From 0e41f7255fa6e217b8ce9221b36bac1e13b380bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: sejo Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 18:44:22 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] updates permacomputing --- src/permacomputing.gmo | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/permacomputing.gmo b/src/permacomputing.gmo index 6eb2cf0..e14d3fc 100644 --- a/src/permacomputing.gmo +++ b/src/permacomputing.gmo @@ -15,10 +15,16 @@ some quotes from the articles by viznut > how to give computers a meaningful and sustainable place in a human civilization that has a meaningful and sustainable place in the planetary biosphere[?] -## physical resources +## problem + +> Over the last few hundred years of human civilization, there has been a dramatic increase in the consumption of artificially produced energy. In the overarching story, this is often equated with "progress". + +> In the computer world, this phenomenon gets multiplied by itself: "progress" facilitates ever greater densities of data storage and digital logic, thus dramatically exploding the availability of computing resources. However, the abundance has also caused an equivalent explosion in wastefulness, which shows in things like mindblowingly ridiculous hardware requirements for even quite trivial tasks. > What makes permacultural philosophy particularly appealing (to me) is that it does not advocate "going back in time" despite advocating a dramatic decrease in use of artificial energy. Instead, it trusts in human ingenunity in finding clever hacks for turning problems into solutions, competition into co-operation, waste into resources. Very much the same kind of creative thinking I appreciate in computer hacking. +## physical resources + > IC fabrication requires large amounts of energy, highly refined machinery and poisonous substances. Because of this sacrifice, the resulting microchips should be treasured like gems or rare exotic spices. Their active lifespans would be maximized, and they would never be reduced to their raw materials until they are thoroughly unusable. > Instead of planned obsolescence, there should be planned longevity.