From the text in the link below, it appears that permacomputing
is primarily concerned about lowering how much energy you use
on tech, and refurbish and reuse old technology.
Depends on how many joules are needed for that. And maybe you won't learn anything technical from it, but that the intent is laudable and the approach worth knowing/spreading ?
While that is emphasized, I don't think that really captures it. The idea is to apply permaculture to computation, as has been done with industrial agriculture.
Permaculture is in the first place an ethical or even utopian project, and I'd characterize it as a counter-culture. You can see this reflected in how permacomputing defines itself in opposition to silicon valley: there's a whole page on what they think is wrong with 'Californian ideology'. See https://permacomputing.net/issues/ and https://permacomputing.net/Californian_ideology/.
Permaculture is a design system grounded in ethics, that concerns itself with rethinking a sustainable society inspired by nature. A common trope is the 7 generations rule: how does a design decision today, impact the future of 7 generation down the line? The domain where permaculture is mostly associated with is agricultural systems, but it also has some influence in the built environment. It was never intended to be limited to agriculture. Permacomputing seems to want to extend or apply it to the domain of computing.
Honestly I don't find the idea of extending hardware lifespans the most innovative. I think it is interesting to rethink the whole of computing from the pov of 200, 500 or 1000 years into the future: if we still want to be there and have a good life for all (and do computation), how could that impact decisions on hardware today?
I think a model where we see all current hardware as a 'repository of components and materials' that can be re-composed (not just recycled) is far more interesting than merely extending lifespans. In that model, there is virtually no waste anymore. Everything can be recombined as we discover more valuable ways of putting things together, rather than thrown away, even after a longer time. I'd argue that also mimics the way nature works. Ecosystems are always growing in complexity as life evolves and diversifies, given the right conditions and lack of bottlenecks. There are no static cycles.
> how does a design decision today, impact the future of 7 generation down the line?
There is literally a) no way to answer that, and b) it probably doesn't even matter. For instance, in 1850 (which is roughly 7 generations ago), the Austrian Empire abolished the customs and tariffs between its Hungarian and Ausrtian pieces. How does it impact us today?
https://permacomputing.net/permacomputing/