Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This website has 81% battery power remaining

solar.lowtechmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 365 posts

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#141

Post by onethought »

pezzana wrote: post #72

This is a fascinating site beyond the power indicator. For example, a recent article discusses low-tech solar panels: > ... To start with, ever since the 1950s, solar panels have been unfit for recycling, resulting in a waste stream that ends up in landfills. This waste stream will grow significantly during the coming years. Solar panels are discarded only after at least 25 to 30 years, and most have been installed o…

How is PV unfit for recycling?

It’s pure silicon, with something like Boron on it. Losslessly recycling might be challenge, but you could definitely reuse all the Silicon and remake another panel. Which toxic elements do you mean? What’s the fire hazard?

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#142

Post by mro_name »

throwaway11602 wrote: post #108
hattmall wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this so so much. The problem is too much reliances on frameworks and add on libraries. Developers will import an entire framework that for the benefit of a single feature. It's mind blowing to look at the amount of js includes for seemingly simple sites. Stackoverflow answers that direct you to import a library or framework should be banned in most cases. I will often have to scroll past several answers…

I am guilty of this, and I feel bad for it. I am not a front end developer, but I have built a few web sites for various projects here and there. I certainly don't NEED to use a front-end framework, but I don't want have to spend a ton of time crafting CSS rules and figuing out how many divs to nest. To get something done quickly, my choices pretty much boil down to plain, unstyled, pages, or a full blown framework l…

do you know the matrix movie quote "but there is no spoon" – maybe the framework you look for is vanilla CSS. Write sensible markup to hold your content (almost no divs), CSS it and be good. Sounds that feasible?

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#143

Post by justsaying9 »

smoldesu wrote: post #30
tentacleuno wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey @dang, you wouldn't happen to know anything about how Hacker News is hosted, would you? Reading this has piqued my curiosity. If time / your position permits, of course.

IIRC it's just stored on someone's Dell Inspiron that they've got laying around in an office. Might be outdated info, but it's really nothing special if memory serves.

Yeah, and apparently the load is such a problem for them, their web server will permanently autoban your IP if you load too many articles at once, say 10-15 that you were planning to save and read offline.

Then if you email to ask 'Wtf', tiny violins will play as they explain they are too broke and impoverished to afford bandwidth enough to not do this, while helpfully suggesting you go to a different internet connection to fill out a form to unblock yourself.

Must be tough times at YCombinator, spending all those billions on junk Web Bubble 2.0 companies and none left to spare for HN bandwidth, or say a proper index so you can look up old articles.

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#144

Post by culi »

pezzana wrote: post #72

This is a fascinating site beyond the power indicator. For example, a recent article discusses low-tech solar panels: > ... To start with, ever since the 1950s, solar panels have been unfit for recycling, resulting in a waste stream that ends up in landfills. This waste stream will grow significantly during the coming years. Solar panels are discarded only after at least 25 to 30 years, and most have been installed o…

To put that in perspective, in 2019 we generated a total of 53.6 million metric tons of e-waste.[0] By 2050, we expect to be generating 6 million new metric tons of e-waste from solar panels alone.[1]

[0] https://ewastemonitor.info/gem-2020/ [1] https://grist.org/energy/solar-panels-are-starting-to-die-wh...

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#145

Post by justsaying9 »

messo wrote: post #107
sam0x17 wrote: post #42

ICANN should make a .solar extension with the caveat that you have to provide evidence yearly that all IPs mapped by the domain were running on solar power

That ... is actually an awesome idea! The condition for getting a domain name should be to have a public consumption and battery status page.

Yes, and it should cost $999/year for the registration fee, funneled into the pocket of some giant virtue signalling multinational corporation, who uses the proceeds to buy media time calling for the excommunication of anyone who refuses to bend a knee and pledge obeisance to Al Gore and the high priests of the Carbon Cult. I approve.

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#146

Post by strickvl »

scrose wrote: post #74

Semi-related —- does anyone have recommendations for where to find small hobbyist solar panels and/or kits to experiment with for small devices like a Pi? Also curious about how a setup like this compares with using a traditional electricity source in terms of cost per hr of running the site off of solar with batteries. What is the break even point against utility costs over there(if there is one)? And are there any…

If you're in the UK, Pimoroni (https://shop.pimoroni.com/?q=solar) has some good options as well.

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#148

Post by damir »

netizen-936824 wrote: post #127
RussianCow wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[citation needed] Websites have become significantly more complex in the last two decades.

I don't want my browser to be loading entire JS frameworks and trackers and whatever other crap just to read a bunch of text. That's absolutely nonsensical

I'm using two browsers, one with disabled JS (primary) and vanilla one. When and only WHEN page doesn't load on non-js browser (and if I really, really, reaaaally want that piece of content) then maybe I will use vanilla browser...

Browsing with js disabled is fast, pages load quickly, almost no trackers and there are "old" or "text" versions of sites still available... old.reddit, old.twitter or nitter instances...

Heck, even google has one...

To be honest, I just use dillo browser most of the time. Small, speedy and safer then most...

Edit: typo.

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#149

Post by justsaying9 »

onethought wrote: post #141
pezzana wrote: post #72

This is a fascinating site beyond the power indicator. For example, a recent article discusses low-tech solar panels: > ... To start with, ever since the 1950s, solar panels have been unfit for recycling, resulting in a waste stream that ends up in landfills. This waste stream will grow significantly during the coming years. Solar panels are discarded only after at least 25 to 30 years, and most have been installed o…

How is PV unfit for recycling? It’s pure silicon, with something like Boron on it. Losslessly recycling might be challenge, but you could definitely reuse all the Silicon and remake another panel. Which toxic elements do you mean? What’s the fire hazard?

It is believed they over time slowly absorb rays of smugness from virtue signalling urbanites in the surrounding vicinity, gradually rendering the panel material radioactive and unfit for future use, even after recycling. Some believe this effect can be mitigated by first sprinkling the unit with the used oil from a sacrificed Chevy 350 engine, while walking in a counterclockwise circle and chanting a priestly incantation. More scientific study is needed to confirm or deny the efficacy of this approach.

Re: This website has 81% battery power remaining

#150

Post by divbzero »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #36
brightball wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fwiw, the top of HN isn’t all that stress. It mostly comes down to disk I/O and efficiency of the language. I’ve been at the top of HN for extended hours a couple of times on just a Heroku hobby dyno with no caching at all, but I had Cloudflare out front absorbing all the traffic that would have come from serving static assets.

Not to be contrary, but if your site is largely static and you're fronting it with Cloudfare, then you're essentially saying Cloudfare can handle load. Not much revelation there, right?

That’s a fair point for GP’s Heroku + Cloudflare deployment. The OP solar site is a better example of efficient static hosting as it is run on a lightweight server [1] and not fronted with Cloudflare. The reading at the bottom of the website indicates 2.70 W power usage at the moment and over two weeks uptime.

[1]: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/about.html#hardware

Post reply on HN