112
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

You know I didn't say that, but the sad part is I do believe you think the world is a simple dichotomy of rich vs poor.

Oh well, I'll take it over the other false dichotomies. I like your energy kid, but you're going to have to get smarter if you want to see change in the world, for all of our sakes. Your current strategy ain't gonna cut it.

Please, enlighten me then, what did you mean by your initial comment?

Kid? I'm willing to bet I'm older than you.

[-] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 16 hours ago

I intended for you to think about it, and if you disagree, offer a thought out response. There's still time for that, just scroll back up.

I'm willing to bet I'm older than you.

Given your responses so far, it's much less embarrassing for you to say you're either 15 or a troll bot.

Regarding the state of the climate, human kind is an ant hill, a game of factorio, a manufacturing pipeline. We're in a race to generate enough energy to escape the grave of our own making that started over a hundred years before any of us were born. We've already crossed the threshold where, if we stopped emitting any greenhouse gasses whatsoever, we will still see a massive population decline due to heat, weather, food shortage, etc, most in poorer countries who are neither responsible for the problem, nor capable if dealing with it.

Our best bet to save as many lives as possible is to continue research into cutting edge power generation, food production, clean water generation, and sustainable and durable housing/cooling technologies.

The strategy of telling the wealthy to stop consuming energy cold turkey is no longer a viable strategy, as it's not beneficial for anyone. It's also not practical unless you're a fictional, superhuman character who can zip around and force humankind to your benevolent will (or you have globally powerful military and are willing to enact martial law, but good luck).

To win the race, to reduce the ensuing death and destruction and minimize unnecessary casualties to the human (and other) species, we need to put as much research as possible into new renewable tech (solar, wind, water, nuclear, and fusion if possible). It's unclear what AI has to offer, but it is already being used to solve manufacturing challenges that neither a single human capable of, nor a group of humans can effectively abstract and communicate about. If this can be leveraged to develop new sustainable energy or bioengineering solutions that were never before known to be possible, that is how we save the most lives.

What doesn't save any lives is rallying behind the same absolutist strategy we've tried for over 50 years and making no progress. But I get it, memes travel further and faster than measured thought. That's also a problem for us.

this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2024
112 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37640 readers
436 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS