@lethargilistic if he really was that concerned about how much more CO2 rendering HTML produces then rendering plain text — enough to think that we should switch from HTML emails to text emails — shouldn't he also think that we should switch from HTML to playing text on the fucking web too and go back to DARPAnet? Also, as a friend pointed out: "what difference does it make compared to santos or whatnot fracking some indigenous community's foodbowl, or the palm oil industry aiding in the colonisation of west papua. why not focus on that stuff rather than tiny-ass potshots like diffuse emissions like that lol"
But more than any of that, I keep coming back to how horrible this take is — that the worth of some data, which are works of human creation for the most part, is determined by how often it is accessed or downloaded or read or interacted with by the masses, as if some percentage of access or traffic can determine the worth of something like that. It's the most stupid least-common-denominator democratic utilitarian take that I've ever heard in my life and maybe it's just because I'm a Nietzschean, but it makes me see red. Truly I mean it when I ask — what about all those hidden rare gems that few people find or watch or read or listen to or interact with but that are beautiful and amazing and great finds to you? The little fascinating pieces of History like old Forum posts and Usenet groups? Am I the only one that enjoys exploring the web and trying to find little known things that turn out to be amazing? I wonder what his opinions are on Libgen and Scihub and The Anarchist Library and the Internet Archive? Project Gutenberg?
Leth
novatorine 🏴🏳️⚧️
Passenger
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the