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

Insect collapse

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 266 posts

Re: Insect collapse

#151

Post by Zoh0eich »

tomp wrote: post #89
lotsofpulp wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not equivalent since you're already alive. Not producing a child isn't the same as killing one's self in any way.

In your value system. It's easy to construct a value system where my own life and my future child's life are both worth more than 58 t CO2.

Well, then you may have a catch-22 where the expense of having your child could cause making the world unlivable for that child thus condemning it or its descendants to non-existence. Thus generalized to the whole population the best action to maintain the ability to have those valued children is to have fewer of them on average. So we're back to the same conclusion.

Re: Insect collapse

#152

Post by Zoh0eich »

skh wrote: post #144
Zoh0eich wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's more one can do than just that. I do not own or use cars. I try limit my meat consumption (not entirely successful on that front). I changed energy providers to buy from renewables sources. I do not travel by air. I don't have air conditioning. I also sit on a pile of money, not sure what to do with it. Index stocks contain fossil companies which I don't want to support. Maybe I'll throw some at those silicat…

What you write is true but I don't think will be duplicable on a large scale without regulations and pricing negative externalities into products. The free rider problem is a negative aspect of human psychology.

The question is what someone who is aware of the issues and willing to act can do. Just because there are those who act irresponsibly does not prevent you from adjusting your behavior.

Re: Insect collapse

#153

Post by throwaway5752 »

tomp wrote: post #89
lotsofpulp wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not equivalent since you're already alive. Not producing a child isn't the same as killing one's self in any way.

In your value system. It's easy to construct a value system where my own life and my future child's life are both worth more than 58 t CO2.

How do you reconcile the future warfare and famine risk to your N existing children caused by the additional carbon of your hypothetical N+1 vs your utility of having an N+1th child, though? Because that is the actual formulation.

Re: Insect collapse

#154

Post by jelliclesfarm »

Speaking as a farmer..We should return half the earths landmass to nature. We must change how we grow food. We must even reconsider our ‘food for survival and fuel’. We can all do without pork and HFCS and kale to live. We can’t live without this planet and it’s natural systems sustaining us. We should waste less. Use less fossil fuel. Every time I hear another VC flog their investment with the tired old line ‘we must feed 10 billion by 2050’, a chill runs through my spine. And another species inches closer to extinction. We have a population problem. Not an environmental problem. All this ‘innovation’ is enabling our addiction to procreation. .. all our traditional and modern methods of Ag and producing food + having breached the carrying capacity of the planet so long ago , we are losing this battle of species survival ...with willful ignorance. It’s all very disheartening.

Re: Insect collapse

#155

Post by mrob »

honkycat wrote: post #148
mrob wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't have any problem with tigers going extinct in the wild. From Wikipedia: "The most comprehensive study of deaths due to tiger attacks estimates that at least 373,000 people died due to tiger attacks between 1800 and 2009, the majority of these attacks occurring in South and Southeast Asia.[1] Over the last five centuries, an estimated 1 million people have been eaten by tigers.[2]" https://en.wikipedia.org/…

Such a low, ignorant comment. You are fine with tigers going extinct because 2,000 people a year, a MINUSCULE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, for the last 200 years die from tiger attacks? I'm sorry to say you are probably going to get your wish, you dolt. Someday it will just be us and the shopping malls and you can continue to sit inside all day. How many tigers are killed by humans so we can display their skin and eat their fle…

I said "extinct in the wild", not completely extinct. Tigers are popular zoo animals (partly because they're so dangerous), and they will breed in captivity. If things are so bad that even captive tigers go extinct then we have bigger problems to worry about.

Re: Insect collapse

#156

Post by radiorental »

honkycat wrote: post #145
radiorental wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I view our success as a product of evolution. It is the driving factor that got us down out of the trees, cultivating our food and to where we are today. Would we be putting a little less pressure on the environment without people like Edward Bernays, possibly. However, I think our collective consciousness can put itself a little at ease. As we enter the 6 mass extinction event, it's a natural cycle and if it wasn't…

I think you vastly over-estimate our power. If the oceans die through acidification and pollution, and all of the insects die we will die as well.

I expect us to die.

I think you may have misread the intent of my comment.

We're going away.

Re: Insect collapse

#157

Post by skh »

Zoh0eich wrote: post #152
skh wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you write is true but I don't think will be duplicable on a large scale without regulations and pricing negative externalities into products. The free rider problem is a negative aspect of human psychology.

The question is what someone who is aware of the issues and willing to act can do. Just because there are those who act irresponsibly does not prevent you from adjusting your behavior.

It does actually prevent me for adjusting my behavior. I'm a victim of free rider thinking. I'm not going to fall on my sword so to speak and sacrifice whilst almost no one else does.

Re: Insect collapse

#158

Post by joecool1029 »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #122
linguistbreaker wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've thought this too but then you are leaving the future to those who breed more irresponsibly. Another way to look at it would be that we have a responsibility to raise more responsible people.

> I've thought this too but then you are leaving the future to those who breed more irresponsibly. The movie "Idiocracy" addresses this very issue. It's a comedy, and I really enjoyed it.

>It's a comedy

I think you meant prophecy.

Re: Insect collapse

#159

Post by ryanmercer »

Zoh0eich wrote: post #139
skh wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me the only thing we can really do is not have children. There are too many people on the planet.

There's more one can do than just that. I do not own or use cars. I try limit my meat consumption (not entirely successful on that front). I changed energy providers to buy from renewables sources. I do not travel by air. I don't have air conditioning. I also sit on a pile of money, not sure what to do with it. Index stocks contain fossil companies which I don't want to support. Maybe I'll throw some at those silicat…

> I try limit my meat consumption (not entirely successful on that front).

You can drastically reduce related emissions by just giving up beef and replacing it witch chicken. IIRC it's something like 1/5 or 1/6th the amount of greenhouse gas emissions pound for pound of meat.

Re: Insect collapse

#160

Post by skh »

astazangasta wrote: post #142
skh wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not genocide to not have children. At an individual level the best thing we can do is to not have children if you are in a rich country. Those of us who live in rich countries massively over consume (including myself in this). Going to a carbon neutral economy is not helpful if it isn't done on a world wide scale. Right now rich countries have a nice system whereby they can realistically become carbon neutral in…

Not having children is also not helpful if not done on a worldwide scale, so I dont see how your strategy is better. I am an American, and I remain optimistic that we can fix our politics. In fact I'd say that fixing our politics is exactly the same as manifesting political will. For a generation since the labor movement dwindled there have not been any significant vehicles of popular will at work in American politic…

The person I originally responded to asked for suggestions to deal with the reality of living on a planet increasingly becoming a shitty place to live. He/she appeared to be having a problem coming to terms with this reality. I suggested not having kids. The suggestion isn't feasible in terms of large scale change. It is feasible in terms of coming to grips with being an over consumer of resources and assuaging the accompanying guilt. At least it has worked for me.
Post reply on HN