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

Larry Page on how to change the world

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#11

Post by nazgulnarsil »

gcheong wrote: post #7

I went to google's san francisco's open house a few months back where Vincent G. Serf ( http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html#vint ) gave a talk and at one point he mentioned a list of engineering "grand challenges" put together by the National Academy of Engineering. It's an interesting list and may provide some good food for thought for anyone with a bit of free time on their hands: http://engineeringchallenge…

i notice that all those challenges are related to one challenge that isn't mentioned. the exponential function as it relates to human population is the basis of most problems.

at some point engineering doesn't matter, there simply won't be enough resources to keep everyone alive, much less with a decent standard of living.

how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#12

Post by Xichekolas »

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #11
gcheong wrote: post #7

I went to google's san francisco's open house a few months back where Vincent G. Serf ( http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html#vint ) gave a talk and at one point he mentioned a list of engineering "grand challenges" put together by the National Academy of Engineering. It's an interesting list and may provide some good food for thought for anyone with a bit of free time on their hands: http://engineeringchallenge…

i notice that all those challenges are related to one challenge that isn't mentioned. the exponential function as it relates to human population is the basis of most problems. at some point engineering doesn't matter, there simply won't be enough resources to keep everyone alive, much less with a decent standard of living. how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?

Population growth has been slowing in the last couple decades. An odd effect of economic success (as a nation) seems to be vastly lower birthrates. It could be ready access to contraceptives, or more women working, or whatever, but it's an obvious trend. Nations like Japan and Italy have negative replacement rates at the moment.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Rate_of_increa...

Aside from that, population pressures do build, but they can't just build forever. Eventually something happens (war, famine, technological breakthrough) that solves the problem in the short term. If we suddenly run out of some critical resource, that will suck for individuals, and the ensuing resource wars may take a terrible toll, but the race as a whole will survive and grow again.

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#13

Post by nazgulnarsil »

Xichekolas wrote: post #12
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i notice that all those challenges are related to one challenge that isn't mentioned. the exponential function as it relates to human population is the basis of most problems. at some point engineering doesn't matter, there simply won't be enough resources to keep everyone alive, much less with a decent standard of living. how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?

Population growth has been slowing in the last couple decades. An odd effect of economic success (as a nation) seems to be vastly lower birthrates. It could be ready access to contraceptives, or more women working, or whatever, but it's an obvious trend. Nations like Japan and Italy have negative replacement rates at the moment. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Rate_of_increa... Aside from that, pop…

sure, but the point is to choose sustainability because if we don't nature chooses war, famine, or disease for us.

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#14

Post by anewaccountname »

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #11
gcheong wrote: post #7

I went to google's san francisco's open house a few months back where Vincent G. Serf ( http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html#vint ) gave a talk and at one point he mentioned a list of engineering "grand challenges" put together by the National Academy of Engineering. It's an interesting list and may provide some good food for thought for anyone with a bit of free time on their hands: http://engineeringchallenge…

i notice that all those challenges are related to one challenge that isn't mentioned. the exponential function as it relates to human population is the basis of most problems. at some point engineering doesn't matter, there simply won't be enough resources to keep everyone alive, much less with a decent standard of living. how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?

Thanks Malthus.

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#15

Post by Xichekolas »

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #13
Xichekolas wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Population growth has been slowing in the last couple decades. An odd effect of economic success (as a nation) seems to be vastly lower birthrates. It could be ready access to contraceptives, or more women working, or whatever, but it's an obvious trend. Nations like Japan and Italy have negative replacement rates at the moment. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Rate_of_increa... Aside from that, pop…

sure, but the point is to choose sustainability because if we don't nature chooses war, famine, or disease for us.

But 'sustainable' population isn't necessarily zero population growth. On a macro scale, even the population explosion of the last 40 years has so far been sustainable due to huge advances in agriculture, health care, and energy. As long as our ability to provide those things grows at the same or better rate as our population, it is sustainable.

(I'll note I am using the literal definition of 'sustainable' here... able to be sustained. As an nerd, I'd really like our future ability to provide those things to be environmentally and socially sound, but that wasn't what I was talking about.)

Exponential population growth becomes a problem when we give up innovating.

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#17

Post by amirnathoo »

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #11
gcheong wrote: post #7

I went to google's san francisco's open house a few months back where Vincent G. Serf ( http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html#vint ) gave a talk and at one point he mentioned a list of engineering "grand challenges" put together by the National Academy of Engineering. It's an interesting list and may provide some good food for thought for anyone with a bit of free time on their hands: http://engineeringchallenge…

i notice that all those challenges are related to one challenge that isn't mentioned. the exponential function as it relates to human population is the basis of most problems. at some point engineering doesn't matter, there simply won't be enough resources to keep everyone alive, much less with a decent standard of living. how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?

"how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?"

How about colonizing space? Seriously. Do you think it will never happen?

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#18

Post by edw519 »

nazgulnarsil wrote: post #11
gcheong wrote: post #7

I went to google's san francisco's open house a few months back where Vincent G. Serf ( http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html#vint ) gave a talk and at one point he mentioned a list of engineering "grand challenges" put together by the National Academy of Engineering. It's an interesting list and may provide some good food for thought for anyone with a bit of free time on their hands: http://engineeringchallenge…

i notice that all those challenges are related to one challenge that isn't mentioned. the exponential function as it relates to human population is the basis of most problems. at some point engineering doesn't matter, there simply won't be enough resources to keep everyone alive, much less with a decent standard of living. how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?

"how do we reconcile our innate capacity to continuously expand with a finite world?"

Condoms.

Seriously, in keeping with the spirit of the OP, many people in the developing world can't even imagine a concept like "family planning" so they don't bother to do it. They just assume you keep having babies until you can't.

Maybe we should be less concerned with "One Laptop Per Child" and focus more on "Condoms for Couples". Then the laptop problem would solve itself.

Re: Larry Page on how to change the world

#20

Post by dangoldin »

Xichekolas wrote: post #15
nazgulnarsil wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sure, but the point is to choose sustainability because if we don't nature chooses war, famine, or disease for us.

But 'sustainable' population isn't necessarily zero population growth. On a macro scale, even the population explosion of the last 40 years has so far been sustainable due to huge advances in agriculture, health care, and energy. As long as our ability to provide those things grows at the same or better rate as our population, it is sustainable. (I'll note I am using the literal definition of 'sustainable' here... ab…

Jared Diamond has an interesting piece in the NY Times where he discusses consumption factors - the point of it is is that if every single person on Earth consumed at the level of an American, it would be as if the population of the world would be around 70 billion americans. Just something to ponder.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02diamond.html

Post reply on HN