You must log in or # to comment.
What does this save, like a milliwatt per year? One of the stupidest things I have ever seen.
Sending the JavaScript to do this literally uses more electricity than this saves.
This is classic. Corpos that are the biggest polluters are also the ones that push hardest on the idea of “carbon footprint”
The more they can convince people that climate change is their fault, the less likely people vote for a government that will regulate the corpos
Throughline (podcast) did an episode on corporations off-loading responsibility for stuff like this onto the populace.
Found it: episode is called “The Litter Myth.”
Don’t worry, they’ll vote for a government that regulates the people and not the corpos
Plus all the energy used in developing the feature in the first place. What a crock.
It’s only going to save power if you’re using an oled, since for most lcd screens the backlight is on whether you display black or white.
All my websites are jet black, and the black is only really black on my phone which has an oled screen.
Either way, it’s just greenwashing. These companies are only pretending to give a crap so they can get brownie points with people who can’t see what they’re doing.
Most lcds take a tiny bit of current to darken a pixel I think. The ground state would be white and power is used to get the lcd in the state where it changes the lights polarization to get it blocked by the polarization filter in front of it
I assume that would depend on the polarization of the screen. I wonder which is more common?
Yes, I think it’s this way around because precision is higher at higher power, so the minor deviations close to no voltage applied are hidden in minute white variations, while near blacks are way more precise. But don’t quote me on that
Back in CRT days, the difference between full white and full black could be as much as 100W. Before dark mode existed, people developed sites like Blackle to reduce the power usage of Googling.
Traditional LCD screens actually use more power to make black.
OLED screens might save a tiny bit of power though.
They can’t do any good in the world. This is the best they have to offer.
It’s almost comical, especially coming from Nestlé
Greenwashing was never about effective practical solutions. It’s always been gaslighting and marketing.
This is the most pathetic attempt at greenwashing I have ever seen.
Came here to say that. So clearly doesn’t change anything (unless you are on a cellphone or have an expensive OLED computer screen)
Fuck nestle
Not all phones; just ones with OLED screens.
CRTs will also save power as they have to shoot fewer phosphors, but that’s not really relevant today.
Don’t pretty much all phones have OLED screens?
These guys say it’s about 50%.
Only midrange to high-end devices. Cheaper ones (which are very common especially in poorer countries) still use simpler LCD/LED screens.
LCD screens have a backlight that’s always on and consumes the same amount of power regardless of what’s on the screen. OLEDs don’t have a backlight; when the screen is dark, the pixels in that area are actually turned off.
Now that most of my pixels are a different color… we can, um… we fixed, erm… wait, what is that supposed to do again? Did we do a global climate change or nah?
Contribute even more by closing the browser and not buying anything from this shithole of a company.
I wish it was that easy, but nestle has taken almost 80% of global middleman positions in the food market, they have become a pseudo monopoly in the food industry.
Remove the pseudo
Everywhere you look end stage capitalism is enshittifying itself. The neolibs, having insisted that There Is No Alternative, are confronted with their system in full and manifest self destruction.
What makes you think capitalism is dying? What I see is just the neverending economic cycle
The current version of the system is literally self destructing by destroying the ecosystem. It is also destroying its other external interface: human consciousness, but that is a more complicated discussion.
The way I see it is this search for money won’t destroy the world completely, but it will probably end up with humans leading their own extinction event and taking lots of other species with us. The world will eventually heal many of its wounds… without us.
Yes sure, it’s only going to massively degrade human civilization.
Not destroying the environment is as easy as researching less polluting and more productive methods, like nuclear fusion. The only thing left to do in that matter is not making it deficitary
Innovation is one of the main things that keep capitalism going, but state-supported or state-ignored monopolies prevent it from happening as people really have no other alternative apart from the monopoly company to buy goods and services
So thanks for providing a great example of the aggressively blinding grip of ideology over our ability to understand our reality. We’ve already broken the ecosphere. A nonexistent technology is not going to save us from the disaster that has already happened. Also the owners of the energy supply are aggressively defending their vastly profitable businesses from any threat to their profits. They’ve done quite well at that, see the comment from you.
Greenwashing bullshit.
Stupid because it makes zero difference for any screen that uses a backlight, which is most of them. And then they could just set dark mode as the default if it actually mattered, which it doesn’t. You can be stupid, but to be really stupid takes a corpo like Nestle.
For oleds, it makes a difference and not an insignificant number of smartphones today use OLED screens.
However, if the microwatt-hour of battery saved by browsing a shitty website of a shitty company for a few minutes saves the planet is another story…
Whatever gets saved will be burned up by their megabytes of JS running in the background collecting every single point of data they possibly can
The thing that’ll save more microwatts is if they removed about 3 dozen of the tracking scripts from the website but we all know no company website will ever do that
Contrary to popular belief, it doesn’t make that much difference on OLEDs. The thing about OLED is that different diodes consume different amounts of energy. Blue diode requires the most energy, green diode requires about the same amount of energy as the red one, but there are more green diodes in pentile screen.
Thus the only energy saving option is a dark red background. And no one is using it. It will also look like shit in most cases.
Here’s a paper which shows that dark grey background basically consumes twice as much energy as dark red one https://library.imaging.org/admin/apis/public/api/ist/website/downloadArticle/cic/26/1/art00005
Yeah but if the OLED screen has to display black (RGB 000), it turns off the diodes completely. But as you said, most dark modes have a dark grey background which doesn’t do shit (jerboa has a black option btw)
That reminds me, Lemmy needs a FuckNestle.
I came here hoping someone would link one. That sub taught me so much about their bs.
No time like the present to make the community if it doesn’t already exist!
Edit: it does!
If you meant to post something, it’s not showing for me at all.
lemmy.world has one but I don’t know how to link to it
Thank you!
You can be sure that they are counting every hypothetical drop of energy saved this way and taking credit for it to their benefit somewhere.
They just don’t want their water brusied by the hydroelectric plant.
A tax-deductible donation to a charity run by the CEO’s brother in-law.
On LCD displays dark mode actually uses more electricity; the brightness is always there, and you need to power the liquid-crystal layer to block that light to result in darker colours.
This whole myth about darker screens saving energy goes way back to the old CRT days when it actually did save some energy.
Yall remember Blackle?
Many phones have OLED displays, which physically turn off the pixels in black areas. Since the site is on mobile, it does make a bit of sense.
But then most dark modes aren’t pitch black. I guess it might save a bit of power by just being at a low brightness. Anyways I need my dark mode and also night mode.
Less brightness means less light emitted by the diodes means less power is used. They may not turn off, but they still use less.
Fun fact! Many OLED displays dim the whole image not by making the diodes dimmer, but by pulsing the diodes fast enough to match the desired brightness of each pixel.
You can test this by taking your OLED phone, pulling up an image, and then waving it around at different brightness levels; the observed image would become blurry at high brightness levels, but would separate into distinct “frames” at lower brightness.
I’m not sure if every OLED does this; just from the phones that I have used.
In case you are using an OLED screen or one of its variants, the difference is noticeable since they turn off the pixels that are black and, therefore, less electricity is consumed.
Depends on the resting state of the LCD.
Saves energy for OLED, not LCD.
Yes for OLED. Sometimes for LCD.
From what I understand, LCDs can have a resting state that will either stop light, or a resting state that will let light through. The backlight remains on, but a panel that natively blocks the light will require less power when showing black.
Apart from this being completely stupid. Why don’t make dark mode the default mode?
It should honestly just default to whatever the system is set to, because that’s likely what the user prefers.
Yes, agree. I run Dark Reader so I barely even notice if anything is darkmode or not. But hard agree.
Respect system settings first, only if no preference is set go to dark by default.
That the user can feel good about himself for “saving the planet”
As long as i have lighting around the monitor i dont need to.
My screen is not amoled 🥲
But you can compensate by giving them your ground water.
If i get my share why not
Nestlé lives in dark mode.
The vampires of the Nestlé board don’t like being blinded by bright screens as they roam the night in search for the blood of the innocent.
Please don’t compare nestle to vampires. Vampires still have a heart even if it’s not beating.
Username checks out. Didn’t mean to offend your people. At least you suck blood for nourishment and not just for fun.
This is very strangely phrased. The “sustainable experience” to me suggests my personal experience like eye fatigue even tho “sustainable” is not the most fitting word for that. But the “contribute” suggests ecological subjects. Whatever it may be it is ur average corporate paternalism nonetheless.
Edit: Maybe im off here it may solely be greenwashing, the eye comfort take doesnt really make sense.
They try to greenwash, just just end up applying more clearcoat.
Contribute to a more sustainable experience by not buying shit from Nestlé.
🙂
without being an expert in that, it’s hard to know what’s owned by them and what’s not…
Well they own like half of the market so
Nestlé’s ethics already went to dark mode.
Think of all the breastfeeding children we could save by making white screen black. SMH. Fuck Nestle
