News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What's a CPU to do when it has nothing to do? by dsr_ on Thursday October 11, 2018 @06:40AM (#18192319)
The 60" CRT typically required 45-65" of space front to back. That's a lot of room to give up.

The 60" LCD panel takes up 3-8" front to back, which is dwarfed by the cable box, disc player, gaming system...

Re:What's a CPU to do when it has nothing to do? by tolien on Thursday October 11, 2018 @06:56AM (#18192393)
And therefore more people have >=1 of the LCD, which is exactly the point…

Likewise, people used to have one TV. Now, a significant majority have multiple. Not because they’re more energy efficient but the effect is the same.

Re:What's a CPU to do when it has nothing to do? by laumars on Thursday October 11, 2018 @07:34AM (#18192588)
The original point was about energy efficiencies though. This was the point people were disagreeing with.

Also for what it's worth, back in the early-to-mid 90s I actually did do a study on the number of TVs in an average household in my home town (it was for a college assignment). While my sample size was relatively small (ie only a few hundred people interviewed), I did discover the vast majority of homes had 2 TVs instead of 1 (which surprised me as I didn't live in a particularly affluent area). So I don't think it's quite true to even say most people used to only have 1 TV. Or at least that wasn't the trend observed by my study.

Re:What's a CPU to do when it has nothing to do? by tolien on Thursday October 11, 2018 @07:53AM (#18192707)
The original point was the Jevin paradox, which says that increased efficiency leads to more efficient consumption. We’re now going round in circles about the causes of the decline of CRTs relative to flat panels, which is definitely a divergence.

I suspect if you re-ran the study you’d get a number bigger than 2, which (qualitatively) is the point I was getting at!

Re:What's a CPU to do when it has nothing to do? by laumars on Thursday October 11, 2018 @08:34AM (#18192939)
The think the thing about the Jevin paradox (if I understand it correctly) is it requires causation and, as I've said previously, I think in the case of TVs it's a correlation without causation. ie I think we would still have seen larger displays and more TVs in each home even if there hadn't been improvements in energy efficiency. I appreciate you feel we're going round in circles but that's always been the crux of my point right from the start and the reason why I don't believe the Jevin Paradox applies to that specific example.

However I do also think we've headed into the realm of using assumptions as statistics (as also discussed in my other post[1]) so perhaps this is one of those occasions where our differing opinions cannot be consolidated?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18192773

Re:What's a CPU to do when it has nothing to do? by cwilkes on Thursday October 11, 2018 @11:25AM (#18194269)
Also there has to be a somewhat high and tractable initial cost for the paradox to kick in. How much does it cost to run a TV for a year? I have no idea as it is rolled into my monthly electricity bill.

Now for a car I can see that immediately. Whoa $60 for a tank of gas? Maybe I won’t go on that road trip or maybe I’ll use the bus or telecommute.