Comment by maccard
4 months ago
There’s 13 million households in California. Theoretically, if every household saved 2 watts with this change it would remove a small gas power plant from the grid. It’s nothing for one household but this sort of efficiency at scale makes a difference.
That's all motherhood and apple pie, but it's a red herring with no basis in pragmatic reality (i.e. not how the calculus of utility-scale power generation industrial planning/ops works), and wholesale disingenuous to posit that even a residual percentage of those households---say, asymptotic to the proportional marketshare of Firefox users in the state as a comparatively low friction proxy aspirational target---would even attempt this hack...to say nothing of its trade-offs or implied liabilities to the end user iff successfully implemented...or how Comcast would be incentivized if adoption achieved a critical mass that made the hack observable (either technically or monetarily) on their end.
Not to discredit the author for sharing the insight, but the hard sell of saving 2W consumption simply isn't a prime mover here. If anything, mitigation of implicit side channel RF interference when the hack is paired with a OpenWrt router (as the author apparently intended) makes a lot more compelling sense...but now we're talking about bootstrapping an additional appliance into the setup, rendering contextual discussion of power savings objectively moot.