You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
3 points

I think you’ve got it backwards. The energy cost is real, so economies of scale make sense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I’m not an expert in this field ofc, but I suspect simply serving a file would be way less energy intensive. There are less centralized alternatives too such as torrent streaming, which may or may not be more efficient. It would be nice to exist in an economy where we could explore these questions!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Than encrypting and decrypting for DRM reasons? Yes. But the reason the cloud exists at all is because economies of scale are real.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Just because an economy of scale is real, doesn’t mean the work being done is meaningful or necessary. I’m arguing that the last couple of decades have seen a lot of work being created in order to necessitate traditional ‘economy of scale’ business models — aka a factory with an owner — when other ways of doing things may have been better in terms of global energy efficiency. E.g. the transcoding/compression only needs to happen once for each use case, the whole movie could be buffered rather than maintaining a server connection for the entire runtime. There are examples outside of streaming too ofc, and I’m not saying cloud computing has no use cases — but nobody really believes that the Netflix model is based on sound fundamentals, do they

permalink
report
parent
reply

Late Stage Capitalism

!latestagecapitalism@lemmygrad.ml

Create post

Community stats

  • 257

    Monthly active users

  • 744

    Posts

  • 3.9K

    Comments