Oh neat, thanks

Looks like there’s a lot of latency

Fair enough, I can’t fault your motivation.

I know but, following this logic, this article would be on topic for !cooking@lemmy.ml since we need to reduce GHG emissions from agriculture, and !gaming@lemmy.ml, since graphics cards are using more and more power each generation, etc.

An article specifically about the greenhouse impact of proof-of-work cryptocurrencies, or a technological innovation to help fight climate change - that’s relevant in my eyes. But this article is really stretching it.

Because of their anti worker policies?

Yes, agree, I’m glad Scientific American is being forthright about this. Is it on topic for !technology@lemmy.ml? I was sort of hoping Lemmy wouldn’t have the same issue as reddit where people just upvote stuff they agree with, even if it’s only tangentially related to the sub.

I know climate change is related to everything, but still…

Crikey, they’ve only got one developer working on it?

Voat has that system of building up credit before your votes count. I heard someone say it helped create an echo chamber, but I wouldn’t know because I stopped visiting pretty quickly. Worth looking at as a case study though.

I could see something like this being subsidised by a health provider like Australia’s national disability insurance scheme