tochee

joined 3 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

Oh neat, thanks

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago (4 children)

Looks like there's a lot of latency

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago

Fair enough, I can't fault your motivation.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 years ago (7 children)

I know but, following this logic, this article would be on topic for [email protected] since we need to reduce GHG emissions from agriculture, and [email protected], since graphics cards are using more and more power each generation, etc.

An article specifically about the greenhouse impact of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies, or a technological innovation to help fight climate change - that's relevant in my eyes. But this article is really stretching it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

Because of their anti worker policies?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (10 children)

Yes, agree, I'm glad Scientific American is being forthright about this. Is it on topic for [email protected]? I was sort of hoping Lemmy wouldn't have the same issue as reddit where people just upvote stuff they agree with, even if it's only tangentially related to the sub.

I know climate change is related to everything, but still...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago

Crikey, they've only got one developer working on it?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago

Voat has that system of building up credit before your votes count. I heard someone say it helped create an echo chamber, but I wouldn't know because I stopped visiting pretty quickly. Worth looking at as a case study though.