Live data from Hacker News

PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

dell.com

61–70 of 281 posts

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#61
post #53
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horrifying. Also: "This PC cannot authenticate to your ISP because the ability to run unsigned code makes it an environmental and digital weapon."

The freedoms of collaboration over the Internet can taken away with: 1. widespread trusted computing (we're close) 2. banning encrypted comms over unregulated spectrums (done) 3. political will to ban such freedoms (growing) How can those that prefer such freedoms preserve them? Political activism can. Can censorship resistant tech help in that situation? Plausibly deniable mesh networks? Sneakernet?

I'm tired of "activism" to restore my freedoms.

I've allowed politicians to get away with a lot of bullshit, but if they come after my PC and homelab, it's time to water the Tree of Liberty.

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#62
post #17

I've never wanted an Alienware laptop in my life, but as a resident of Oregon there is absolutely nothing more that I want right now than an illegally powerful laptop.

These aren't that powerful from a computing standpoint; They use low-end i5 11400F along with a low-end nVidia 1650 Super and have 8GB single-channel memory. Also, I think it's more about inefficiency when sleeping and idle.

Yeah, but for me its more about it being illegal than actually being a good laptop.

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#63
post #36

Just want to remind everyone how far California has gone in energy efficiency: > In 2018, California's energy consumption was second-highest among the states, but its per capita energy consumption was the fourth-lowest due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs. Source: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-4 This is an achievement to be proud of.

Easy with so many people living in tents and cardboard shantys.

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#64
post #36

Just want to remind everyone how far California has gone in energy efficiency: > In 2018, California's energy consumption was second-highest among the states, but its per capita energy consumption was the fourth-lowest due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs. Source: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-4 This is an achievement to be proud of.

How much of that is due to the mild climate and how much is due to the energy efficiency programs?

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#65
These overzealous "green" regulations crack me up. Don't get me wrong, I'm very pro-green-energy: I think my own country should stop building coal power plants and start investing heavily in solar and wind. However, a lot of these consumer-targetted rules are just ludicrous bureaucratic overreach that cause more issues than they solve.

A quick example: My apartment block was just "upgraded" to meet some new energy-efficiency building codes, and the result is that the car park now looks like a cave. The new LED lights turn on and off automatically, but they turn on seconds after you drive past them. So you're basically driving along in the darkness, but followed in the distance by some lights. It's a lot like the glowing trails of bioluminescence you see behind dolphins sometimes. It's insane.

A more IT-focused example relevant to this article: I have made a name for myself running around to various customers doubling the performance of their core business applications by turning off dynamic power management on their database servers. There's a literal turbo button (in software) on every piece of server kit sold for about 15 years now because of some stupid regulation that was started by some hippie moron in California.

Think about how absolutely crazy it is that to be "energy efficient", companies all around the world are buying servers twice as powerful as they actually need, just to save $50 in electricity per annum. The amount of time, money, and resources wasted waiting around for CPUs running at 50% of their rated clock speed is just mindboggling.

This extra computer power they've been forced to buy isn't energy neutral! More chips have to be made, more assembly is required, etc... It burns up an unbelievable amount of resources in order to save a negligible amount of electricity, which is now becoming increasingly clean anyway...

I'm not making this up. A large telco here kept doubling down on the scale of their new LOB application server platform because the performance was bad. The irony is that the more hardware you throw at something like this, the slower it gets because the percentage load drops, which lets the power management kick in more often and more aggressively. Last I hard, they were planning on buying another 100 blade servers, despite 5% or lower loads on what they already had.

PS: Some cloud platforms like Azure leave this on the default settings at the hypervisor host level, so now there is nothing I can do to improve this situation. The control has been taken away from me, so I guess everyone just has to learn to live with 3 GHz CPUs running at 1.5 GHz forever...

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point but wonder if the legislation that bans these specifically mention computers or just any electronic device that draws more than XXXX watts per hour.

It does not matter. The correct way to reduce electricity consumption is to increase the price of electricity, aka a tax. No need for politicians to selectively pick and choose which products to gimp. For those who will retort with “but those are regressive taxes and hurt the poor”, I will say that if you want to fix people being poor, then give them cash. It is unrelated to the goals of reducing electricity usage, a…

The objective is presumably to incentivize increased electrical efficiency in devices, by banning inefficient electrical devices. The goal wouldn't be to decrease consumption; it would be to increase the amount of useful work done while holding consumption constant.

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#69
post #9

Good. It's time Silicon Valley cared about TDP the way auto makers have to care about gas mileage. Tighten the screws.

Automakers shouldn't be caring about gas mileage.

YOU should.

If you want to drive a 50 MPG Prius, do it. If you want to drive a 12 MPG PowerStroke Diesel V-10 Ford F-350, do it.

Re: PC can't be shipped to CA, CO, HI, OR, VT or WA due to power consumption

#70
post #36

Just want to remind everyone how far California has gone in energy efficiency: > In 2018, California's energy consumption was second-highest among the states, but its per capita energy consumption was the fourth-lowest due in part to its mild climate and its energy efficiency programs. Source: https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-4 This is an achievement to be proud of.

Yep. According to Natural Resources Defense Council via NYT, "about a quarter of all residential energy consumption is used on devices in idle power mode" in Northern California [1]. Huge opportunity for efficiency improvement through regulatory action, given idle power consumption is otherwise an afterthought for both manufacturers and consumers.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/science/just-how-much-pow...

Post reply on HN