It's presented too dramatically IMO, but the core argument is one we need to raise awareness of: you use energy and emit carbon so a company can run code that in part grooms you into being a better consumer of their products.
Brick and Mortar stores do this too. Some ways are fun and nice like air conditioning and wine while browsing. Others not so much: facial recognition at Target's nationwide, and companies like ShopperTrak and others.
No matter if it's online or in person it's getting increasingly creepy. Any awareness of it a net positive, even if it is a tad dramatic.
Shouldn't there be figures in watts (a measure of power) rather than watt-hours (measure of energy) on the project page?
Right now it seems to me there's non-monotonically increasing energy expenditure when looking at the Wh figures.
Life has to be pretty great when people have to go to such extraordinary contortions to find something to complain about.
Irritating color scheme.
Great project! The energy footprint of the internet is huge and should be addressed.
For example: https://webtest.app/?url=https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/
Never liked when Amazon increases the price a few days later after witnessing you researching something to buy. This is why I only purchase items 'on-the-spot' in a small window of time which allows me to escape such a practice.
Thus, the 8,724 pages of code that track and personalize user behavior and experience and were involuntarily loaded by the customer (me) through the browser, are evidence of Amazon’s core money-making strategy at work. Moreover, all the energy needed to load this relatively large amount of information was effectively unloaded on the customer (me), who ultimately assumed not just part of the economic cost of Amazon’s hidden monetization processes, but also a portion of its environmental footprint.
Holy crap. Are you telling me, when I visit a website, that it uses electricity? That I'm downloading code onto my computer? That when I tell my browser to load a webpage, that page loads against my will?
Why aren't more people talking about this?
90% of the code is jQuery / third-party (also includes jquery / polyfills) / polyfills btw.
At some point, convenience wins.
off topic, but I first read the domain as Java Virgin and had a good chuckle...only to realize that I misread
pretty cool art project, thanks for sharing.
>The average amount of energy needed to load each of the twelve web interfaces, along with each one’s endless fragments of code, was 30 watts.
What is that supposed to mean? A watt(= 1 J/s) is a measure power so energy per unit of time. Shouldn't this rather be given in joule?