291–300 of 315 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We came very close to the world being completely dominated by Orwell style authoritarian one party states. It seems like not only we came close, but it is the very reality we currently live in, we just don't like admitting it. Although instead of one party, we have one class.
If you think that, you have no clue what it's like to live in the real deal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It reminds me of getting on a stand-up paddle board. As you find your balance, there is a wobbling. If you haven't done it in a while, it feels almost certain you will fall. But (usually for me), you find your balance, and suddenly you are floating in the water, like Jesus Christ himself. With all the new elements in society, I think we're all "finding our balance". And once we have, we'll be able to explore the futu…
Ahh yes, nothing like melting the ice caps and flooding several countries to "find the balance" between being able to be alive and everyone on the planet owning 3 automobiles to ensure GM has a profitable quarter
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why specifically 2015 and not, say, 2000?
Brexit / Trump marked a turning point for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a huge difference between what I was responding to... > The size of the climate disaster, and the urgent need for radical changes in the global economy, simply can't be overstated right now. ...and your take, which I fully agree with: > "Science" (...) finding that we are causing the climate to change into something that is less favorable to humans than our current climate is abundantly clear to anyone
Ah okay, now I better understand what you meant. Personally I think it's true that the size of the climate disaster is absolutely enormous and we really do need radical changes throughout the global economy. But if you don't share that opinion then I see why you'd want to see a citation with such a statement, even if you don't deny that the CO2 in the air is man-made and causing the planet to become a lot less hospit…
> A new report by 11,258 scientists in 153 countries from a broad range of disciplines warns that the planet “clearly and unequivocally faces a climate emergency,” and provides six broad policy goals that must be met to address it.
The analysis is a stark departure from recent scientific assessments of global warming, such as those of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ...
This says two things to me:
1. "a stark departure from recent scientific assessments of global warming" says that this is NOT what the experts in the field are saying.
2. "from a broad range of disciplines" says that these are mostly not climate scientists.
Here is the best article I know about the real climate science vs doomsday predictions: https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/11/25...
Yes, we have been since 1945, when the first persistent existential threat we created ourselves first arose... Nuclear Weapons. Now, we have the added threat of Genetic Engineering, the second existential threat we created ourselves. All of our Institutions have an embedded growth obligation they haven't been able to meet since the 1960s, which lead to their being run by people willing to fudge the truth to keep the…
That makes me wonder at what point the world's nuclear arsenal became big enough to be an existential threat. For reference, there were apparently ~300 atomic bombs in the world in 1950:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_nuclear_weapons_sto...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is, with a decent voting system, it only takes 51% of the population to decide government policy, but with corporations, even 1% of the population can keep harmful corporations from bankruptcy. Even ignoring the problem of those 1% potentially being the richest 1%, there is the issue that harmful businesses often have lower costs than ethical businesses, and some consumers are too price-sensitive (or d…
Is it right that the 51% of the population is able to coerce 100% of the population into paying higher prices for the more ethical businesses? High and mid income earners can and should choose more ethical/environmental businesses as they have the means to do so.
Just from the numbers yes because the other side isnt saying more or even same but less.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's so weird, in movies there's always the villain going out of their way trying to "destroy the world" and it seems so far fetched - and now I'm talking to one.
Hahaha! I am flattered. But, like all the villains in the movies, I don't see myself as the bad guy. You're trying to screw me out of my share while clearly not contributing your share, and I have access to a slow WMD you can't stop. That's just bad negotiating on your part. You can: 1. Try to disarm me, but you are unable. 2. Try to not screw me, and it'll be fine. 3. Do your bit, and it'll be fine. Listen, what tha…
But your line of reasoning perfectly shows that it fine - humanity going extinct is a good thing. The universe is better off without the like of us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe climate change could be by a sufficiently determined technological and industrial civilization, if there was some such thing. Climate change could also be solved by a magical flying rabbit, if there was some such thing.
They aren't talking about sufficiently advanced technology (magic). They're talking about things we can already do, but have serious trade offs. The most common suggestion is to add particles to the atmosphere that reflect sunlight. I think sulfur was first proposed, but I think study of calcium carbonate has been ongoing to avoid the ocean acidification issues that sulfur presents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid democracies are inherently unstable. Athenian lasted 200 years and got swallowed up by Macedonian autocracy. Roman lasted 500 years and got overthrown by the army. Polish lasted 350 years and the parliament voted to allow neighbouring empires to divide the country. The US is at 250 years and people are seriously worried about it devolving into either Gilead or Cyberpunk any moment now.
I am intrigued, can you refer me to where Polands parliament voted for the empires to devide the country?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_Sejm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Partition_of_Poland