffee filters?
I would expect it’s important to figure that out before spending “months” making a decision. At the very least, if you’re making a blog post about it, you should try to figure that out because right now is sound like “we spent a lot of time figuring out the smallest possible bundle size we could have because something something greenhouse gasses.”
- tengbretson 5y agoI wonder if they base hiring decisions on how long of a commute and what kind of car the would-be employee has.
- dgut 5y agoAnybody above 160 cm consumes too much energy so we only hire below that for a greener planet.
- eternityforest 5y agoThey could save a lot more Co2 by making sure the site this goes into don't have any 1MB images that nobody will look at for more than 1 second.