This always interests me. I always push for more efficient use of computing resources but there isn’t any interest in this while it’s cheap
I agree. This topic was discussed recently on a HN thread and I'll repeat what I said then.
Some of the most popular languages are the least performative. But if a program runs slowly, many developers will simply throw more hardware at the problem. The "hardware is cheap" attitude is widespread among developers and is frankly embarrassing.
Compare that to other industries that strive to improve energy efficiency. Imagine if a manufacturer said that they were going to make fridges/washing machines or other appliances without regard to energy-efficiency because "hardware is cheap". It sounds ridiculous.
A typed, compiled language can give you good performance and smaller memory footprint for free with the reduced computing resources that implies - no premature optimisation required.
Among developers, there is also a double-standard in attitudes and practice. Developers complain loudly when they are at the receiving end of slow or memory-hungry apps (or websites). But when it's their turn to build apps or sites, they will prioritise languages or technologies that suit their own ease and comfort above all else. The user-experience, performance, memory footprint - all take a back seat.
At some points, bandwith will stop being "free", the price of electronics will grow, etc... Then it will reach a tipping point where the masses can not afford anymore what had become "essential".
Millenials and GenZ made lots of fun of boomers in yellow yest complaining about gas price.
I wonder what demonstrations will look like when we can't afford Netflix and Tiktok and Zoom any more.
For me, I'm old enough to remember a time where switching the modem on was a thoughfull decision, because of the phone bill.
But I'm afraid it's not going to make things any easier than it was for the yellow vests who had gone through one or two gas shocks in the 70s...