social.coop is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A Fediverse instance for people interested in cooperative and collective projects. If you are interested in joining our community, please apply at https://join.social.coop/registration-form.html.

Administered by:

Server stats:

502
active users

"The ecological dynamics we find ourselves in are not entirely a consequence of design limits, but of human practices and choices — among individuals, communities, corporations, and governments — combined with a deficit of will and imagination to bring about a sustainable Cloud. The Cloud is both cultural and technological. Like any aspect of culture, the Cloud’s trajectory — and its ecological impacts — are not predetermined or unchangeable."

@cloudanthro

@MarieVC @cloudanthro it’s funny (in the catastrophic sense) that if you were to, say, suggest that maybe we should ban companies from using excessive redundancies that waste resources and maybe they should plan better or just deal with downtime, there isn’t a single mainstream political party that would go for that, at least in most Western countries I’m aware of. The idea of ‘maybe don’t do the provably harmful thing just because it’s profitable and your harm is one step abstracted’ is apparently monstrous to so many people

@serene_arc @MarieVC Yeah, even anarchists like me balk a bit even though it's probably necessary one way or anoter. I think what folks are afraid of is regulatory capture scenario, where now only Google/Microsoft/Amazon who have the resources to do "a green transition" are legally allowed to put more than a few computers in a room.

That could be bad because it's much closer to the State's current vision of general purpose computing being restricted by State auditing.

@Elucidating @serene_arc @MarieVC

> folks are afraid of is regulatory capture scenario, where now only Google/Microsoft/Amazon who have the resources to do "a green transition" are legally allowed to put more than a few computers in a room.

Reasonable, except solar scales down nicely

Less than ten thousand dollars will get you all you need for a small solar powered server farm

@Elucidating @serene_arc @MarieVC they’re basic policy choices that we’ve left to companies but they’re always going to choose the thing that gets them the most profit: zero downtime. But a policy choice can just…be decided the other way for them if necessary. It’s what we do with all regulations. They don’t get to decide to pay workers scrip anymore; that choice was taken away.

The oncoming climate catastrophe is going to be so bad and it’s been caused by companies chasing profit even when it’s not sustainable. They clearly can’t be trusted to make the correct choices.

The article above has an absurdly low efficiency rate, like single digit. That can’t go on.

@Elucidating @serene_arc @MarieVC hell we could just actually apply anti trust laws and say ‘no sorry you can’t own more than one data centre. That’s too much concentration.’

Better yet, actually start treating the Internet as essential infrastructure. Maybe the government or some public non profit should be formed to run data centres

@serene_arc @MarieVC I think Amazon would be less of a problem if it just focused on data centers. The number, I think, doesn't matter (insomuch as a trust issue), but rather the proportion.

@serene_arc @MarieVC I think we should just attack the problem directly rather than beating around the bush. Let's outlaw the industrial use of coal power over 5 years and gas turbine power over 7.

@Elucidating @MarieVC That would solve the emissions problem, but not the water and noise pollution ones. Admittedly the carbon emissions is the priority but data centres are sucking up more water than a medium town in a time when water resources are reaching critical levels.

Honestly they should just put them all in the far north and pay large amounts to FIFO workers to manage. Not only would that solve the water issue but it would also drastically reduce power concerns. But they don't want to do that because of the cost.

@serene_arc @MarieVC I find it fascinating how you're more willing to imagine regulating tech that actually stopping ~55% of carbon emissions in your country and 40% in mine.

I think this is an example of how you've been influenced subtly by pro-oil activism. We can imagine tackling those problems as well. But they're a strange thing to pivot to when asked directly. Nor are they even remotely of the same magnitude.

@serene_arc @MarieVC But I'm happy to also say, "It should be forbidden to build a water cooled data center anywhere there are droughts. And we should also stop selling natural spring bottle water from places that experience droughts as well.

As for noise pollution, I gotta admit I don't even care to consider such a trivial thing when way bigger issues are at stake than property value.

@Elucidating @serene_arc @MarieVC noise pollution isn’t a property value issue, it’s a health one, as discussed in the article above.

@serene_arc @MarieVC I think that article is doing the same thing, fwiw.

@Elucidating @serene_arc @MarieVC no? That’s not a pro oil activism stance. We’re discussing under an article link, where they make the points about noise pollution and water use quite strongly. I thought it Internet etiquette to keep the discussion relevant and address the points in the article. The article makes a number of points of concern that are unrelated to fossil fuel use.

@serene_arc Yeah, no, I think you have it wrong.

But maybe we agree in broad strokes and just have prioritization and communication style issues, so let's conclude here okay? I *think* we both agree a radical carbon emissions reduction rule should be in place, both agree water and noise are also problems that can't simply be externalized.

@Elucidating @serene_arc if you think I have it wrong by talking about those issues, take it up with MIT and the author of that article. They are the ones you’re calling wrong instead of accusing me of being secretly taken in by pro oil propaganda because I’m talking about said article

@serene_arc It's weird how me discussion specific points of the article, a practice you just defended as "etiquette" or somesuch, is now actually bad and I shouldn't do it.

Can we stop talking now, if that's the case? I guess it's my bad, and I'm very sorry for upsetting you. I've apologized, so please leave me alone now.

@serene_arc @MarieVC Hmm, I think I'll restate my point. Also:The big actors aren't invested in fossil fuels, they're already deep into a non-carbon power plan.

It's the small and medium actors and in particular the ones given state exemptions that are a problem here. This seems bizarre, but unless the gas-o-sphere is courting you, ironically the economics are super clear and everyone taking the time to build facilities they own is aligned.

@serene_arc @MarieVC I don't mean to give these companies a pass. They do plenty bad.

But the problem here is that they're the only ones who "can afford" to do good. Which is to say, lots of other actors, in your country too, are basically only viable by being subsidized. They're cost centers for governments and fossil fuel subsidiaries. Thats how they're built.

@MarieVC interesting, but a little unfair. Cloud is very vague, but let's say that delivers something for 3 billion people... Airplanes? Maybe 800 million? And how many of those are private jets that are a huge waste of energy and pollution?

@elgosz @MarieVC I think you're chaffing the issue a bit here. Besides, as the article notes the PaaS/big providers are doing green transition (and btw this saves them so much money).

The problem is the sea of small unconverted data centers. Those collectively produce most of the problem, and many are actually government operated or give special status.

@elgosz @MarieVC Don't just say "oh well cloud computing helps a lot of people "

That's fine, but it will hurt a lot more people, generationally, if it doesn't go 0 carbon

@MarieVC @cloudanthro@bird.makeup @aral Der Stromverbrauch an sich ist kein Problem, solange er (wie bei Apple seit 2018) zu 100% aus erneuerbaren Energien stammt.