Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Insects Are in Serious Trouble

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 168 posts

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#101

Post by zzalpha »

AlexandrB wrote: post #7

As sad as this is, the reality is that nobody cares. Biologists have been beating the conservation drum (rightly so) for decades but the behaviour of the average consumer has hardly changed. Arguably, it's actually gotten worse with metrics like the use of plastic at an all-time high [1] (thanks, bottled water). Soon enough we will learn what the economic value of the free labor provided by insects and other animals…

But the bad thing about capitalism is that things that are hard (or impossible) to quantify are, at best, an afterthought.

It's actually worse than that. Capitalism cannot on its own deal with negative externalities even when they are quantifiable.

You solve that through government regulation. But when government is bought and sold by businesses who would prefer costs be externalized as much as possible, the outcomes are... less than ideal.

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#102

Post by pygy_ »

mikeash wrote: post #82
pygy_ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sustainable growth is an oxymoron. The economy is a dissipative system. It consumes energy/creates entropy to sustain itself. In its current state it already consumes more than the earth/sun can supply. Having it grow even more means consuming ever more energy (fossil and nuclear fuel is finite, the sun light is constant), and generating ever more entropy (i.e. pollution, heat, and ecosystems destruction). Edit: also…

Human energy consumption isn’t anywhere close to what the sun supplies. We just don’t capture much of it. Life is a dissipative system too. It consumes energy and generates entropy. This can’t go on forever, but I wouldn’t take that as an argument against life.

But life had up to now evolved to function at a sustainable level.

It can't go on forever indeed there's a thing called the heat death of the universe, but it is sufficiently far in the future that I don't care about it.

The shit that happens now means that my kids won't be able to have children in good conscience (I already feel sorry for them for the mess I put them in).

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#103

Post by pygy_ »

maxerickson wrote: post #88
pygy_ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sustainable growth is an oxymoron. The economy is a dissipative system. It consumes energy/creates entropy to sustain itself. In its current state it already consumes more than the earth/sun can supply. Having it grow even more means consuming ever more energy (fossil and nuclear fuel is finite, the sun light is constant), and generating ever more entropy (i.e. pollution, heat, and ecosystems destruction). Edit: also…

The sun can supply an awful lot of power. Humans use something like 10 or 20 terawatts of power (constantly), the sun smacks the earth with ~100 petawatts of power.

Given how destructive we are at 20 TW, I don't want to see what will happen when we consume more.

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#104

Post by pygy_ »

eplanit wrote: post #100
pygy_ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sustainable growth is an oxymoron. The economy is a dissipative system. It consumes energy/creates entropy to sustain itself. In its current state it already consumes more than the earth/sun can supply. Having it grow even more means consuming ever more energy (fossil and nuclear fuel is finite, the sun light is constant), and generating ever more entropy (i.e. pollution, heat, and ecosystems destruction). Edit: also…

Discussions of "sustainable" are, to me, disingenuous and incomplete, because nobody ever wants to confront the root issue: population size. Really, no ecological practice is "sustainable" in the face of ever-increasing population size. If we could achieve stability and predictability in the size and scope of the human species, then we can find truly sustainable practices. Without that, it's just a buzz word.

Food limits how far the population can grow anyway.

AFAIK the energy consumption (and thus the pollution) for the benefit of developed nations far outweighs the one that benefits the poorer ones whose population increases.

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#106

Post by riot504 »

mikeash wrote: post #18
b0rsuk wrote: post #10

I think nothing will change as long as economic growth is understood as economic Good . Current economy can't work if there's no economic growth. Banks are among the biggest culprits. If banks lend money at a 5% interest rate, their customers must grow their businesses by 5%. A new, sustainable economy is needed. I think about it each time I see the Race for the Galaxy card. I've seen a radical example of this among…

I like growth. I want to be wealthier or be able to work less (which is really just an aspect of being wealthier). I want everybody else to be wealthier too. I want my children to be better off than I am. The problem is growth without care for the consequences. Making some people wealthier at the expense of killing the planet is a bad plan. But I think that it goes too far the other way to turn around and say that gr…

I have thought about that often. The conclusion I have reached is this Earth's way of keeping the population of a species at a natural state - droughts, plagues etc... At first this appears harsh based on our preconceived notions of humanity. Many people will die due the environmental conditions in which they live - regardless of pollution levels.

Earth does not have a bias towards one species, such as political/economic policies will have. Mother Nature's laws determine the strongest/fittest will survive, but our current system puts wealth that leads to power as the strongest.

Switching to a system which does not value materials, money and power over others but focuses strictly living off the land such as the African Tribe will result in a drastically different social construct than we see today.

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#107

Post by hutzlibu »

sxates wrote: post #67

Years ago when I lived in suburban Texas with a typical suburban house with a back yard that had open space behind it I had a terrible insect problem. Exposed skin would get a mosquito bite-per-minute, the dogs were coming inside covered in fleas, etc. So I went to Home Depot and bought this yard spray that promised to kill mosquitos, fleas, ticks, etc. and I hosed down the back yard in a desperate attempt to reclaim…

I think a much better way to get rid of mosquitos in a local area, but not of everything else, would be a laser turret ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito_laser

Unfortunately not market ready, yet ...

edit: bat boxes, water-fish traps and having birds around will certainly reduce mosquito population ... but there will be still lots of them around. A laser can take them (allmost) all out ...

Oh and about the water: if you just have open water around with no fish in it ... then the mosquitos will love that, btw.. So taking care, that there is no open water around, when it is hot, helps also a lot ... but I still want my laser turret.

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#108

Post by nostromo »

hutzlibu wrote: post #107
sxates wrote: post #67

Years ago when I lived in suburban Texas with a typical suburban house with a back yard that had open space behind it I had a terrible insect problem. Exposed skin would get a mosquito bite-per-minute, the dogs were coming inside covered in fleas, etc. So I went to Home Depot and bought this yard spray that promised to kill mosquitos, fleas, ticks, etc. and I hosed down the back yard in a desperate attempt to reclaim…

I think a much better way to get rid of mosquitos in a local area, but not of everything else, would be a laser turret ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito_laser Unfortunately not market ready, yet ... edit: bat boxes, water-fish traps and having birds around will certainly reduce mosquito population ... but there will be still lots of them around. A laser can take them (allmost) all out ... Oh and about the wa…

I noticed in South East Asia it was common to keep a water feature in the yard with one or more fish in it.

Mosquitos land on the water to lay eggs and are immediately eaten by the fish.

The water feature could be quite small. Sometimes just a large vase in a shady location with no aeration pump or filter (the water needs to be stagnant) and a few goldfish.

Or... you know... lasers. :D

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#109

Post by Caprinicus »

nostromo wrote: post #108
hutzlibu wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a much better way to get rid of mosquitos in a local area, but not of everything else, would be a laser turret ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito_laser Unfortunately not market ready, yet ... edit: bat boxes, water-fish traps and having birds around will certainly reduce mosquito population ... but there will be still lots of them around. A laser can take them (allmost) all out ... Oh and about the wa…

I noticed in South East Asia it was common to keep a water feature in the yard with one or more fish in it. Mosquitos land on the water to lay eggs and are immediately eaten by the fish. The water feature could be quite small. Sometimes just a large vase in a shady location with no aeration pump or filter (the water needs to be stagnant) and a few goldfish. Or... you know... lasers. :D

Either we put the lasers on the fish or I’m out

Re: Insects Are in Serious Trouble

#110

Post by pygy_ »

maxerickson wrote: post #88
pygy_ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sustainable growth is an oxymoron. The economy is a dissipative system. It consumes energy/creates entropy to sustain itself. In its current state it already consumes more than the earth/sun can supply. Having it grow even more means consuming ever more energy (fossil and nuclear fuel is finite, the sun light is constant), and generating ever more entropy (i.e. pollution, heat, and ecosystems destruction). Edit: also…

The sun can supply an awful lot of power. Humans use something like 10 or 20 terawatts of power (constantly), the sun smacks the earth with ~100 petawatts of power.

Does your estimation take into account the energy absorbed by the plans we farm?
Post reply on HN