Between the Boughs by Evergreen Games

slow computing

this is a piece in my series about my evolving relationship with computing and game development. you can read about my switch to linux here, or my thoughts about small game projects here.

this year, I've been honing my set of values and priorities towards how I make games. as time goes on, I've realized that how I make games can't be separated from my relationship with computers as a whole. as a result I've been developing my ideas around computers in general, and today I'd like to present them condensed into a concept I'll call "slow computing," taking from the "slow food" and subsequent global movements that began to arise in the 1980s.

my central idea here is that we gain more by doing less with computers. by giving up on chasing the bleeding edge and the shiniest (and subsequently the corporate-est), we can better realize other valuable goals in computing and in our lives in general. below is essentially a long elaboration on what all those things can look like!

here's various areas that slow computing lets us re-prioritize towards:

below I'll go into detail about what all these things mean to me, and how I think anyone interested can start applying them. in the second part of this article series, I'll explain how this relates more directly to videogames and how I want to make them.

pragmatism

this means using computers in ways that genuinely bring us value, individually and collectively.

"computational maximalism", the current norm we are experiencing, places all value in computing in increasing computational ability. this cultural norm creates a perpetual churn of devices and chasing the newest, most sensationalized thing.

in contrast, slow computing or "computation pragmatism" places the value in computing as maximizing the concrete value computers bring to our lives compared to the costs (personal, societal, ecological, etc.). this is the opposite of the current norm, as the tech industry increases their profit through selling us as many things (increasing the cost) while giving us as little value as we may tolerate (retaining demand).

in everyday individual terms, I think this typically looks like reevaluating what software and services we use or how we use them. the areas below all go into this in their own ways. between overcomplicated workflows, unnecessary busywork, and apps (such as social media) that ask for great amounts of our time while giving us little, I think there are a lot of ways we can generally gain by refocusing our relationship with computers into habits that directly serve the things we really want and need. in this sense you could also call it something like "mindful computing."

basically, we often talk about the need to go outside and touch grass, and I think that sensation calls for a re-evaluation of not just immediate behavior, but the general way our lives relate to computing.

ecological impact

this one has the most straightforward solutions, at least on a personal level. optimizing ecological impact means using computers and software (including web services) that reduce electrical, water and material cost. this includes considerations against using web services built on ecologically-inefficient data centers. ecological impact is also improved through using computers longer before replacing them, and preferring repair over replacement. unlike the 80s and 90s, the speed of development of computers has slowed significantly. this is a good thing! that means we have mature, easy-to-use functionality that can stay relevant longer with fewer compromises.

in the longer term, this could mean favoring device convergence (having fewer devices that fit more of your needs) rather than device specialization. ever since smartphones were invented, it's been my dream to have a full computing experience that can go anywhere and morph into any form factor. today mobile technology is mature to the level where there is little a phone can't do that a computer can, yet the lack of software and hardware integration prevents things like this from being fully realized as of yet.

longevity

valuing hardware and software that stand the test of time. a lot of resources and human labor are inefficiently expended through remaking things that have already been made or repairing things that have been engineered without longevity in mind. we could be so much freer as a society and do so much else with our energy if we didn't have to constantly remake, replace and repair things that could just work.

in hardware, this means doing what we can to encourage the growth of a repair culture and encouraging regulations and business practices that value longevity and repair.

in software, this means using free-and-open-source software (FOSS) where possible, as their openness helps them being adaptable and maintainable through time. as developers, we can focus on simplifying dependencies and favoring stable, low-overhead solutions.

in both these cases, one of the best guarantees of longevity is broadly adopted standardization, especially open standards. this improves repairability and reduces the device churn generated through competing and rapidly changing standards.

global accessibility

people all over the world don't all have the same access to computers. especially in the global south, where it is more common to have a smart phone or tablet, and an individual or family may not even possess a computer. when they do, it's likely to be older or never have been a high-end device.

this is a big disparity with the global north, which has a much higher rate of computer literacy alongside a higher availability of devices and generally more easy access to knowledge bases around them, which are currently centered around english.

I believe computers can be useful to everyone, but these socioeconomic barriers currently prevent them from reaching a large portion of the world in the same way. this is rapidly changing, but nonetheless I believe there are things we can do to bridge the gap from the other side.

while this is perhaps the most infrastructural of all the fields I've presented, I believe just by favoring slow computing it helps the gap close faster. normalizing the use of FOSS reduces barriers of distribution and access.

for those of us who are developers, we could think more about what computers people currently have and how to bring what we make to them where they are, rather than what computers or knowledge people should have in order to use the software we make.

more effort could be made to make computers understandable to the general public. computer people unfortunately often live in a bit of an echo chamber, and consequently lose sight of the important goal of making all the things we do appreciable to the average person, both in our own countries and languages and beyond. in addition to reorienting engineering work away from "more" towards longevity, we can also reorient effort towards simplicity and accessibility.

ergonomics

you might be familiar with ergonomics in discussions about how devices are shaped to fit our bodies, but it can also broadly describe how any technology is made to fit us, be it physically, mentally or emotionally. ergonomics can relate strongly to learnability, ease of use and general accessibility.

thanks to the maturity of computing, we can start thinking about how computers fit to us more than just how much they're capable of doing.

for example, I as a game developer love writing games in lua. it's simple and ergonomic, and helps me sketch game ideas out without thinking too much about engineering. when I started making games 20 years ago this was a lot less practical than it is today, and it felt like a more active compromise between ergonomics and performance. today, that performance compromise has gone down substantially while the ergonomic benefits have remained the same.

you might be surprised how much the computer on your phone or your desk can already do that you don't realize. even phones can now can handle things like video editing and gaming. these days I do a lot of writing on my phone in bed: I experience general fatigue, so I really appreciate the device always with me being able to do more. thanks to Obsidian and SyncThing existing on android, I can write the same way as I would at my desk and have all my files stay synced. this fits me as a person so much better than having to only do serious tasks at a more traditional desk environment.

self-determination

as discussed, there is a strong conflict of interest between the tech industry and the general public in what computers ought to be.

various forms of open and free software have existed almost as long as computers have as the balancing force against corporate interest. the entire computing world already relies on it behind the scenes, even when we don't use it ourselves. collective, collaborative effort has already long proven itself as the most reliable, sustainable and efficient model in computing. it already embodies all the values I've outlined, because as people we have shared similar values in computing since long before my time.

most of the points I've outlined here are infrastructural in nature. this is too, but the difference is the work here is practically already done. FOSS is mature and super-usable! the only things left are to bring more people to it, and to bring it to more people.

through using as much FOSS as we can in our daily lives, we can regain self-determination and pragmatism in computing. self-hosting still isn't as easy as it could be, but it's still more accessible than ever.

this year I moved away from cloud storage to using a SyncThing server hosted on my raspberry pi. it only took an hour or so to set up, and it pretty much just works. my raspberry pi costs only a few US dollars worth of electricity per year, and it handles all my file storage and syncing across all my devices. it cost me very little in terms of time and energy, and it's served to save me money, privacy and agency in computing.

that's a small example of the kind of benefits we gain when favoring self-hosted, FOSS and communal infrastructure over corporate infrastructure. a lot of what I've discussed has been in terms of infrastructure, and we typically think of infrastructure as something beyond ourselves. but in reality, today we can create infrastructure ourselves with the resources we already have and technology that is readily available.

conclusion

while I believe these areas are overall complimentary, they sometimes present conflicts with each other. for example a new device might be more ergonomic, power-efficient or repairable, but it would also contribute to device churn and material waste. or conversely, you might find yourself compromising by valuing longevity.

to me, what's most important is being more thoughtful and deliberate about my relationship with computers and how they fit into my life. being more conscious about costs and benefits plays into that, but there will always be costs and that's okay. any solutions we come up with on an individual scale are short-term at best, because what we can do collectively and in the long-term will exceed that by far.

what I value in this term "slow computing" for me is creating an alternative, holistic value system that marries goals that are most relevant to me as a person in my daily life, and what I believe benefits us most as a collective and as an interdependent planet. for me this is a freeing contrast to mainstream, corporate-defined values of maximizing consumption and various other "number-go-up's" at the expense of everything else, and it feels appropriate to me to humbly place it alongside the other "slow" movements.

other people doing similar things!