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

Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

thehangedman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 173 posts

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#21

Post by lisper »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #12
goatsneez wrote: post #2

I liked the read despite its predictable, unoriginal, oft-repeated decry of technology with respect to its (perceived) environmental burden. There are several replies by Berry's contemporaries which vocalize their disagreement with his position and his justification. With the distance in time to this piece, I think the point to add to the discussion is that a key implicit assumption of Berry (and in fact even to his…

> The assumption that the default mode of civilization is prosperity for all. First off, I'm not sure where you're getting that from reading this article, but maybe I'm missing something. Secondly, Berry is a Christian so of course he believes that there can be enough for all - this is (at least used to be) a central tenet of Christianity. Christ said: " 25 “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what yo…

> Berry is coming from the worldview that God created a world of great abundance and that if we share, there is enough for all.

Sure, but he/they are simply wrong about that. The natural state of living systems is to propagate until they reach a natural limit imposed by some resource constraint or other. Our current technological civilization is an anomaly produced by the sudden release, over a period of a few hundred years, of solar energy stored over a few hundred million years, with a concomitant rise in CO2 levels and global temperatures. That party cannot be expected to last much longer, computers or no computers.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#22

Post by actually_a_dog »

geocrasher wrote: post #8

The original Computer Vegan, complaining about the coal used to power a computer while at the same time using a typewriter that is made of steel that had to be fired and forged probably using coal. I'm not saying he's wrong, but unless he mines his own metal and has a solar powered forge, he's fooling himself.

I don't know. If we're just looking at it on the basis of how many natural resources it cost to build the thing, you may have a point (although, computer chip manufacturing is a notoriously dirty business -- look what it did to the orchards of Silicon Valley).

But, consider what it would take to run the thing. Unless you power your computers by solar energy or somehow have a nuclear reactor in your back yard, you're probably expending non-renewable energy to power it. The typewriter, being made in 1956, is almost certainly a manual model and only uses ribbon and paper to keep it going. I daresay the typewriter has a lower lifetime environmental impact than any computer.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#23

Post by karaterobot »

None of his points in this piece are wrong, including the one about him not buying a computer. They may be arguable, in fact may be highly debatable, but they're at least positions a reasonable person could have, even if other reasonable people disagree. Indeed, reasonable people can hold a variety of differing opinions, and understanding the ones you disagree with is a really satisfying activity. Good for him, not buying that computer.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#24

Post by [deleted] »

deanCommie wrote: post #17
UncleOxidant wrote: post #6

> My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then. This was written in the late 80s, but I'd guess they're still using that typewriter over 60 years after it's purchase. Not saying I completely agree with his whole essay, but there's not a lot of computing equipment still in use (or considered usable) from that era. > But the cost would not be just mone- tary. It…

> there's not a lot of computing equipment still in use (or considered usable) from that era. George R R Martin works in Wordstar 4.0 from 1987: https://www.theverge.com/2014/5/14/5716232/george-r-r-martin...

[deleted]

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#25

Post by drivers99 »

formerkrogemp wrote: post #20
deanCommie wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's not a lot of computing equipment still in use (or considered usable) from that era. George R R Martin works in Wordstar 4.0 from 1987: https://www.theverge.com/2014/5/14/5716232/george-r-r-martin...

I suppose that's why he never finishes anything.

I always wondered why people always say that. Why would using a new word processor make anyone write faster?

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#26

Post by astrange »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #22
geocrasher wrote: post #8

The original Computer Vegan, complaining about the coal used to power a computer while at the same time using a typewriter that is made of steel that had to be fired and forged probably using coal. I'm not saying he's wrong, but unless he mines his own metal and has a solar powered forge, he's fooling himself.

I don't know. If we're just looking at it on the basis of how many natural resources it cost to build the thing, you may have a point (although, computer chip manufacturing is a notoriously dirty business -- look what it did to the orchards of Silicon Valley). But, consider what it would take to run the thing. Unless you power your computers by solar energy or somehow have a nuclear reactor in your back yard, you're…

> although, computer chip manufacturing is a notoriously dirty business -- look what it did to the orchards of Silicon Valley

If I wanted Silicon Valley to have good air and soil quality, I would simply not have built suburbs and auto infrastructure on top of all of it.

The idea that single family homes aren’t pollution and industry is comes from 70s boomer environmentalism, which is part “if I don’t see it, it’s not happening”, part pastoralist NIMBY (because you just read Cities as Growth Engines), and part explicitly trying to stop people from having children (because you just read The Population Bomb).

I would’ve said the modern examples are Marin County NIMBYs and MCU’s Thanos. But it seems like the guy in the article is an even more orthodox example.

Note that the Bay Area’s residential only zoning may be commonly thought to keep away dirty industry, but since it was invented here in Berkeley you can just look up what the inventors thought they were doing, and they just wanted to keep out Chinese people. “Residential zoning” meant “no home businesses” and by that they meant “Chinese laundries” with a side of “immigrant corner shops”. It wasn’t about factories.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#27

Post by iRomain »

I laughed so hard at Gordon Inkeles' response.

Wendell Berry:

  My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then. As she types, she sees things that are wrong and marks them with small checks in the margins.
Gordon Inkeles:

  Wendell Berry provides writers enslaved by the computer with a handy alternative: Wife - a low-tech energy-saving device. Drop a pile of handwritten notes on Wife and you get back a finished manuscript, edited while it was typed. What computer can do that? Wife meets all of Berry's uncompromising standards for techno- logical innovation: she's cheap, repairable near home, and good for the family structure. Best of all, Wife is politically correct because she breaks a writer's "direct dependence on strip-mined coal."
  History teaches us that Wife can also be used to beat rugs and wash clothes by hand, thus eliminating the need for the vacuum cleaner and washing machine, two more nasty machines that threaten the act of writing.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#28

Post by ghaff »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #6

> My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then. This was written in the late 80s, but I'd guess they're still using that typewriter over 60 years after it's purchase. Not saying I completely agree with his whole essay, but there's not a lot of computing equipment still in use (or considered usable) from that era. > But the cost would not be just mone- tary. It…

I probably still have a USB 3 1/2" drive somewhere but not sure sure how many old drives I could read. And certainly would have to build a system that could read a 5 1/4" drive and there are various other old formats where reading would be a major project.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#29

Post by MichaelZuo »

iRomain wrote: post #27

I laughed so hard at Gordon Inkeles' response. Wendell Berry: My wife types my work on a Royal standard typewriter bought new in 1956 and as good now as it was then. As she types, she sees things that are wrong and marks them with small checks in the margins. Gordon Inkeles: Wendell Berry provides writers enslaved by the computer with a handy alternative: Wife - a low-tech energy-saving device. Drop a pile of handwri…

Wife is also partially self replicating and somewhat field repairable in austere conditions too.

A level of technology unlikely to be achieved by computers anytime soon.

Re: Why I am not going to buy a computer (1987) [pdf]

#30

Post by cogman10 »

geocrasher wrote: post #8

The original Computer Vegan, complaining about the coal used to power a computer while at the same time using a typewriter that is made of steel that had to be fired and forged probably using coal. I'm not saying he's wrong, but unless he mines his own metal and has a solar powered forge, he's fooling himself.

I'd not even worry about the steel used in his typewriter.

Paper is made through an energy and chemically intensive process. I'm sure someone can math out the kwh that go into each sheet of paper, but it is far from 0. Paper costs anywhere from $0.005 -> $0.02 per sheet and that price point is going to be very closely tied to the energy used to produce that paper.

Here in Idaho, power goes for around $0.11/kwh and is primarily non-co2 emitting sources (hydro is the big one with nuclear, solar, and wind up next. Coal exists on our grid but isn't the prime source of power here). So, that'd put the power cost for one sheet of paper at a max of 45 -> 181wH.

If he wants to be energy conscientious, then I'd argue a raspberry pi with a low power oled display will beat the pants out of paper and pen in terms of energy consumed per page. Especially since writing with a keyboard is much faster than pen/paper or a typewriter.

Rpi = ~5W of consumption OLED display = ... idk, can't really find good numbers on this but certainly less than 100W which is where a 65' oled display maxes out. For a 13' display, that's what, ~9W?

So, with a 15W system, you can write for 3 hours before you get to the max possible energy cost of a piece of paper. I'm guessing the author can use more than 1 piece of paper in that timeframe.

And, of course, you can pair such a system with a solar + battery setup to get completely coal free writing (except for the cost to produce the chips for the rpi, display, solar, and battery)

Post reply on HN