No device - console, phone, laptop, tablet, anything - should be sold with less than 128gb of storage. 64gb is not acceptable. It’s almost anti consumer, and it only exists so that companies can say “Prices start at…”
@Daojoan 1975 Carty is reading core dumps in octal and chuckling a little.
A core dump is when you look at memory. All of it.
@CartyBoston @Daojoan 64K was enough to put a man on the moon, and it's enough for you
But seriously.
I think most people could get away with far less RAM if most software, operating systems, and websites weren't so bloated.
Especially with the user-hostile spyware.
@ajsadauskas @CartyBoston @Daojoan this. i feel this so hard on my work laptop. i run a modern and updated linux on a 2015 laptop as my primary driver at home, easy breezy, still quick and responsive.
my work machine is a relatively new (2022) thinkpad so bogged down in corporate bs that it takes -- no joke, and no exaggeration -- over 5 minutes after logging in to be able to use anything. and don't even get me started on how long it takes to load even a simple excel workbook.
@CartyBoston@mastodon.roundpond.net @Daojoan@mastodon.social I still do that today.
Don't confuse consumer-grade computer gadgets with industrial-grade stuff.
Right now I'm working with a device that has 1MB of storage total ... and in my line of work this is monstrously large.
@Daojoan #degrowth dictates otherwise. We really need to start doing way less with even way more less.
My fave pet remark: we flew to the moon with less than 4K, and remember the root DNS servers of yore? Well, we’ve been doing way less with much more resource spillage. Let’s reverse that trend, and try to break out of this death spiral.
@dalias @Daojoan The solution for that is easy. Things need to #degrowth the shit out of themselves all the way.
Which means, we need to stop pixing every shit we take. And if we do, a crappy-rezzed still is all we need. And the crappyrez should further disincentivize us away from the currently fashionable ultratechnonarcissism (that’s killing us).
@dalias @Daojoan That’s why we need to fix the tech. And actually, limiting the maximum storage would be a GREAT way to put a limit to a lot of resource-wasteful practices.
People actually WOULD need to stop and think twice about using up resources if these resources would (to them) be as precious and scarce as they, well, actually really are (given that we have but one world to burn).
@dalias @Daojoan I think you’re missing the #degrowth point. You don't need to store all that stuff. And if you actually can’t, that limit is a bit clearer.
The bad thing here is that you actually *can* buy devices that keep up the pretence of infinite, boundless growth. Like I said: one world, and that’s it. We’ve already used it up. Now what? Use it up even more?
@js @Daojoan No amount of digital storage for personal use can "use up" the world. As the storage volume gets larger, the material mass and manufacturing cost (which reflects material and energy usage) tends down. This won't go on forever, but "people are storing too many pictures of their kids" or "oh noes people are storing offline backups of wikipedia" are NOT ACTUAL PROBLEMS THE WORLD FACES.
@dalias @Daojoan It’s not a “cost” thing. It’s an actual resource scarcity thing. Including, by the way, energy. Storage is rare earth metals, minerals, and energy.
You’re right, “this won’t go on forever”. It didn’t; we’re now burning up 1.7 of earth’s yearly resources every year. This year, Earth Overshoot Day? August, 1.
And no, it’s not just “storage”. It’s unbridled growth (the idea of—) anyywhere. And that’s why #degrowth is a necessity. Everywhere.
@js @Daojoan You really don't understand the stuff involved. Yes, replacing devices every year because you need bigger storage has resource costs. OTOH the marginal resource costs of a 512 GB SD card vs a 64 GB SD card are basicaly zilch. Storage size does not translate to resource consumption in any direct way.
@dalias @Daojoan I do object to that “all the data they want” as a given beyond discussion. Cuz limits. We really really need to scale down. And if a limit compels us towards the what and how of storage: good.
That 50mpx multiexposure stored as one 5GB stream? No. A flow that starts that way and then stores a single 200K png? Maybe ok.
@js @Daojoan How about we start doing #degrowth with stuff that only benefits a minute minority, like private jets, yachts, etc. And then with things like cryptocurrencies and other blockchain nonsense.
Consumer devices having more storage is the least of our worries, and yes, we went to the moon with much less hardware, but you won't be able to save even a single family photo on that amount, so shall we just stop taking photos?
Let's start degrowth with stuff that's actually useless before we start blaming normal people for the excess of the rich again.
@ainmosni @Daojoan Yes, yes. Nuke all private jets, yachts, SUVs, kill off leisure flying, kill off business flying, *realistically* tax fossil fuels to reflect environmental impact, kill off crypto, cloud crap, eat the rich, it’s all a start towards a world that’s better. Because it’s one in which we might even survive.
@Daojoan They could say "prices start at" basically the same even without that. They're not saving money & passing that on to the consumer with ridiculously undersized storage. They're making an excuse to jack up the price on the one with acceptable storage by 10x the cost of the difference.
@Daojoan - I revived an old Dell Venue 8 Pro tablet (which I am typing this post on) thanks to Mobian Phosh finally offering an OS that makes its Atom processor actually usable, and it is indeed 64gb of storage. Currently 40gb of empty space on it after loading a bunch of apps and even some music and a video. Point being: there can be plenty of exceptions to your rule that can still offer a lot of utility.
@Daojoan hell, my windows computer's "system and reserved" stuff is 61.8 gigs of storage. Just that. Not any installed apps or downloads or programs.
@Daojoan I agree with the general thread. Less
bloatware, more efficient use of resources. (And we had 300 Baud, and LIKED IT... and it really was uphill both ways... but we damn well wore shoes on the Georgia asphalt...)