High-End Gaming PCs Banned in Six US States(nichegamer.com)
nichegamer.com
High-End Gaming PCs Banned in Six US States
https://nichegamer.com/2021/07/27/high-end-gaming-pcs-banned-in-six-us-states-after-california-energy-bill-limits-sales-on-high-performance-pcs/
110 comments
And the response explains why that comment is wrong:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27957381
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27957381
The response cites a table showing that desktop PCs sold after 2021-07-01 must consume no more than 75 kilowatt hours per year (base rate, with adders allowed for some features). 75 kWh/year is only 8.6 watts of continuous power draw. Even a basic budget desktop will drastically exceed 8.6 W if it's on continuously with significant load, like running folding@home. Since practically every desktop computer can draw more than 8.6 watts and sales of only a few computer models are restricted, I conclude that the restrictions are not about power consumption in the fully active state.
[deleted]
The exact math was off, but high end gaming PCs are still not being banned.
The important dispute isn't about the calculations, but whether the limits only apply to sleep mode (as claimed by the first comment) or also to yearly maximum power consumption (and thus to power consumption during active use).
If they applied to active use it would effectively outlaw computers entirely. That interpretation doesn't make sense.
There's some uncertainty with various forms of idle and sleep but that's a much smaller worry.
There's some uncertainty with various forms of idle and sleep but that's a much smaller worry.
[deleted]
Although the top comments TO that top comment seem to be explaining that the top comment is wrong, and it's probably a bad thing.
...I feel like this topic is oddly confusing.
...I feel like this topic is oddly confusing.
Exactly true. It’s the fact that people think top comment means something is more accurate when all it means is it was most voted. That’s like saying Trump is always right because he got the most votes in 2016. Every website is the same, likes or upvotes are literally a popularity contest and what is popular, usually the first couple comments and the comment that mostly closely meets already widely held expectations. Anyone who is an expert or knowledgeable in any field can attest that often, but not always, the top comment on a topic is wrong and the best comment sits 4 replies deep with almost no upvotes.
This is HackerNews. Either the top comment will support TFA and replies will refute the top comment, or the top comment will refute TFA. I can't think of a major story where that wasn't the case. That's kinda the shtick here.
Not just the top comments. Replies that agree are fairly rare here in general.
Personally I think that's good. Replies that agree rarely add new information, but they drown out other more informative comments and can create an echo chamber.
Personally I think that's good. Replies that agree rarely add new information, but they drown out other more informative comments and can create an echo chamber.
Sounds like gun laws. As long as the grip on the gun is shaped in a certain way, it's no longer an illegal assault rifle.
You mean "assault weapon". The laws invent the category of "assault weapon" and then define it arbitrarily to ban it. "assault rifle" is something completely different and actually has a definition, but is also something that's illegal for sale anywhere in the US (if newly produced). Assault rifles are defined by having selective fire between semi-auto and fully-automatic. (These weapons are still sold in the US, but only old weapons grandfathered in, and require special permitting to own.)
For more see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
For more see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
Considering many assault weapons are rifles and many assault rifles are assault weapons, please excuse my imprecise language.
You make it sound like the guns are using loopholes, but it's more that a lot of these bans are against a bunch of random miscellaneous attributes of the gun and don't make sense to begin with.
Why the downvotes? I bet they can ship the PSU separately and mark the PC as "for-parts" to get around this ban.
If you didn't read the discussion, that is the impression, yes.
To reduce emissions, they've started targeting the gaming industry? The meat industry emits orders of magnitude more pollution (even relative to the number of users of each)! Obviously, politicians would lose favor for targeting the meat industry, and thus have avoided fixing measures which would actually reduce emissions.
> They list consoles with taking a bulk of the emissions at 66%, and desktop computers at 31%. In spite of this, consoles are seemingly exempt from the bill.
My guess is the exemption is to tend to corporate interests? Absurd.
This bill does nothing to target Bitcoin mining (these people custom-build machines anyway).
Thoughtless bill through-and-through.
Perhaps this will make more kids build their own PCs, and thus fall in love with computing. Pointless hurdles like this kickstart a hacker's journey. A silver lining at last.
> They list consoles with taking a bulk of the emissions at 66%, and desktop computers at 31%. In spite of this, consoles are seemingly exempt from the bill.
My guess is the exemption is to tend to corporate interests? Absurd.
This bill does nothing to target Bitcoin mining (these people custom-build machines anyway).
Thoughtless bill through-and-through.
Perhaps this will make more kids build their own PCs, and thus fall in love with computing. Pointless hurdles like this kickstart a hacker's journey. A silver lining at last.
Not to mention meat is only 3% of emissions in the U.S. (of which the U.S. is the largest producer of emissions on a per capita basis). So if these gaming computers are a few orders of magnitude less than that (at idle speeds) it shows how ridiculous this is. Not to mention that these systems will just be shipped to the other 44 states (they aren't exactly dismantling them) so it's really just shuffling the problem elsewhere.
>it shows how ridiculous this is
Does it? If the other comment is to be believed, this law bans high end PCs which use more than 11W while in sleep mode. This is an absurd amount of power to draw. Most devices use less than 1W in sleep mode. Using so much power shows extremely inefficient design.
If this law can cause companies to fix their buggy firmware this could result in a massive power savings with virtually no effect to consumers since these devices never should have been using so much power anyway.
Does it? If the other comment is to be believed, this law bans high end PCs which use more than 11W while in sleep mode. This is an absurd amount of power to draw. Most devices use less than 1W in sleep mode. Using so much power shows extremely inefficient design.
If this law can cause companies to fix their buggy firmware this could result in a massive power savings with virtually no effect to consumers since these devices never should have been using so much power anyway.
Some of us like to keep their PCs in performance governor, disable sleeping, disable, core parking, disable swapping, disable switching to iGPU. I want a responsive PC, not a PC that thinks it's a good time to lower the performance.
My guess is the exemption is to tend to corporate interests? Absurd.
Its a law about how much energy PCs can use. Consoles aren't exempt; they're just not PCs.
They'd probably be allowed anyway because the law is about how much energy is used when the machine is idle, and consoles are pretty efficient when they're not doing much.
Its a law about how much energy PCs can use. Consoles aren't exempt; they're just not PCs.
They'd probably be allowed anyway because the law is about how much energy is used when the machine is idle, and consoles are pretty efficient when they're not doing much.
I think the real question is why we make a distinction by the use case of the hardware and not the hardware itself?
Under the hood consoles use the same chips and technologies as PCs and so do servers.
Under the hood consoles use the same chips and technologies as PCs and so do servers.
> Its a law about how much energy PCs can use. Consoles aren't exempt; they're just not PCs.
I don't understand what distinction you're making -- the Earth is getting polluted all the same. It's still an exemption.
Consoles would likely still be allowed -- but that's more fair and future-proof.
I don't understand what distinction you're making -- the Earth is getting polluted all the same. It's still an exemption.
Consoles would likely still be allowed -- but that's more fair and future-proof.
I don't understand what distinction you're making -- the Earth is getting polluted all the same. It's still an exemption.
That's not how laws work. For something to be exempt there would need to be a clause that specifically states "Consoles can pollute as much as they like". There isn't such a clause.
Saying they're exempt is like saying cars are exempt from the EPA's Cleaner Trucks Initiative (https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engin...). They're not exempt, they're just not trucks.
That's not how laws work. For something to be exempt there would need to be a clause that specifically states "Consoles can pollute as much as they like". There isn't such a clause.
Saying they're exempt is like saying cars are exempt from the EPA's Cleaner Trucks Initiative (https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engin...). They're not exempt, they're just not trucks.
Completely agree.
If you let the uses of electricity become politicized, don’t be surprised when your electricity consumption gets banned. Bitcoin mining is no more useless than video gaming.
It feels wrong to ban the sale of a product on the basis that "it might be used on the electrical grid".
There is nothing stopping me from buying a PC and running it on my own off grid solution.
If the power companies don't like my power consumption, they should simply implement solutions on their end, like charging me more money proportional to my usage.
There is nothing stopping me from buying a PC and running it on my own off grid solution.
If the power companies don't like my power consumption, they should simply implement solutions on their end, like charging me more money proportional to my usage.
It seems that charging a premium on energy use beyond a certain threshold would be far more effective. The carbon-cost of investigating high-end consumer electronics might actually be more than the few PCs that would be purchased.
Similar to how broadband is charged? On the flipside of that, energy users could also have their energy throttled based on the number of consumers in the household.
You have x energy credits as part of the package, if you don't want to pay over that then your energy will, of course, be throttled.
You have x energy credits as part of the package, if you don't want to pay over that then your energy will, of course, be throttled.
You can build it yourself then. They're banning complete packages which is much more likely to reduce grid power consumption.
Power companies do like your power consumption. It's the state that doesn't, but they also want you to keep buying electric cars.
Not really. The regulations also hit me as relatively reasonable, seemingly having exemptions for highly expandable devices, and largely being concerned with idle energy usage. Furthermore, this was known a long time in advance and is the reasoning for the ATX12VO standard that appeared in 2019.
https://twitter.com/JayzTwoCents/status/1420206010317230081
https://twitter.com/JayzTwoCents/status/1420206010317230081
That person is misreading the regulations. It's not about idle power consumption.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27957381
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27957381
Having dived deeper, this is under the tier 1 requirements under California's energy efficiency limits. Which the California Energy Commission (CEC) noted to adopt tighter appliance energy standards.
However from December 2021, "computers with high-speed networking capability, multi-screen notebooks, notebooks with cyclical behavior, and monitors with high refresh rates" will be covered by the rules" under tier 2 requirements.
That is ridiculous.
However from December 2021, "computers with high-speed networking capability, multi-screen notebooks, notebooks with cyclical behavior, and monitors with high refresh rates" will be covered by the rules" under tier 2 requirements.
That is ridiculous.
> computers with high-speed networking capability
What's high speed?
10mbps was high speed once, then it got obsolete. Now 1Gbps is standard, and while it's not lightning fast, it can be considered fast.
10Gbps ethernet is becoming bog standard in our servers, and they'll trickle down to consumers systems then.
What's next? MIMO wireless adapters?
What's high speed?
10mbps was high speed once, then it got obsolete. Now 1Gbps is standard, and while it's not lightning fast, it can be considered fast.
10Gbps ethernet is becoming bog standard in our servers, and they'll trickle down to consumers systems then.
What's next? MIMO wireless adapters?
if you ask the ISP it's 10 Mbit/s
Yeah. PCs which consume high power when in idle state.
How is that determined?
Few PCs draw much power when idle. A dual-monitor flat screen setup probably draws more than most idle computers (but yet not in power saving state).
Few PCs draw much power when idle. A dual-monitor flat screen setup probably draws more than most idle computers (but yet not in power saving state).
This is for prebuilt machines. Seems pretty easy to test. Turn the thing on, put it in sleep mode, then record the power draw from the PC PSU. Monitors are not included.
You'll see the Dieselgate of PCs. It's very efficient and underclocked while being tested, but when a customer registers the product with the website, the driver app installs the normal performance profiles.
If the computer can easily underclock when idle... why stop doing that?
Because "idle" is not well defined for manufacturers. For instance, core parking is a thing.
Idle is pretty well defined. It's when you close the lid of the laptop or hit suspend. The CPU stops running entirely and ram is given some power to persist data.
As long as it's trying to trigger on idle, I don't see how it would ever cause me a problem. If the CPU load is sufficiently low for cores to park, then let them.
If you want to disable core parking when not idle, that's fine, but it wouldn't even affect the measurements taken by this law.
If you want to disable core parking when not idle, that's fine, but it wouldn't even affect the measurements taken by this law.
Which includes a lot of PCs with beefy GPUs. Nvidia in particular has a lot of issues with idle power usage for their cards.
So Nvidia will finally fix the issue worldwide thanks to this local law.
They're really good these days. The fan even switches off entirely when not gaming.
Still a very annoying law because it prevents you from enabling stuff like wake-on-lan on modern PCs. You have to turn off all the power compliance toggles in the BIOS or it will power off the NIC and break a bunch of other stuff. If the vendor doesn't let you disable compliance mode, you're SoL.
Idle PCs consume roughly 0% of the country's energy. If they wanna reduce it anyway, they should put an energy star sticker on computers so people can save money with more efficient machines.
Idle PCs consume roughly 0% of the country's energy. If they wanna reduce it anyway, they should put an energy star sticker on computers so people can save money with more efficient machines.
Why can you not use wake on lan? Apple devices still have full networking capabilities while using less than 1w. It doesn't take over 11w to wake on lan unless the firmware is insanely inefficient.
This law will get mobo vendors to fix their products causing power savings world wide.
This law will get mobo vendors to fix their products causing power savings world wide.
That is not accurate - take a look at Page 9 of the product compliance datasheet: https://downloads.dell.com/rdoc/dell%20alienware%20ryzen%20e...
WOL and similar features do not change power consumption and this is not where the listed PC's fail. They fail on idle/standby power consumption and to be clear - there is NO reason they have to. Similar spec'd PC's can be purchased that meet these requirements.
WOL and similar features do not change power consumption and this is not where the listed PC's fail. They fail on idle/standby power consumption and to be clear - there is NO reason they have to. Similar spec'd PC's can be purchased that meet these requirements.
Hmm I assumed that this was similar to the EU reg which did lead to NICs being turned off even when you have WoL enabled. The NIC definitely affects idle power consumption and I would not be surprised if vendors take the path of least resistance (disabling features that are only used by "power users") until their hardware meets the requirements.
I'm sure similar PCs meet the requirements, and I'm also sure they're more expensive on average because they are newer. Too bad consumers are not allowed to make choises for themselves.
I'm sure similar PCs meet the requirements, and I'm also sure they're more expensive on average because they are newer. Too bad consumers are not allowed to make choises for themselves.
More detailed information:
https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/dell_energy_pcs/
Are there any restrictions on the purchase of individual computer parts, or restrictions on assembling those parts for a fee? What about the import of those parts, or a whole high-end gaming PC from out of state, post sale?
Would leaving the state explicitly to purchase a high powered gaming PC be illegal? A federal crime?
This just feels nominal and designed to send a message, but I genuinely don't understand that message. Gaming is bad because it hurts the environment? That's not right...
So many questions, and I'm suspecting there are fewer answers.
Would leaving the state explicitly to purchase a high powered gaming PC be illegal? A federal crime?
This just feels nominal and designed to send a message, but I genuinely don't understand that message. Gaming is bad because it hurts the environment? That's not right...
So many questions, and I'm suspecting there are fewer answers.
[deleted]
At a minimum, at least this is ideologically consistent with wanting to ban bitcoin, since both consume approximately the same order of magnitude of energy.
Yes but gaming PC's are far more useful
Are they? With cryptocurrencies I can at least conduct commerce. With gaming PCs, I can... play violent videogames?
You can create an entire VFX short film with an high end pc. You can simulate fluid mechanics and invent a new revolutionary propulsion system for aircrafts with an high end Pc. You can train a NN to recognize perilous situation from webcam footage and distribute the weights freely on GitHub With a HPC. There are Miriam of things you can do with a powerful computer.
This law is stupid, a single EV recharge consumes 100x more than a HPC every single second.
This law is stupid, a single EV recharge consumes 100x more than a HPC every single second.
Do the majority of gaming PC owners spend most of their time doing those tasks though? I think if the answer were yes, we would be discussing VFX and ML workstations, not "gaming" PCs.
If we can legislate less environmentally harmful ways of doing commerce, why can't we legislate less environmentally harmful forms of entertainment? This is simply the logical conclusion of that line of reasoning.
If we can legislate less environmentally harmful ways of doing commerce, why can't we legislate less environmentally harmful forms of entertainment? This is simply the logical conclusion of that line of reasoning.
Workstation hardware can be used for desktop gaming and any PC can be used for workstation tasks. There's no good reason to treat them differently under the law when the specifics of how they're different are very arbitrary.
They're marketed as gaming PCs. Why shouldn't they be regulated according to their intended purpose?
Marketing is marketing, any PCs intended purpose is whatever the owner chooses to use it for. I play games on a xeon machine with ECC sometimes. The distinctions between workstations and "gaming" PCs are arbitrary and superficial and no one should be misled into thinking otherwise.
Playing violent video games makes me less violent. I would imagine me being less violent could be beneficial to myself and others. Though whether violent video games do the same for others is debatable.
I would imagine kids that are exposed to violent video games at an early age may not understand it initially. It's very possible they will emulate it. But continuous exposure to it will help a smart kid understand and control it.
I would imagine kids that are exposed to violent video games at an early age may not understand it initially. It's very possible they will emulate it. But continuous exposure to it will help a smart kid understand and control it.
Shorting a market is not commerce but thanks for LARPing.
Destroying the environment to promote violence and toxic masculinity isn't entertainment.
Videogames don't promote violence or toxic masculinity in any way. It's just pixels on a screen you click buttons to. You're overthinking.
I couldn't disagree more. There are clear links between gaming violence and far right terrorism: all of the white incel mass shooters have been avid gamers. These games are practically training camps for right wing terrorists.
I'm just gonna assume you're being sarcastic for the sake of shitposting.
You can play peaceful games too.
yes, the violent video games are fun, life is also about having fun.
>after July 1, 2021, the kWh per year limit becomes 50, 60, and 75.
RTX 3080 consumes 250W when mining, so it would hit those limits in 10 days?
RTX 3080 consumes 250W when mining, so it would hit those limits in 10 days?
There are a lot more gamers than there are bitcoin miners, so it ends up balancing out:
https://www.wired.com/story/xbox-playstation-cloud-gaming-en... https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/11/video-games-...
We need to ban gaming if we want to solve the climate emergency.
https://www.wired.com/story/xbox-playstation-cloud-gaming-en... https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2018/11/video-games-...
We need to ban gaming if we want to solve the climate emergency.
That motherjones article says pc gaming consumes 75 TWh per year while just bitcoin is estimated to use 120 TWh.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56012952
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56012952
Less than a factor of two difference is "approximately the same order of magnitude", as I originally stated.
Yes and we should also ban televisions and automobiles and espresso machines and loud music and nighttime lighting and virtual reality and air conditioning a room to below 74 degrees.
In this specific instance the consumer is being done a favor by being prevented from buying terrible prebuilts, but the law is absurd.
What's wrong with the prebuilts? Price vs performance?
That, but also:
- Low quality parts
- Bad build quality
- Incompatible & proprietary motherboards, coolers and power supplies
- Bizarre part choices, like severely underpowered cooling and power delivery or using just 1 stick of RAM when 2 sticks would be significantly faster with about the same amount of money
- Windows installation filled with unwanted software and/or outright malware, like McAfee, which can have a double-digit % effect on game performance.
- The purchase process can involve dark patterns, like cleverly hidden support contracts with a monthly fee
The PC hardware channel Gamers Nexus has been reviewing prebuilt systems for past few months [1]. None of the reviewed computers have been great, and the ones from big manufacturers (namely Dell and Alienware) have been the worst of the bunch.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsuVSmND84QuM2HKzG7ip...
- Low quality parts
- Bad build quality
- Incompatible & proprietary motherboards, coolers and power supplies
- Bizarre part choices, like severely underpowered cooling and power delivery or using just 1 stick of RAM when 2 sticks would be significantly faster with about the same amount of money
- Windows installation filled with unwanted software and/or outright malware, like McAfee, which can have a double-digit % effect on game performance.
- The purchase process can involve dark patterns, like cleverly hidden support contracts with a monthly fee
The PC hardware channel Gamers Nexus has been reviewing prebuilt systems for past few months [1]. None of the reviewed computers have been great, and the ones from big manufacturers (namely Dell and Alienware) have been the worst of the bunch.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsuVSmND84QuM2HKzG7ip...
You pay more for less than if you did it yourself and it isn't hard to find where they've cut corners to lower their costs.
But also critically the people buying pre-builts are obviously not interested in doing it themselves. That is why the market exists, right? So like its fun for more serious people to dunk on them in Youtube videos or whatever but I think its something pretty overblown.
Also if you're really willing to spend some money, there are plenty of Boutique vendors (Falcon Northwest) that will gladly sell you a capable and well-built computer.
But also critically the people buying pre-builts are obviously not interested in doing it themselves. That is why the market exists, right? So like its fun for more serious people to dunk on them in Youtube videos or whatever but I think its something pretty overblown.
Also if you're really willing to spend some money, there are plenty of Boutique vendors (Falcon Northwest) that will gladly sell you a capable and well-built computer.
Not everyone needs to build their own desktop, but those specific prebuilts aren't desiderable even compared to other prebuilts.
Price vs... price. You can nearly always build a more suitable PC for cheaper(potentially with the extra steps of paying someone to build it for you). Though recently I've heard of a distortion where apparently due to high GPU prices, some prebuilds' value was more fair.
They're worse in general than self-building, but those specific ones have serious cooling issues.
[deleted]
All dark blue states. California, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington.
Pointless vote-grabbing bills are pushed to get headlines and signal the lawmakers virtuosity. Makes me think of the plastic bag "tax" in LA.
Pointless vote-grabbing bills are pushed to get headlines and signal the lawmakers virtuosity. Makes me think of the plastic bag "tax" in LA.
The plastic bag "tax" means I use the same number of pastic bags bug now I pay an extra few nickles when I go to the store and the bags I use and dispose of contain much more plastic than they did previously. I don't know who won there but it isn't me, the environment, or the retailer.
Why not just bring your own?
Like, serious question. I didn't do it until I had to but I can fit more crap in my own bags, and they're not going to break on me when I carry them up the stairs. Its kind of just better.
Like, serious question. I didn't do it until I had to but I can fit more crap in my own bags, and they're not going to break on me when I carry them up the stairs. Its kind of just better.
Because I don't want to have a collection of wadded up bags with me at all times? I don't know ahead of time how many bags I might need. Bags always seem to get dirty in one way or another.
The amount of carbon dioxide I exhale from being a living human while shopping is roughly the same as the shopping bags would emit if I burned them when I got home from the store. (which is much much less than if I drive even a short distance to the store)
The plastic in the supply chain getting things to the store is of ridiculously larger magnitude.
I reuse a fraction of the bags I get for various extra jobs usually revolving around waste or odds and ends uses which I otherwise would have to purchase bags for specifically.
In short, bringing my own bags is usually more of a hassle (though I do on occasion for one reason or another) and by every metric I can think of, not using disposable plastic bags is a meaningless gesture.
The amount of carbon dioxide I exhale from being a living human while shopping is roughly the same as the shopping bags would emit if I burned them when I got home from the store. (which is much much less than if I drive even a short distance to the store)
The plastic in the supply chain getting things to the store is of ridiculously larger magnitude.
I reuse a fraction of the bags I get for various extra jobs usually revolving around waste or odds and ends uses which I otherwise would have to purchase bags for specifically.
In short, bringing my own bags is usually more of a hassle (though I do on occasion for one reason or another) and by every metric I can think of, not using disposable plastic bags is a meaningless gesture.
Confused - are you saying that you go to the grocery store on an impulse and those impulses are never from home? (Where one would store the bags) And maybe you’re saying you just walk to the store - you don’t own a car or live very close - so you couldn’t even store the bags anywhere that would be convenient for use?
I’d understand if that’s the viewpoint but this sounds a bit contrived. I find bringing my bags is same or less effort as dealing with the ones I have to get rid of at the end of the trip plus the tax included. And I hate throwing away things that are single use when I could easily use something that doesn’t have that lifecycle.
I’d understand if that’s the viewpoint but this sounds a bit contrived. I find bringing my bags is same or less effort as dealing with the ones I have to get rid of at the end of the trip plus the tax included. And I hate throwing away things that are single use when I could easily use something that doesn’t have that lifecycle.
Australia has the same thing for over a decade. From what I see, the vast majority of people bring their bags back to the store to use again.
Exactly. True experience: two weeks ago I was in a Target in Florida and got a plastic bag with my purchase, just a normal grocery store grade bag. One week ago I went to a Target in Burbank and paid for a plastic bag with my purchase. This thing was some sort of fancy heavy-duty tote.
The bigger problem is attempting to modify behavior through an open market by way of legislation. As opposed to using legislation to prevent damaging behavior directly.
The bigger problem is attempting to modify behavior through an open market by way of legislation. As opposed to using legislation to prevent damaging behavior directly.
how does this apply to builds ie are parts next. many gamers build thier own pc's. i am personally no where near these high end but do build my own.
It looks like this ban tries to fix the symptoms, not the problem itself.
Also, is there any data that backs this? Like what % of total grid load goes to such PCs?
Also, is there any data that backs this? Like what % of total grid load goes to such PCs?
I.. don't know what to say with this rule
Wait, what about people who already own the high end gaming pc?
Wait, what about people who already own the high end gaming pc?
[deleted]
First they came for the gamers
But presumably they’re not banning coal powered electricity stations, they’re focusing on banning ….. gaming PCs.
What about air conditioning, heaters, houses without insulation…. All banned?
What about air conditioning, heaters, houses without insulation…. All banned?
I fail to see how a progressive residential energy tax wouldn’t have been the better option but I’m super jacked to see progress being made, even if it is a tad misguided.
"I am super jacked to see progress being made in controlling the moral failings of certain humans, even if it has to be through banning the sale of alcohol nationwide."
I fail to see how this is an attack on people’s moral failings. PC makers can improve their idle energy usage and get back into the market. This seems no different from regulating the efficiency or emissions of fridges.
Alcohol is a good that is enjoyed by huge numbers of people for pleasure and to escape pain. It can also be produced from basically any foodstuff that contains starch. I don't think high power PCs fits into the same category.
There’s a residential energy tax called monthly energy bill. What is best, people are taxed on usage. Consume more - pay more. If it’s too low, just slap extra per-kwh tax on top. Like for gas.
Then people will just buy more gasoline cars.
The top comment explains why this is probably a good thing.