3 ms·
Or the fourth option, an environmental disaster all around
by AlecSchueler 9mo ago
Or the fourth option, an environmental disaster all around
- dubbie99 9mo agoThe materials that go into a chip are nothing. The process of making the chip is roughly the same no matter the power of it. So having one chip that can satisfy a large range of customers needs is so much better than wasting development time making a custom just good enough chip for each.
- AlecSchueler 9mo ago> The materials that go into a chip are nothing. They really aren't. Every material that goes into every chip needs to be sourced from various mines around the world, shipped to factories to be assembled, then the end goods need to be shipped again around the world to be sold or directly dumped. High power, low power, it all has negative environmental impact.
- direwolf20 9mo agoWhich materials are they and how would you suggest doing it with fewer materials?
- stackghost 9mo agoIn theory, graphene based semiconductors would eliminate a lot of need for shipping and mining.
- hansvm 9mo agoMaybe. They have the potential for faster semiconductors, but only after adequate modifications. Graphene isn't a semiconductor, and it isn't obvious that we'll find a way to fix that without (or even with) rare resources.
- serf 9mo agoultra pure water production itself is responsible for untold amounts of hydroflouric acid and ammonia , and most etching processes have an F-Gas involved, and most plants that do this work have tremendously high energy (power) costs due to stability needs/hvac. it's not 'just sand'.
- direwolf20 9mo agoHow would you suggest doing it with fewer materials?
- robotresearcher 9mo agoThe claim was that "the materials that go into a chip are nothing". Arguing that that is not that case does not really put someone on the hook to explain or even have any clue how to do it better.
- AlecSchueler 9mo agoCease production.
- cruffle_duffle 9mo agoWhy are you on a technology site?
- AlecSchueler 9mo agoI'm not sure why you're asking this or what you're insinuating. The site is called Hacker News, it should be open to anarcho- and eco- hackers too. Not all of believe in infinite growth. Do you want to expand on why you're on this site? I've been here for more than 15 years and I'm not the person I was when I signed up or when I went through life in a startup.
- cortesoft 9mo agoThat doesn't contradict the point, though. The negative impact on the environment is not reduced by making a less powered chip.
- AlecSchueler 9mo agoNo, hence "all around."
- s5300 9mo ago[dead]
- Aurornis 9mo agoIt’s the opposite. Using an off the shelf MCU is much more efficient than trying to spin your own ASIC. Doing the work in software allows for updates and bug fixes, which are more likely to prevent piles of hardware from going into the landfill (in some cases before they even reach customers’ hands).
- compiler-devel 9mo agoNobody cares, unless they’re commenting for an easy win on internet message boards.
- estimator7292 9mo agoYou have to use a chip, and no matter what kind of chip you're paying for the same raw resources. I don't think you have an actual argument here, you just want to be indignant and contrarian.
- NuclearPM 9mo agoWhat do you mean? Earbud are environmental disasters?