Proposal Raised For GNOME Software Labeling Its Carbon Cost / Environmental Impact

[kpedersen]

I am going to resist the urge to moan about Gnome 3's poor use of hardware resources. This is because no matter how poor I feel Gnome is, it is still light years ahead of Windows (Vista+). And that is *after* hardware manufacturers specifically target Windows so should provide the best power management experience possible. What the fsck have they been doing all these years!

So Gnome developers... feel free to take private jets to work and wash a single pair of underpants daily. You (via your users) still waste less power than the hordes of Windows users running a defective OS full of defective services.

(But obviously what they really want us to be doing is running a shite phone and accessing the cloud in order to be "green")

[pmorph]

I wonder if there is real potential for saving more than the additional emissions from producing (accurate enough) data?
Doing it just for labels wouldn't make much sense.

[bison]

I propose that they use low-carbon ones and zeros. Problem solved.

[k1e0x]

Where as there is nothing wrong with trying to be energy efficient, as it saves you money and resources, I think counting carbon would be a serious waste of the projects time.

One must balance efficient use of your time as well.

[Random_Jerk]

rastersoft how dare you make sense. The deplorable Trump toadies and death cultists only care about fake AOC cow fart nonsense and rubbish, than engage in useful discussion. I personally see nothing wrong with this. Other companies have been trying to do this for multiple years now, without seriously impacting the quality of their products.

[bearoso]

Guys you need to understand who made this initiative. Philip Withnall’s coding and maintainer merits goes way beyond all of yours combined.

Facts about Philip Withnall:
1) Long term maintainer of glib
2) Recent performance initiative on Gnome-Software
3) Recent initiative to extend sysprof profiling capabilities to glib and many other areas

But hey you can safely ignore these facts just like you ignore the basic law of physics causing global warming. Good for you Karens.

I looked him up, too. I definitely like his work. I'm also a GNOME user, so I'm not completely against that.

But people can make mistakes or do or say stupid things. Everyone, including myself, does.

The problem isn't being aware of environmental issues or anything like that, it's common sense. GNOME as a project is absolutely tiny. Any environmental impact is negligible at this point and, even if it were 100 times bigger, still would be. Any discussion about it simply contributes to entropy.

[jrch2k8]

I looked him up, too. I definitely like his work. I'm also a GNOME user, so I'm not completely against that.

But people can make mistakes or do or say stupid things. Everyone, including myself, does.

The problem isn't being aware of environmental issues or anything like that, it's common sense. GNOME as a project is absolutely tiny. Any environmental impact is negligible at this point and, even if it were 100 times bigger, still would be. Any discussion about it simply contributes to entropy.

My guess this is simply some marketing ploy to appeal to the snowflakes and appear wokeish while the talk would be pretty much about your run of the mill code optimizations and not some ultra retarded actual carbon footprint which would be absolutely meaningless and within 0%

[Djhg2000]

I like efficiency, but this just seems like more useless bureaucracy to please who knows who. Do we really want to discourage lots of testing by labeling it as "carbon cost"?

[Duff~]

Glowing in the dark, eh GNOME?.

[Klassic Six]

Putting GNOME aside why the issue of global warming is an issue of politics?? I mean sure morons like Trump thinks that the climate change is a hoax but it doesn't change the fact that we humans are the main cause of that.
In other hand I've agreed that GNOME has more issues need to addressed first.