this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
267 points (99.6% liked)
Technology
72017 readers
4098 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Distributed computing would eliminate the water usage, since the heat output wouldn't be so highly concentrated, but it would probably somewhat increase power consumption.
In an ideal world I think data center waste heat would be captured for use in a district thermal grid / seasonal thermal energy store like the one in Vantaa.
Of course that isn't to say that we shouldn't be thinking about whether we're using software efficiently and for good reasons. Plenty of computations that take place in datacenters serve to make a company money but don't actually make anyone's lives better.
Yes, this would be the ideal for dealing with that issue. Re-use that heat to generate some of the energy the data center is demanding.
Imagine there’s an engineering & physics issue to be solved. But where would we find those top talent people to solve it?
If I'm having a video meeting p2p instead of microsoft teams running in the cloud, that would reduce power consumption, not increase it.
Is a connection between 3+ people still p2p? Or is there another term for it?
I don't know how this would work over the internet though.
On a LAN you could use multicast, but I don't think ISPs support multicast, it seems like it would be an easy way to DoS. But I honestly don't know.
So, if you can't multicast, the way to have serverless multi-user video calls would be to have a separate video feed for each receiver, which I can see using more resources than through a server that would replicate the stream to all the receivers. Of course this is dependant on distance, even without multicast it consumes more resources if everyone is in the same LAN.
There can be an unlimited no. of connections (or peers). Remember the bittorrent days, where you could seed to and download files from many peers simultaneously? You can do the same with data streams, f.ex. video and audio. Try Keet if you want to see a practical example.
We don't need data centres to share files, chat, do video calls, live streaming, etc.
I'm not talking about the technical possibility. Of course you can have multiple video stream, one per participant.
I'm saying that without multicast, it can be more resource intensive than having intermediate servers that can multicast on the application layer.