3 ms·

> Even if you don't care about the environmental side Why wouldn’t you?

by bowsamic 4y ago

wizofaus 4y ago
Is there an IT equivalent of coal rolling?
- iasay 4y ago
  I think this entire thread is about doing that. My MacBook I’m typing this on is sitting here at 9.2W (battery full, running off mains).
- 2III7 4y ago
  Running all cores on turbo even when idle.
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Crypto mining.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- elteto 4y ago
  Yes, programming in dynamic languages like Python.
pdpi 4y ago
I thought that was a more polite than saying "even if you're a selfish asshole, there's still a reason to do it out of pure self-interest".
- junofan 4y ago
  Wow, fifty years of oil company rhetoric has really gotten to people. Individual behavior change hasn’t worked at scale, nor should anyone expect it to. I’ll continue to use as much electricity as I’d like while advocating for nuclear and renewables.
ipdashc 4y ago
I mean, on the scale of things, typical computer usage is just not that much energy, right? Compared to stuff like air conditioning and transportation. My server, which is old and probably somewhat power-hungry, uses ~125W. A house-sized AC unit is in the kilowatts range, that's 10x more (of course, the AC is only on for parts of the day). If I operate that 125W computer for a year, that's ~1,000 kWh. EVs use around 0.3 kWh/mi, so running that computer for a year is the equivalent of driving an EV 3,333 miles. (Most people drive 10,000 miles a year or more.) And if your gas gar gets 34 MPG, then it gets (via MPGe) about 1 mile per kWh. So using the 125W computer for a year is like driving a gas car 1,000 miles - and that ignores, of course, that the gas car spews pollution, while electricity can be gotten from renewables or nuclear. So it's not like the energy usage of computing doesn't matter, but it's somewhat insignificant. Like someone else said above, it costs energy to manufacture new chips and computers too, so you might be better off just staying on old ones.

> Even if you don't care about the environmental side Why wouldn’t you?

wizofaus 4y ago

Is there an IT equivalent of coal rolling?

iasay 4y ago
I think this entire thread is about doing that. My MacBook I’m typing this on is sitting here at 9.2W (battery full, running off mains).
2III7 4y ago
Running all cores on turbo even when idle.
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Crypto mining.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
elteto 4y ago
Yes, programming in dynamic languages like Python.

pdpi 4y ago

I thought that was a more polite than saying "even if you're a selfish asshole, there's still a reason to do it out of pure self-interest".

junofan 4y ago
Wow, fifty years of oil company rhetoric has really gotten to people. Individual behavior change hasn’t worked at scale, nor should anyone expect it to. I’ll continue to use as much electricity as I’d like while advocating for nuclear and renewables.

ipdashc 4y ago

I mean, on the scale of things, typical computer usage is just not that much energy, right? Compared to stuff like air conditioning and transportation. My server, which is old and probably somewhat power-hungry, uses ~125W. A house-sized AC unit is in the kilowatts range, that's 10x more (of course, the AC is only on for parts of the day). If I operate that 125W computer for a year, that's ~1,000 kWh. EVs use around 0.3 kWh/mi, so running that computer for a year is the equivalent of driving an EV 3,333 miles. (Most people drive 10,000 miles a year or more.) And if your gas gar gets 34 MPG, then it gets (via MPGe) about 1 mile per kWh. So using the 125W computer for a year is like driving a gas car 1,000 miles - and that ignores, of course, that the gas car spews pollution, while electricity can be gotten from renewables or nuclear. So it's not like the energy usage of computing doesn't matter, but it's somewhat insignificant. Like someone else said above, it costs energy to manufacture new chips and computers too, so you might be better off just staying on old ones.