36C3 preroll music
Herald: Our next speaker is Chris Adams,
and we were talking about reducing carbon
in the digital realm. How to understand
the environmental impact of the digital
products you built and take measurable
steps to green your stack. Floor is yours.
Chris Adams: Cool! applause Hello
everyone. First of all, can you folks hear
me in the back? Yeah. If you can just
raise your hands. Excellent, cooI! All
right. Hello everyone. My name is Chris
Adams. As you can see, Mr. Credit, Chris
Adams on pretty much every online ralley.
Please don't try to follow this link
because it's not actually gonna go
anywhere yet, but it will be up at the end
of this talk. I'm just going to introduce
myself. If you don't already know me, my
name is Chris Adams. I have a background
working in environmental kind of wacky
startups from Loco2, which was all about
trying to make trains easier to book than
planes. A.M.E.E, which was all about
putting kind of carbon calculation as an
API, so you could work out the carbon
footprint of anything. And now I spend a
bunch of my time working with the Green
Web Foundation, where our mission is to
basically make the web green. And I also
help organize an online community called
ClimateAction.tech, which as you can see
is for folk like yourselves who want to
work out how to do something about climate
in their day job and what they do. I've
got about 45 minutes with you and this is
a kind of rough outline for the day. I'm
gonna briefly give you a kind of primer on
how you measure carbon and why you might
measure that. I'll share with you a mental
model which I found useful for helping
think about what steps I can actually take
as professional working in this field; and
then I'll give you some pointers of where
to go next. If you feel compelled to do
something about, well, what is essentially
an existential challenge and the biggest
challenge we are already facing. So first
of all, measuring carbon! So, can you just
show you... raise your hands if you've
seen this before? Yes. The water cycle. So
you get the idea that we've got like a
water, kind of, evaporates, goes along
into the sky, then comes down and rains.
And then... generally it's best if it
doesn't go in one place because that's
that's a good thing. But generally we have
like cycles in nature and one of them we
have is for water and we also have
cycles elsewhere. And that's kind of why I
want to share with you here, because there
are also cycles around carbon. So what
you're seeing here is actually some freeze
frames of a really, really cool but
somewhat confusing video. And as I was
saying, kind of carbon works on a kind of
slower timescale that might have here. So,
this is an... this is basically a diagram
of all the carbon in the world with some
idea of proportions. All right? So, the
green stuff up here, this is us like we're
made of carbon. It turns out. So a tree.
Trees are made of carbon. And when living
things die and decompose, some of the
carbon ends in the atmosphere as we
decompose. The purple stuff here - this is
like the ocean. Fish are made of carbon,
too. And so are plants and everything like
that. And when they die, they sink down,
which is why you've got this massive
chunky like stock of carbon down here.
Eventually, some of that might become
sediment, then form rock, then end up in
this kind of black stuff around here,
which we kind of consider that the earth's
crust. So then at the top, we've got
carbon in the atmosphere. So you really
can't see it very well. But there is
carbon up here. This is kind of
atmospheric carbon, really. And there is
like if you watch this video that I've
linked to, you can see all moving around
as a cycle. But this is kind of wealth
carbon, really. So now in about 1850, we
started using a lot more energy. And
to meet that demand of all this energy, we
started burning fossil fuels in earnest as
well as burning wood for fuel. And you can
see the fossil fuels here as kind of stuff
that's kind of come out of here and is now
represented here. And we've also taken
some carbon in the earth and burn some of
that, and like... What is it? Where does
this all go? There's a clue in these
arrows on the screen. Right? Now if we
fast forward to 2017, it looks a bit more
like this. You've seen like there's less
of this red stuff down here because it's
got into here and because it's circulated
all the way around. We've ended up with
carbon in other parts of Earth. And, in
particular, you'll see that we have fewer
red dots down here, but we've got a lot
more around here, which is going to pushed
some of the carbon higher up here. So this
is kind of... if there's one thing I want
you to kind of really take away is that
when we talk about climate, it's really
about carbon. And we need as an industry
to be able to get good at understanding
how to reduce carbon more than anything
else. If we're going to be thinking about
climate. Now, I'll try and break this down
to a kind of simple way, which I found
really, really useful for this. There's a
lady on Twitter. Her name is Professor
Julia Kay Steinberger. She's awesome. She
has this really nice way. She recently
shared this thread on Twitter where she
basically explained how she explains kind of
climate change to her children who are 4
and 7 years old. And she basically did it
this way. She got like a globe, wrapped it
in some plastic and then said, well, this
is basically what happens. You understand
the idea of being wrapped up in things
getting warm and things getting too warm.
That's it. And like, that turned out to be
a really effective way for her to do it.
And it turned out if kids can get this
stuff, then I think we can. And I think
it's really, really useful for us to kind
of be aware that carbon is actually a thing
that we do need to be able to count, and
track and account for in our jobs. So
we've spoken about this on a planetary
scale, which isn't all that actionable.
But if we were to kind of bring this down
to organizational scale, where the most of
us might kind of work and more specific,
it might be easier for us to act upon. It
might look a little bit like this. There
are established ways to measure carbon
within an organization you work in and in
the same way that accountants might talk
about legal ownership of a company. There
are guidelines for talking about who has
responsibility for emissions when you're
reporting and deciding who should be
changed, who should be making reductions.
And I'm sure in this diagram here to
actually take some very, very dull, dry
material into something that we can relate
to, which is hot beverages and coffee.
And, generally, you can think of it like
this: if either these three kind of
scopes, there's this idea of scope 1
emissions, which is basically if I burn
fossil fuels to heat up a, say, container
so I can have coffee, then that's the
emissions from me burning less fossil
fuels myself and my scope 1 emissions.
Scope 2 might be me using a kettle. So if
someone is a burning coal to generate
electricity for me to kind of boil the
kettle, then that's my scope 2. Now scope
3 might be me walking to a store or into a
coffee shop and all the emissions and all
of that supply chain - that's my scope 3.
So there's this idea of kind of like
dependency chain of carbon, which...
because I'm speaking to a bunch of people
who have some understanding where
technology I think you should be, kind of,
you should be ready to be comfortable with
the concept of dependency chains and
things like that. And to make this a bit
more concrete, I refer to, say, a good
example. So Stripe... Has anyone heard of
Stripe here? Okay, a few of you. Okay. So,
basically, payments company. All right?
Now they are actually pretty good about
sharing information about what they do and
what their emissions are. And you can see
this here. They've basically got... in
2017, they started making noises about
becoming carbon neutral and they started
reporting information in these kind of
scopes here. And you'll see this phrase -
TCO2E, but basically just think of that as
carbon dioxide, the stuff that's warming
up the world because there's different
gases, but they all have more or less the
same effect. So in many cases, people will
use the term CO2E2 to describe all of
these kind of basket of gases. All right?
But you see here that from a scope 1
emissions are quite small because they're
usually just heating a building. Scope 2
is a little bit higher, because they pay
to, say, keep a building running. And then
you'll see down here that there's massive
scope 3, because they tend to pay for a
lift infrastructure and have a lot of
people flying around as if they're prevent
a lists??? and so on. All right? Let's
look at some other other examples. Amazon!
So Amazon repeat started reporting on CO2
emissions for the first time this year.
And long story short, their carbon
footprint is about the same as the country
of Finland. Right. Which is kind of large.
And as you can see, because obviously they
run lots of services, which is why you got
4,5 million tonnes of CO2. They also have
a lot of warehouses and things like that,
and have a lot of kind of cars or vehicles
that are getting things around. But
because they actually have a large supply
chain themselves, they have a massive
honking great scope set of scope 3
emissions. So let's look at another
company, right. Google. So Google is a
Google has a surprisingly low emissions
considering scale, about the same as the
African country of Liberia. All right?
Now, there's something interesting here.
Google have reported their emissions with
scope 1, 2 that you can see here. And 3,
but they have this interesting thing here,
where this is the energy they're using.
But this is the energy they say that
they're using because they are purchasing
what are basically renewable energy
credits, which is one way of using green
energy. If you do not have access to green
energy in certain parts of the grid and
Google are pretty good in this field, but
it's worth bearing that in mind. Google
are transparent about this stuff, where at
Amazon, you don't see these numbers. So
this number could be somewhat higher for
we know. All right. So this gives you an
idea of what some of these numbers might
look like. And then let's look at another
company, which is also, well I assume you
might have heard of. Is this works? Yes. I
go to Apple. Yeah. So Apple has... these
are their emissions with just their
facilities. So just their data centers and
just, say, the offices that they have.
Right. So this is quite low, by
comparison. Right. So this is carbon
emissions of maybe Gambia - another
small African country. All right. And
you'll see once again, by sourcing
renewable energy, they've had a kind of
quite big reduction in the emissions that
they otherwise wouldn't had. But you'll
also see that in scope 3, because there's
lots of flying and because there's lots of
commuting, they have a lovely new office
miles away from anywhere. So you have to
drive to get there, you know, it's like, I
don't know, 40 percent of the emissions
were just their facilities. We have to
drive there and back. All right. But if
you look at the emissions from Apple as
all the products that people buy, you'll
see that the emissions are somewhat
larger, about the same size as Mongolia,
which is kind of large. And you will also
see that there is a large... this is a
breakdown from Apples annual report, and
they basically... they're pretty
transparent about this stuff and they're
good on this. And they say this is where
the emissions come from. And you can see
all the way around here, this is the
manufacturing. The machines they have. And
then if we zoom in to like this bit over
here. Right. You'll see that there's a
little bit of information there. There's
like, obviously use phase. But the main
car, the main impact from what they do is
actually making the electronics. So this
is kind of how we tend to think about a
carbon and how one might report
on carbon and make it and make decisions
to reduce carbon. All right. Now, I'm
going to share with you a mental model,
which I found helpful in this field. I
call it Platform, Packets and Process. And
it's generally aimed taking something
which is quite abstract to this scope 1, 2
and 3 thing, to something that you might
act upon inside the teams that you work
in. And it kind of maps to the kind of
groups that you might be working in if
you're, say, a frontend developer or a
backend developer, or a designer, or
product manager. So it kind of tries to
map to that. And as you can see, platform
might be infrastructure you run; Packets
is infrastructure other folk run, like the
rest of the Internet; and Process would be
decisions that are made inside your
organization that cause that to be
emissions. So if you highlight a large
company and you have a massive, say,
corporate campus which is miles away from
everyone else has to drive to. Then
there's gonna be a load of emissions from
that decision that you actually make. So
let's run through this. On the scope 1, 2,
3 thing I shared with you, this is a kind
of how it maps. And this might look like
some of the things, some activities you
might have been involved in that will
create emissions. So, generally, on the
platform side, if you're running
infrastructure yourself, there'll be scope
2; if it's scope 3 you'll see here and,
well, I'll go into the other ones in more
detail later. All right. So this is the
model that I'm sharing with you today. All
right. So let's have a look at Platform:
infrastructure that you run. There are
kind of three levels, which I'm going to
share with you today, which might be of
use to you. All right. There are so
basically Provisioning, Provider and I'm a
bit worried about showing this last one
because it's kind of new: the other
programing languages. And that's partly
based on some stuff from yesterday. But
also, I'm a bit worried about kind of
inciting the pitchfolks when I share this.
But we'll see where we go with this. So
Provisioning is one level you might
actually have if you build digital
products and you run servers. All right.
So this chart you see here is a chart from
the CEO Power of Wireless Cloud Report.
This basically shows how Australia uses
the Internet and it gives you an idea
that, well, we don't use the Internet in a
uniform fashion all the time, because
basically if you think about us being set
at midnight as we tend to fall asleep, we
tend to use Internet less. All right. And
then as we wake up, we might say kind of
have coffee or something like that, then
as more of us come to work, we start using
it more. And then later on we work during
the day, then we'll go home. But you will
start watching Netflix and things. And
then once again, we fall asleep and then
we get to there. So there is a kind of
pattern. And if you have any analytics on
how your own tools are using your ad
services are used, you'll see these kind
of waves and patterns in how it works. And
this is worth bearing in mind, because
traditionally when we've had to provision
services to support something like a Web
site or a video streaming service, the way
that we used to do it was basically buy a
big server that can handle the peak usage.
And we just accept that. Because
Provisioning is quite a difficult kind of,
because it's a pain to do. We just leave
this big box idling most of the time in
the hope that we could actually hit the
surfing at the peak, right. Now the
downside of that is that, well, if we can
make this conceptual leap that the cloud
computing is someone else's computer, then
it shouldn't be that much of a leap again,
to realize that computers run electricity
and we generally burn fossil fuels right
now to generate electricity. So in the
example we had before, when we had this
big box that wasn't being used, we would
basically be burning money to pay for
capacity, we didn't have. But we're also
burning fossil fuels and causing emissions
one way. Now we've got better kind of
running infrastructure. All right. So
we've had this kind of trend over the
last, say, 10 to 15 years to abstract
machines away to make them easier to
manage. So this might be VMs or
containers, or dinos, or unicorns, or
whatever you might prefer to use. But in
general, the pattern is make something
more abstract and then make it easier to
spin it up and down in response to demand.
All right. This is better because we now
have something looks a bit like this. So
we are not... we're wasting less well,
we're burning less money, but we're still
burning money. And as a result, we're
still burning fossil fuels. Now, there's
some new changes in the last few years,
which are relatively recent, and we're
seeing kind of changes in how we work now,
which look a lot, look and sound is
sometimes referred to as like service lists
or functions as a service if you work on
the backend with the servers, right. Now
here, this is interesting, because we're
rewarded for efficient use of computers,
because we basically pay on a per request
basis. So if someone tries to load a page,
we pay for specifically that request. And
then when we're not using it,
theoretically we're paying for nothing and
theoretically things can spin right down.
So there's a much clearer mapping between
the usage and what you would pay for here.
Now, there is a trade off here that is the
number of providers that if you want to
use tools like this and have this much
tighter mapping is that we end up with a
small number of people who do provide
this. So if you were to go to, if you want
to move to something like this, you
generally end up using something like
either Microsoft Stacks or Google or AWS.
And this kind of presents us with a kind
of awkward problem right now. If we care
about climate and we care about like
basically being able to solve problems, as
say professionals, we have to choose two
of these three things. So we kind of care
about the fossil fuel thing because we're
in a climate crisis officially now. All
right. Also since I think December, when
the EU parlament declared this. If you've
used to running any kind of online
service, you'll be aware that in many
cases there is a kind of shift to
basically use a hosted thing, because it
turns out that running infrastructure is
extremely complicated. And in many cases,
if you can buy versus build, then you'll
often save yourself a lot of hassle. And
the final one thing is, well, avoiding
oligopolies is quite a good thing, and
because diverse ecosystems are healthy
ecosystems and we kind of don't really
have so many options right now; if you do
care about this, it does feel a little bit
like this. And as we saw from just
yesterday, if you are at this stage, you
saw Gillian Oliver talking about this and
how much infrastructure you had to run
themselves, in many cases because we
didn't win it with this consolidation,
where if you want to use one service, you
have to buy into all these other things
associated with that company. All right.
So that's one of the trade off you might
have to think about when it comes to, say,
Platform and Provisioning. Provider is
also another decision that might affect
it. Now, I didn't mention in the beginning
of this talk that you can basically reduce
emissions from what you do. If you say a
cloud provide like AWS just by running it
in a different region. So you can see this
map here. This is by this person who is
best paid by Amazon to build kind of
sketch naughty things. And this is a list
of all the data centers and you'll see the
ones with the green leaves, which are
marked as kind of sustainable regions. And
you see on the right hand side on the east
coast of America, which is around North
Virginia, which has traditionally been
coal country - you don't have much in the
green regions there, but on the left hand
side, where you see a lot of kind of
leaves. And that's because on the west
coast of America, there's a lot more hydro
and things like that. So, you know,
with kind of a lower CO2 for each kind of
unit of computer that you're paying for.
So, yes, you can reduce emissions just by
switching from one region to another
region. And this is because, basically, to
expand that point I shared with you
before, where you are in the world... like
the place will affect the carbon intensity
of the emissions that come from running
infrastructure anywhere. So let's have a
look at Europe. Right. So France kind of
green full of nukes, right. So that's good
for some people, maybe less so in Germany.
Right. Germany, which is up here, this is
the land of solar and coal. Right. So
we're not all that green. England is
actually got lit up quite a bit better
than it was before. But up here, you can
see Poland: aww, not so good. Poland is
really, really into coal. And as you can
see up here in the Nordic states where
there's loads and loads of mountains and
wind and water, that things are really,
really green. And this gives you an idea
that you can kind of see where the
emission, the likely emissions might be
depending on where you're on the world and
that you might make decisions based on
this. But to have to kind of compare
against this is gonna be quite complicated
process. So one thing that we do. All
right. The Green Web Foundation, which is
where I currently work, is we build like a
directory to make it easier for you to
make that, to do the right thing. And we
present this information as an API and as
data sets for you to kind of build into
your own tool in which I'll expand a
little bit later. But one of the key
things is that your provider will actually
have an impact on who you... basically,
where something is will have an impact on
emissions from here. There is also... At this point
here I wanna segue a bit into kind of
energy markets, because when you start
working with computers and if you have to,
if you're responsible for any service, the
more you think about cloud or how to work
with cloud, the more you realize how many
parallels there are to energy markets.
Now energy markets are really interesting
in lots of strange ways, right. So in
Europe, but actually in lots of places
around the world, you can have cases where
the cost of electricity is actually
negative rather than positive. So like on
a day where there's which is really,
really sunny or really, really windy, it's
actually cheaper for the grid to basically
pay people to basically take energy off
the grid to keep it stable than it is to
say power down a nuclear power station
or power down some kind of large coal
fired power station. And then under
assault, you end up with these scenarios
where you have a negative and you have
negative cost. And one of the reasons here
is to basically get people to kind of take
this demand and put it to use in other
places. And I'm sharing this with you
because it's the kind of the idea like
shifting load might be might be something
you're aware of as developers or trying to
kind of delay jobs, for example. But you
see this manifesting now in how we use
energy, but basically things like with
IV's and things. So this is an example:
Bulb energy in the UK. They will
basically... if you have a car, they,
basically have time rest now, where
depending on the time of day or if you're
prepared to kind of provide, be a little
bit less strict about when you need
something running, then you'll get a
cheaper electricity. And why am I sharing
this with you? Because I think you start
to see things like this in the realm of
like computing now. So this is a paper
that was shared this year, the ICT for
Sustainability (ICT4S), basic conference
in Lapperate, which I've misspelt. Sorry,
Finnish people. And the general idea is
that these people started building Kubernetes
Scheduler to basically run a docker container,
run machines, run workloads where
energy was cheap and green by basically
tracking where it was sunny really. And
they were able to do this on where they
end up working with Microsoft to do this,
because Microsoft is one large company
that has a number of data centers all
around the world. But it kind of sucks
that there's only one company that you can
actually get this stuff from, or if you
wanted to do something kind of
cool with, say, a more
decentralized use of the web that... you
have to kind of go through one large
company. And if we were to look at say,
well, maybe a more kind of open, green and
decentralized web or Internet might look
like there is actually some lessons we
could learn from the energy sector over
the last, say, 10 to 20 years. So Germany,
one thing that we saw was the Energie-
wende over the last 15 years. And the
result of that was that we had like cheap
green distributed energy. So that we,
Germany is interesting in the sense that
it has quite a heterogeneous grid. So
there's lots and lots of smaller providers
of energy rather than just a handful of
huge providers. And there's lots of
reasons why having a diverse ecosystem is
helpful in this, right. And I kind of
wonder like this is one I share with you
as an idea. What if we'd something like
a digitalwende? Right. What if we could
do something like this to, kind of,
abstract computing away to the point that
you can run these in the same way? There
are companies that are now doing stuff
like this right now. And there's one
company called Helios Exchange that does
exactly this. But the paper I showed you
before, shows you this stuff around there.
So this may provide a way away from having
to rely on just basically an oligopoly and
concentrating more power. If we were to
kind of be prepared to think a bit more
about how we run computing around. So
final thing is, as this possible way of
sharing was programing language. So where
appropriate, you can have an impact here
as well, because different languages have
different goals and that can result in
reducing emissions from just much more
efficient use of resources. So this is
Hannes Mehnert yesterday. He was
presenting some work he's been doing on
MirageOS unikernels. All right. And
whether you probably can't see it. He was
basically making the point that this is
how he used running this stuff before.
When he switched to using unikernels, he
saw memory usage and CPU dropped massively
by just having a kind of better use of the
existing resources. So this was like a 25
fold decrease in compute use and a 10
times decrease in like RAM usage. And you
see the same things with other computing,
other languages. And the nice thing is
this is recorded now so you can see it too
tomorrow. All right. But there's also
papers that talk all about this stuff. So
depending on what your goals might be,
there may be certain languages which are
really better kind of optimized for the
task that you might actually have. Now,
does this mean that I'm saying that we
should all go out and code everything in
Ocaml, C and Rust? No, that's a really,
really... we choose languages for a wide
range of reasons from ecosystem to hiring,
to like developer happiness. And when you
look at a project or a product level,
you'll see that these kind of micro
optimizations, more than fun, might not be
the most effective way to achieve some
emissions reductions. But it's still out
there and it's worth being aware of. And
also, it's worth thinking about if you are
able to kind of think about the entire
stack of tools you might be using, then
you're kind of doing something like this
in many cases. If you say use like Redis
or nginx or something to serve things. So
that's the idea for, like, platform. Now
let's talk about packets. So this is...
I've spoken of infrastructure you control,
this is infrastructure you do not control.
All right? Now, you cannot really control
the other parts of the Internet, and
that's generally considered a good thing.
But what you can do is control how much
data you send over the wire instead, allright.
And if we were to kind of look at,
say, the amount of energy we sent over the
wire and we figured out that both sending
data uses infrastructure, it uses energy,
which uses fossil fuels. Then we've got
some bad news, like we've seen pages
growing in size to the point that in
average they... I think the mean web page
size is now larger than the original
download of Doom. All right. But we're
also seeing it, because we have mobile
phones, so we use this more. All right.
And then because cellular network tend to
use more energy to shift the same amount
of data as, say, wired or Wi-Fi networks,
we have a loss here. So from a kind
of energy and climate point of view, this
is like the worst scenario we can imagine
right now. Thankfully, there are this, if
we think about Web page budgets as
basically carbon budgets, we realize we
have lots of tools that we can repurpose
for carbon reductions. So one example is
Google's Lighthouse. It basically runs
checks against your page, then it grades
you on how well your page is optimized. So
what we've been doing at the Green Web
Foundation is taken Lighthouse, we
forked it and we made Greenhouse. Which
was basically the same idea, but it kind
of looks at how many resources you run and
then says, well, yeah, climate emergency
folks, maybe you don't want to get all
your stuff from fossil fuels. And there's
some other things far worse than we can
make it, kind of, work out the carbon
footprint from this, because these numbers
exist, but that's further down the line.
But you can also see that I'm referring to
the ethical web principles here. If you
care about this as a professional, this is
something that the creators of the web are
now saying and giving you license to be
doing. If you do say, look, I don't want
to do this, there is a moral argument for
doing this. And if I want to build the
web, as Tim intended, then you can refer
back to these ethical principles now for
this. But I will need to share with you
that that doesn't mean that we should just
like reader optimize every single web page
and they'll be fine. Right. It's worth
getting a sense of perspective around
this. All right. Video like, video just
dwarfed web traffic. When we think about
designs, we might make like to give you
some context. This chart is just showing
you an idea of where like usage of
like data flows. Right. Now, 60 percent of
this basically is just telling us that all
the video used and streamed is about 300
kind of megatons of CO2. And that was what
it was in 2018, which is roughly the
carbon footprint of Spain. All right. So
all the video = Spain, that's kind of
numbers and numbers you might want to look
at. Now, video on demand like, say,
Netflix and stuff - just like the country
of Chile. Porn - that's like Austria. All
right. So these are some kind of like
reference points is for you to kind of
refer to now. All right. And I speak about
that process now. And like, this is why
it's worth thinking about some other thing.
This is why I also care about kind of making the
web green, because I think it's going to
be easier to make the entire Internet
green than it is to stop people watching
porn, basically, which is a statement, I
suppose. So I spoke a bit about the
process and how there are other things you
can do outside of computers. All right. So
they are obvious. There's two ways I'm
going to show this. So there's kind of
inward looking at process, like the
greening of how we build digital products.
Right. This isn't visible to the end
users, but it's still a useful thing to
do. Now, an example of this is the company
called WHOLEGRAINDigital. I really admire
that. They're really really cool company
doing some good stuff on the web and they
are one of the original kind of WordPress
agencies and they basically say, yes, we
do everything with WordPress and green
energy and they started working at their
own missions and blogging about this. And
what they said was that they know, that
they looked at these figures and they
switched to running on green infra because
that was the kind of right thing for them
to do. But when I started doing that, they
started looking at where else are their
emissions and what they do. And they
basically looked at and some realized
that, oh, wow, a large part of their
emissions just comes from travel. And you
guys, you can see office and home energy.
And of the travel, around 94 percent of
their emissions came from commuting. So
this is why I'm saying that it's more than
just playing around with computers and
optimizing stuff. All right. So this was
kind of useful and this kind of inspired
some of the work agreement foundation for
us to start sharing this. And what we've
been doing recently is basically take this
model and build some, like I guess in VCC,
which is I'm afraid is minimum viable
carbon calculator, not the post-growth,
other kind of acronym there. And we
basically built like a simple spreadsheet
that is very, very fast to fill out. So we
picked two people to kind of get an idea
of, okay. These are the things I'm paying
to run. This is the like if I build a web
project, this is how much data I'm
shifting over time. And then because it
turns out that it uses energy to keep
people warm and dry inside buildings and
people tend to use energy commuting. Then
we tracked it, we tracked that as well.
And we do this to give people some figures
and get some idea of where they might want
to act upon this, because the current ways
that you report on, say, emissions or
think about this is like an annual report
every year. That's a really, really slow
debugging cycle. That means we have like
eight or nine kind of hits of the F5 key
before, like it's a climate apocalypse.
That feels like we should all do a little
better than that. But this is entirely
open, you can link to the template
yourself. And we've we learnt some
interesting things and we did this. We
realized that when we were working on this
because the team were pretty good on
commuting the let them cycle to work. They
were emissions are quite low there. But we
also realized that there was actually an
argument for changing how we design, say,
a Web site. We found that one chunky
background video, you know, those things
that we all hate. Right. That had the same
carbon footprint as basically the entire
team commuting for the entire project. All
right. So it's quite easy to make an
argument to get rid of that and it kind of
meaningful, measurable reduction there. So
these are some of the stuff that we do now
in this. The other thing is an outward
process. So these might be decisions you
make that affect the kind of emissions
through use or for your end users. And
these are gonna be much more visible to
end users. The example I like to refer to,
because I'm a fan of the company. is
Fairphone. You folks have heard a
Fairphone here, right? Yeah. Like they're
basically the canonical Fairtrade smart
smartphone, really. All right. That's the
best way to describe them. And they
also... there's lots of good things about
what they do, but they also share lots of
information about their own carbon
emissions and what steps they're trying to
take to reduce them in a relatively honest
way, which is also really good. And
because they publish it, we can read it.
Now, we've seen trends in electronics over
the last, say, five or six years where we
had modular things and we saw a few failed
attempts at having modular smartphones.
We've been a shift towards like systems on
a chip and stuff like that. So if you are
going to do that, that means in some way
that having a modular design is a
challenge. But it means that if most of
the energy or impact on building
electronics is coming from basically
turning sand into a chip with lots, lots
of energy then we'll need to think about
where we might have a way to decouple this
from the rest of it. All right. To make us
the electronics we do have last longer.
All right. And this is what I found in
there, over LCA life CO2-analysis report,
where they look at the emissions over the
entire process. They... basically the
first thing is their actual use is pretty
small for this. But what you can see here
- the emissions were from the production.
And the thing they decide to do was make
the phone as easy as possible to repair
for end users or replace parts of it. To
make it go from, say, a 5-years project
product to a sort... from a 3-years
product to a 5-years product. And this had
the impact of reducing the emissions by a
measurable figure. And it's a pattern that
we might follow ourselves. All right. Now,
actually. Fairphone and it make a real
feature of this now, they've talked about
this to their, kind of, audience. So they
basically say if you can just say upgrade
just the camera rather than the rest of
the phone, that is still kind of working,
then you can reduce the carbon footprint
over the lifetime by these kind of
figures. And I think this is actually
worth sharing because it hints that there
are options for us to actually be doing
something until we can run everything on
green power, which would affect these
numbers. And I think I've shared with you
like a mental model and see how it can be
activated. I've spoken with you about kind
of carbon. Now I'm just gonna give you
some steps of where to go next. So, okay.
It's 2020. Right. And I kind of feel this
feels like this table stakes. And I'm
really glad that at least one person is
taking photos of this. I'd really like it,
if more of you to take some photos of this
and share with your peers, because I think
the single most effective thing we can use
in community is stuff like this. All
right. We would expect we need to kind of
make this just... we need to change the
static about how we build things. So in
the same way that we would expect a
builder to know about asbestos and we
expect automotive engineers to know about
lead poisoning in particulars. I think as
professionals we need to know about the
impact of carbon and what we do and that
we don't need it to build digital
services. And I think if we can build
electric cars in the automotive center,
then we can build green stacks in
technology. And I think we need this to
become the norm. So this is what I need. I
need your help me to share this with your
boss, with your coworker. Set something
like this. We've had people talk about
just how bad the situation is. And like
this is really like one of the minimum
things we can do. Which doesn't actually
have a massive cost for us, as you do. So
if we do, we need something like a cloud
moonshot to get off fossil fuels. And this
is one thing I really would ask you to
really consider. So asking for this is a
bit easier if you have friends. So I'm in
a group called ClimateAction.tech, where
it's basically just a slack group with a
few other things that we now run from
here, on meet ups. And the idea is that we
do this to kind of share what the
strategies are to actually kind of push
for this kind of stuff, because not
everyone can join Extinction Rebellion.
And I'm not sure that everyone should join
Extinction Rebellion. They used that we
have different aspects of ourselves that
we bring in our work compared to where
else we might work. Now if you are
interested in acting upon any of this. I
work at Agreement Foundation and we
provide, we have like an open source
platform where you can check your stack
and then the tools you have to do this.
And if you are interested about any of
this stuff, we are trying to find a way to
make it easier or to make some of this
much more transparent, because I shared
with you before about how large companies
can basically fudge some of the numbers to
make them look greener than they otherwise
might be. So tomorrow we're running a kind
of on lecture room M2. We're running
something like a workshop to figure out
what some of this might look like in the
same way that we set up robots.txt. So
carbon.txt a way to verify this. There's a
Web site that that's been hastily put
together to give you some idea for this.
And finally, I'm just gonna wrap up now.
Thank you for letting me talk to you about
this stuff here. If you're interested in
getting in touch and talk to me, please do
the Green Web Foundation. I'm Mr. Chris
Adams on Twitter and GitHub. We're asked
to do some training around this because we
realize that although most of us do care,
we don't have much ways to act upon this
kind of stuff. Then finally, if you find
this interesting, there's a newsletter
which I've started with a friend of mine,
Martin, where we're basically sharing what
we learn as we go through it, which bits
are hard, which bits aren't so hard. And
yeah. Thank you everyone!
applause
Herald: Thank you very much. We do have
plenty of time for Q&A. Nonetheless, I
would like the Q&A to be of high quality.
So when you ask a question, it should be a
question. Thanking the speaker is lovely
and nice, but don't waste our collective
bandwidth on that and do that afterwards
on your own. And I don't really care what
your name is or what your affiliation is.
Just ask a question, and make it short and
so on. And the first two questions go to
the Internet.
Signal Angel: You've mentioned the preview
for other workshop, a carbon.txt just now.
Can you already share some strategies how,
for example, the Green Web Foundation and
other sites directories can protect
themselves against being abused by
companies, for example, through
greenwashing.
Chris: So I think... you just need to read
some reports about this kind of stuff. And
get familiar with this. Now, I really
apologize - a large bunch of this was
incredibly dry. There was lots and lots of
dry material around this to, actually,
figure this stuff out. I think it's mainly
a case of working out what numbers you...
what questions you might actually have to
ask. And I can share a link specifically
for the questions that you need to ask.
But generally, I think the four things I
would look for: if the organization hasn't
made a public statement about when they're
going to hit zero emissions; if they're
not sharing their progress on an annual
basis; if they're not sharing how much of
their business they get from basically the
from fossil fuels right now; then how much
of their business is still involved in
extracting fossil fuels from the ground. I
think these are the key things and if
they're not using this kind of scoped
emissions process, which is a clear thing
of finding numbers, those are the biggest
ones. There is a page on that I've got
which lists these questions to ask and
I'll share link to everyone since I get on
the webs to link to this.
Signal Angel: And the second question from
IRC: The numbers that you've mentioned
that the companies themselves publish. Can
you verify them? And if yes, how?
Chris: So the thing that you can... Oh,
that's the thing is - independent
verification is the thing you need to ask
for, it's the final one. So I have just
finally seen where the voice is coming
from. It's like the voice of God speaking.
The independent verification is very
important. All the examples I pointed to,
had independent verification, usually from
a set of companies that do auditing of
this kind of stuff. Now there is again,
there's a firewall of tedium around this
stuff, like that thing where I showed you
with a Google with Google's numbers being
high and low. This is because you need to
kind of go into the minutiae of
understanding market based reporting,
because location based reporting and
there's reporting around this stuff,
there's like lots of academic literature,
but there's just not very accessible to
lots of people right now. They need to be
more of us who do do this stuff. This is
partly one of the reasons we want to have
something like carbon.txt was to basically
give people a chance to see this, but also
linked to the specific documentation
they're referring to. So you can ask.
Okay. So it's nice you've done this. But
whereas this was a third party
verification of this or why is the same
guy called Trevor being basically audited
all of these companies and like literally
it's the same dude who's reported Amazon's
and Apple's. And I'm not sure about
Google. Right. But Trevor is probably a
good guy. But the fact that there is only
one person doing this is kind of...
come on, we know that there are things that
you probably don't want to do in this
field. Also in Europe, at least, if you
want to sell renewable energy, you do need
to register this with the government
registry. And there is something in
there... I didn't really talk about this
in the session. The aim is talk about more
in carbon.txt, how to find this and how to
look this up. Basically, everything we
know about SSL and DNS, you can apply that
to solve this kind of problem without
needing a freaking block chain. All right.
And you can actually find something useful
here, right? Like this data is out there.
It's just the we need to better know the
right questions to ask and make sure that,
well, we are running stuff on a green
stack rather than a brown stack.
Herald: Ok. Microphone number 6, state
your question.
Mic6: Hello and thanks. Very good. Thanks
for your great talk.
Herald: I've said something about thanking
the speaker before.
Mic6: I know. That's why I said it. I
understand you could try to convince
people to reduce their carbon emissions.
Now the managers I have been working under
are generally good in reducing cost. Do
you think it would help to translate
carbon emissions into cost and have this
problem solved by the invisible hand?
Chris: So this is actually the approach
that Amazon use. And for some of the
spreadsheets I've showed you before where
we do not have numbers forecast for
emission, for reported emissions, the best
thing you can go on is going to be sector
level averages for the carbon intensity of
spending a 1000 pounds or 1000 euros in a
particular area. So you might look at it
like that. I kind of feel that there are
certain people who really respond to this
kind of like cost base messaging. But I
think it's more attractive for us to kind
of change the aesthetic around what we do
so rather than us continually striving. I
mean, if we had the narrative for people
for our generation was to basically save
the planet, that feels a much more
attractive thing than using cost. But I
do... I'm aware that if you are in an
organization where the primary driver is
cost, then you need to be able to use that
language. And that's why we've been
speaking about some of that. But there are
lots and lots... there's actually stuff in
this field to show this. There are
organizations that will basically help you
quantify the risks from doing nothing
versus the cost of action. Because in many
cases, when we talk about this, we think
that we often use... you hear the phrase:
"Well, what's it going to cost to shift to
kind of green energy?", for example. But
it's like - what we pretend is there is no
cost to inaction, when it really, really
is. And we've seen just the five years
massive, massive changes in the
destruction of companies and industries
and, well, hundreds and hundreds of lives
as well. So I think that you can use costs
for this, but I think it's a bit reductive
to only use costs.
Herald: Shall be microphone number 2.
Mic2: You in your research, did you
encounter a tradeoff between privacy and
security and carbon neutrality? And if
yes, in which cases?
Chris: Yes. In fact, I used to work at a
company, Amy. One of the key ideas behind
the company was that if you can understand
the company's CO2 emissions, you can
understand the supply chain. And if you
understand the supply chain, then in some
ways you can use it as a kind of cost to
kind of beaten organization to reduce
their prices, because you can see that
they're much more wasteful compared to
other ones. But at the same time, this
is... so that works at an organizational
level. There's also a personal aspect to
this. And I think that this is a field
that in many cases is focusing on
individual action and kind of shaming
people has been proven not to be very,
very effective. But that doesn't mean that
you shouldn't do anything, that there
isn't a cause for individual action,
because I think that provides the cover
for politicians to make the decisions
which will result in kind of real
meaningful changes. So there is a
tradeoff, because in order for you to
understand emissions, because basically
emissions are essentially a proxy for
activity and you will usually see this and
there are plenty of stories around this
and hopefully there might even be a topic
about this specific subject on Republica,
in May. Because, yeah, there is lots of
interesting literature around this
tradeoff that we do actually have to make.
Herald: Microphone number 1.
Mic1: Hi. Can you make an educated guess
on how much emissions could be spared if
like the big providers would follow your
advice?
Chris: So I guess it's tied to the, you
know... I've showed you the numbers of
Google like that different kind of charts.
Right. You could make the list, kind of
like coyork??... just cheat argument. You
say, well, maybe all of it. Right. But I
don't think that's really accurate.
Generally, if we are looking at just the
CO2 emissions from just like running the
Internet, right. I reckon you could
probably wipe out two thirds to 80 percent
of it, what actually depends on where you
might be looking at this, actually. So
more than half comfortably. All right.
Because if you look at, say, data centers,
the main driver there, the main source of
emissions is from them being on 24/7,
continually use like three quarters of the
emissions, assuming that data centers are
full of servers which are used for three
to five years, which is common. I'm not
sure this is the case. Please talk to me
if that's not the case, because I hear
rumors that that might not be the case at
large companies, but no one will write
this down. So until you know that I can't
give you a really educated, a really kind
of better guess than that, but it'll be
lovely to find out if that data exists and
there are lot of hackers who might get to
know about this kind of stuff.
Herald: Microphone number 4.
Mic4: When you talk about moving
computation around the globe, basically
cause to the weather. I wonder if there
isn't a lot of overhead associated with
that, like additional communication. Maybe
if you know, you're far away from a
database, you need rooting hops or
whatsoever. Do you know anything about
that?
Chris: Yes, I spoke to the guy to Alan
James, who was actually working on that.
And I said, hey - what you said, I said,
yeah, we take that into account because we
can work out the emissions from moving a
container of this size to over there. And
in many cases, we might move to the state
that we watch you when a query there as
well. So his approach was to basically
apply various kinds of metadata tags to
the kind of jobs you might want to run to
provide this kind of flexibility. And this
is not new idea like a Mastodon ... is a
kind of data science company that started
doing something like this 10 years ago.
They're kind of the ... Green Cloud
people doing this kind of stuff. And even
before then, there's this phrase called
"chasing the moon". Where was this idea that
you can do this if you run stuff on the
dark side of Earth, which sounds super
metal. Right. There is... this is not a
new concept, really, but it is cool.
Herald: Microphone number five, please.
Mic5: Hi. Do you see any chance of getting
governmental support with this, for
example, like with tax cuts for electronic
cars? I mean, maybe it would be possible
in here, too.
Chris: Yes. I was actually at the EU
Commission Green Public Procurement
workshops. They've been doing for the last
like few months. And I was... there were a
tiny number of people from small
companies. There were lots of large, large
companies who were there saying, yes, they
think you should do is move to our cloud.
That's the clear solution to the climate
crisis. But they actually, it does look
like there is guidance and there is going
to be support in this field. All right. So
I do know there's going to be... well,
we've already seen this like we've seen
the European Parliament declare climate
emergency saying: we need to halve
emissions by 2030. That's around 8%, year
on year for the next 10 years. Now, most
of us don't know what that looks like
because the last time you saw 8% drop in a
single year was the collapse of the Soviet
Union. Which is partly why I'm kind of
sharing stuff like this, because I think
the idea of having a more managed
reduction of emissions feels more kind of
conducive to I guess a kind of
continuities of how we live than the
collapse of the Soviet Union. So I think
there is stuff out there. But in many
cases, we don't have the knowledge right
now as people in the sector to know what
is effective. And this is something that
we need to, as professionals, learn, to
learn where the levers are if we want to
consider ourselves as professionals facing
the scale of the challenge that is ahead
of us.
Herald: Microphone number two, please.
Mic2: Hello. So my question is about you
talked a lot about how much a carbon
emission happens because of running a
server in the server side. But if the
traffic goes really, really high in a real
larger scale, you might have a lots of
emission just because of their
transmitting the package through the
datacenter from and ... and backbones plus
like there carbon emission from rendering
the page in the like formZ and everything
around that. Is there... I was looking for
it for a while, but I couldn't find a
number like saying okay, one TB of traffic
in the data center from United States
going to cause like this much of carbon.
Chris: Yeah. Is that your question? What
is the carbon footprint of a gigabyte of
data or something?
Mic2: I want to have some numbers saying
like which one is like translate traffic
to a number.
Chris: Okay. So there are two
organizations who are doing some work in
this field. In fact, there's a whole kind
of community around greener web
performance where they are tracking this
kind of stuff now. There's a group called
the Shift Project, who I've referenced
before, who talk about the carbon
footprint... the video being the carbon
footprint of Spain. They've actually got
some browser extensions which you can
install into Firefox. I'll give you
numbers as you browse to see this. I've
also put together just like some
interactive notebooks, you can get some
ballpark figures of this kind of stuff
yourself. So very quickly, you can decide,
well, do I do this or do I do something
different. So, yes, look at Green Web
Foundation, there's a link specifically to
a notebook with the numbers for this.
Herald: Next question goes to the
Internet.
Signal Angel: Hey, IRC states that in
their experience, Kubernetes has a quite a
high CPU idle usage, about 40 percent as
mentioned. This mechanism that you showed
to adapt the server usage to the demand.
Does this mitigate against this?
Chris: I don't really know enough about
Kubernetes to give a useful opinion on
Kubernetes. So my thing was like this is
an interesting idea because it's treating
cloud and compute like a utility. And as a
result, we see patterns that we've seen
that have success in other sectors. But
that could be applied to us. I don't know
beyond that, but I can tell you that
there's a lot of well, there's basically
funding going into this kind of stuff now.
But I'm sorry, I don't know much more than
that. But if you do work with Kubernetes,
please you talk to me because I would be
really nice to have a better answer than I
don't know in future.
Herald: Microphone number three.
Mic3: How many talks do I have to attend
here? So that it will have been worth it
traveling here from Munich instead of
watching this online.
Chris: So it depends what... Okay. First
of all, I think coming to a conference,
just because there's talks, that's not the
reason to come to a conference. You come
to a conference to have high quality, high
context conversations with other people
and get something useful from that,
because like you said, you don't need to
do that. That said, the idea of like
having kind of physical community is
actually very, very useful. I think that
there isn't a number, I can't say like
seven because that's going to be
meaningless. But there is a whole issue
around basically the carbon footprint of
traveling to events and in many cases, so
for some context: I was organizing a
conference in London called Helping
Organize your Conference called Map Camp,
and we were trying to internalize the
carbon costs of people traveling, and we
found that some basically a minority of
people coming across the Atlantic Ocean
wiped out, I think, by half the carbon
footprint, the kind of carbon budget for a
600 person conference. So there is some
numbers around that. We've actually hired
a group to give to actually publish some
of this information out there. And there's
a couple of widgets to figure this stuff
out. But if you're here for the talks,
that's one thing. But really, you should
be here to make speak to the other people
and get some kind of meaningful connection
you can have from there.
Herald: Microphone number one.
Mic1: Is this possible to create like an
automated way, a platform or service that
tech companies can connect to and
estimate, like have a rough estimate about
the carbon footprint based on the stack
they use, based on the bandwidth, based on
the, you know, different process
information.
Chris: It depends. This relies on the
organization having access to the matrix
that will go in as an input. So garbage
in, garbage out. Right. So the spreadsheet
I pointed to gives you a very, very low
quality version of doing that. There's
also a tool called AWS Green Cost
Explorer. We've basically forked a diverse
cost. AWS Cost Explorer worked out which
ones, which regions are running on fossil
fuels and then we present that information
back to you so you can get some idea for
this so you can work out these numbers.
But I don't see them right now, largely
because a lot of organizations see this
information is commercially sensitive. So
they don't like to share this. So we have
to go on basically kind of some rough
numbers here. And this is one of the
problems that we do have. And that came up
with the grim public procurement thing was
that we don't have the transparency right
now to make the particular informed
decisions about this. But theoretically,
yes.
Herald: Microphone number five.
Mic5: Hi. I have a question about this
double things that you are doing. On one
side, you have the getting things done
like building sustainable infrastructure.
And in the last days, yesterday, there was
a couple of examples of that. And on the
other side is generate momentum like
convincing people to join the movement and
be more aware of that. So I was wondering,
how does, for example, the Green Web
Foundation apply to that? In the sense
then how radical can you be like, can you
kick out people from your directory
because you think they are not doing green
enough? Or how does this work?
Chris: So I should be clear about the
Green Web Foundation just being a handful
of guys. It's not a big thing at all.
Right. So it's been running for about 10
years. And this is a thing that we have
been doing for the last six months. I
mean, I joined in March and we started
looking through this and we are basically
now, we've been contacting our providers
and say: look, we need you to provide some
more useful and some more rigorous data
evidence to back up your green claims. For
this reason, because you can't...
basically, it's as the stakes are got
higher, it's become more and more
important to actually do this. And if
you're going to base decisions about how
you kind of choose infrastructure from now
on, it makes a lot of sense to do that. So
we are heading in that direction to say,
look, if you can't share this information,
we're going to stop listing you. But we
have given, because we're not so sure
ourselves in this, we we're giving people
a deadline to get this information. So you
probably see some the stats change over
the coming weeks as the way that we do our
reporting changes. But because we released
open data sets around this on a regular
basis, you can actually see this.
Herald: Microphone number two.
Mic2: Hey, have you heard about the
Science Based Targets initiative? And if
yes, what do you think of them?
Chris: So Science Based Targets is
interesting because they are one of the
drivers to basic... So if you're not
familiar what Science Based Targets are:
Science Based Targets are basically a way
to say, well, if you're an organization
and you want to hit net zero, the science
dictates that you need to take these steps
here. I actually think they're better than
nothing in a lot of cases and I think
they're probably one of the more effective
things to use. And they also insist that
you do need to understand emissions in
your supply chain. So I imagine
organizations that sign up to Science
Based Targets will come on pump against
the problems that I've just explained
about, trying to get numbers from the
large companies who tend to be coy about
sharing this stuff. I think it makes total
sense at corporate level. If you're not a
state body. But I feel that the legally
binding targets that are now in place in
the U.K. and we are likely to see in
Europe in the next six months to a year,
would be greater levers, because they
provide a degree of certainty for people
to then justify decisions. Because it's
the law now, rather than being a thing
that you might get unemployed for.
Herald: Question from the Internet.
Signal Angel: You mentioned that video on
the Internet is a large majority of the
energy usage. Can you say something about
how this breaks down to encoding, storage,
transmission and decoding?
Chris: Yes. Those numbers, I understand,
are all about just the transfer. So I
don't think there is much about the
encoding parts on that. That's just
sending.
Signal Angel: And quick follow up: can you
approximately say how much people can save
by, for example, staying on single
definition or SD instead of HD?
Chris: I... was it four times? I don't
know what that the change in resolution
would be and it's not something I feel
comfortable showing numbers on, because I
basically be making up on the spot. I feel
that the solution is telling people to not
do something like this - I think it's
really, really hard ask and seriously,
speeding? Getting off fossil fuels is a
much better way to solve this problem than
telling people they're not allowed to
watch Netflix ever again or only in low
resolution, for example. Like we like
technology because we're like 15000 people
here because we like technology. Telling
everyone you don't get to use technology
anymore is gonna be much, much harder to
sell than just use green power and stop
running fossil fuels.
Herald: Okay. Last question goes to
microphone number one.
Mic1: Hello. I work for a company that...
Herald: I've said something about
affiliations and introductions. Stage your
question? We're pretty much out of time.
Mic1: If a company owns a lot of servers
and the only solution to reduce the carbon
footprint was to switch to green energy,
this would increase the costs for the
energy. And I'm afraid that I don't have
good arguments to go to ask them to switch
to green energy because of the costs.
Chris: Green energy is cheaper than fossil
fuel energy now, like ... so, we've seen
this massive reduction in costs like a
like storage has come down by 85 percent
in the last say 10 years, we've seen a
massive drop in renewables, like this
argument is kind of being solved at that
level there. It's a choice of provider or
something separate. But I think in many
cases it's going to be a case of choosing
who you want to do that. And if you're
trying to make this argument here, you can
make the argument that generally people
tend to want to work in companies that are
not destroying the planet. And if you want
to retain people or attract new people
saying, hi, we're part of the solution,
not the problem is a good way to present
this. And that's why lots of organizations
talk about kind of green credentials
because it's a recruiting tool in the same
way that they talk about open source or
working from home or anything like that,
especially as we get older and have more
kids and then realize that: wow, they'll
be alive when this stuff happens! Okay.
Herald: Thank you so much. We're out of
time.
applause
36C3 postroll music
Subtitles created by c3subtitles.de
in the year 2021. Join, and help us!