The Fediverse - especially the microblogging side of it - has deep issues when it comes to environmental sustainability.

And the high resource requirements, which result from an incredible level of redundancy, aren’t just bad environmentally: they make running a server more costly, and increase our reliance on Big Tech’s infrastructure.

I wrote about all this, along with some suggestions for how we can improve things somewhat.

  • h3ndrik@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Also the software needs to be efficient. Use less RAM and CPU cycles. And I don’t think the ActivityPub protocol in itself is very efficient. I’d like those aspects compared to an old federated technology like NNTP or email.

    But I’d agree on the things in top. Content should get compressed and cached on demand. Neither transferred every time from the original instance, nor transferred without a user ever viewing it. Caching on demand or a DHT (P2P) storage backend could do that.

  • Rimu@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    I appreciate the practical suggestions section, there’s some great ideas there.

    You might be interested in the low bandwidth mode that https://piefed.social has. It can be enabled during login and removes most of the images and Javascript.

    Really, developers need new tools to support these values. Our dev tools report on performance and reliability but not on sustainability / energy use / CO2. Our programming frameworks offer flexibility, power and expand-ability but never intentionally constrain our energy / waste / performance. The only exception to this that I’ve seen is Google App Engine which has some resource utilization limits and a pretty limited ORM that feels like fighting with one hand tied behind my back sometimes.

  • vic_rattlehead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Good points, makes me think of how good lightweight RSS readers were at accomplishing the same kinds of content aggregation goals, and worked well even over 56k modems.

  • Handles@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    Fair point and while I don’t want to sidetrack from it — how much is the Fediverse’s energy usage compared to those of AI services or cryptocurrency farms?

    I’m all for scaling down our resource consumption and finding environmentally friendly alternatives, but it has to be across the board. It’s no use that a small segment minimise their expenditure if the biggest culprits continue and expand their exploitative behaviour.

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      how much is the Fediverse’s energy usage compared to those of AI services or cryptocurrency farms?

      Practically 0.

        • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Well this site says that the bitcoin network uses at least 91 TWh annually.

          According to fediverse.observer, there’s roughly 21000 Fediverse servers online.

          Let’s just assume that a server on the Fediverse uses 500W. That’s quite a high estimate btw, but we can overestimate, it’s fine.

          That gives roughly 0.09 TWh annually, or about 0.1% of the bitcoin network. And remember that’s an overestimate and remember that that only considers bitcoin and no other cryptocurrencies.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      How about we do it because it makes us feel good, morally? How about we do it because we want to set a good example?

      This whole “I won’t change until those who are worse than I am change,” is so juvenile to me.

      • Handles@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        No, I agree. It’s not about waiting out the bigger players. It’s making sure that everybody does their part!

        The fediverse has its footprint for sure and it’s great that we pull together to minimise that. I just want to put it in perspective at the same time and point out that federated services aren’t the only, or even biggest offenders here.

        Many of the hotshot technologies — cryptocurrencies a few years back, this season it’s “AI” — get launched without a thought of their environmental impacts, at a time where basically every MWh counts. I want to help with my fedi usage, but I also want that to be reflected in idiots’ bitcoin mining or GPT generated “content”.

        There has to be proportional balance.

  • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The practical suggestions sound good but the rest of the blog post makes this sound like a much bigger issue than it is, I feel.

    There are simply not enough servers or activity on the Fediverse to have to worry about this at this point, if you ask me. It could for sure be better with regards to environmental concerns, but there’s a lot more pressing issues I think.

  • Jumuta@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    How much of the power consumption is from the servers and how much is from the clients?

    • smallpatatas@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That’s a good question. The best answer is, I don’t know!

      But if I had to guess, based on the small amount I’ve learned:

      larger servers most likely benefit from economies of scale. They’ll be using CDNs, and will often have several people on their server following any given remote account, rather than just one. So the per-client energy use is almost certainly lower than for small servers.

      But it’s still tough to know whether it’s the client or server using more energy. IIRC with video streaming, the end user’s device was a big factor in overall consumption - but it’s not like the server is chugging away 24/7 fetching media for you like a Fediverse server is.

      For single-user servers, or servers with only a few accounts, I expect the server (and all the network infrastructure in between two servers) is doing a lot more work than the client(s) - unless it’s like, the server is on a raspberry Pi and the client is running on a powerful desktop for a lot of the day, or something. Again, many factors at play.

      Really though, the question I start to ask in all this is more about, which parts of the system are the most difficult to justify?___

  • 56!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    What I feel is missing from the practical suggestions section: why cache images at all? They should be stored on the server they were uploaded to, and nowhere else. The image URL would be attached to the post, and could then be used by clients to fetch the image from the original server.

    I thought lemmy did this, but it seems not (any more?).

    • smallpatatas@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      I hear you on this - Akkoma does this by default, but the issue there is, let’s say someone on a tiny server posts an image, even a relatively small one - if it gets boosted by an account with 10k followers, that small server will effectively get DDOSed, assuming enough of those clients are online.