Live data from Hacker News

How Vulnerable Is the World?

aeon.co

11–20 of 64 posts

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#11

I don't think we need to worry about any new fancy technologies wiping us out. Nature is perfectly capable of doing that itself. My biggest question with the whole COVID issue is why hasn't this happened sooner? And why only one single pathogen? Why aren't there dozens of COVIDs happening all the time? What happens when we get 2, 3, 4, 5 of them at once with a 10% IFR each? I don't think our civilization would be abl…

If COVID originated from bats or whatever, then the reason we don’t see multiple viruses going around simultaneously is because animal–human crossover, though it certainly does happen, happens more rarely than that.

If COVID is a virus of whatever origin that escaped from a Chinese lab (only mentioning this because it’s a popular theory among ordinary netizens and the WHO expressly didn’t rule it out, though it called it not a likely scenario), then we don’t see multiple pathogens going around the world because all developed countries’ top-security bio labs are – thankfully – quite secure. Stephen King’s The Stand and Richard Preston’s The Hot Zone have kept readers awake at night with fear for decades now, but the labs they describe have managed to keep their pathogens from escaping.

Also, some horrible pandemics of yore like bubonic plague were easy to stamp out by modern hygiene practices, which is why they only pop up today in undeveloped places with poor hygiene (e.g. prisons in Madagascar).

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#12
I trust in our ability to cope and adapt.

Civilisations have collapsed before, and will collapse again.

We've been around as an identifiable species for 100,000 years, that's a couple of Ice Ages and at least one point where we were down to a few hundred individuals.

Trying to control every eventuality and predict everything will be as destructive as the disasters the article talks about. Instead of shoring up control mechanisms, we could/should be shoring up our ability to adapt. Spread knowledge widely, increase education and teach people more (and better), take our kids out of the cities and into some wilderness at least once in their lives. Make our science less prone to bad incentives and less reliant on a small number of publishers. Make our internet infrastructure free from bad incentives, or corporate control. Have a plan for the collapse of civilisation, instead of hoping it won't happen or futilely trying to prevent it.

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#13

Don't forget the anthropic principal: the reason we haven't yet encountered any civilization-destroying black balls is because we wouldn't be here to wonder why if we had. Similarly, there's a probabilistic argument that we actually are on the cusp of some humanity-destroying event. If human population grows exponentially until it faces a civilization-destroying crisis, then a large fraction of the people who will ev…

> Finally, don't rule out the possibility that the definition of "consciousness" may shift.

Memes (in the academic sense, not the cat video sense) display all our characteristics for biological life.

They respond to stimuli (other memes, changing social trends, etc).

They grow, evolve, reproduce (Catholicism->Many branches of Protestantism)

They maintain homeostasis (core principles)

They're built of cells (people)

And so on. Although I probably wouldn't say they show signs of intelligence (although it'd be cool if someone could imagine a sentient meme). They seem more like "simple" organisms, but at a layer of abstraction above sentient life, something like how biological life is a layer of abstraction above chemistry.

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#14

I don't think we need to worry about any new fancy technologies wiping us out. Nature is perfectly capable of doing that itself. My biggest question with the whole COVID issue is why hasn't this happened sooner? And why only one single pathogen? Why aren't there dozens of COVIDs happening all the time? What happens when we get 2, 3, 4, 5 of them at once with a 10% IFR each? I don't think our civilization would be abl…

If COVID originated from bats or whatever, then the reason we don’t see multiple viruses going around simultaneously is because animal–human crossover, though it certainly does happen, happens more rarely than that. If COVID is a virus of whatever origin that escaped from a Chinese lab (only mentioning this because it’s a popular theory among ordinary netizens and the WHO expressly didn’t rule it out, though it calle…

> even the WHO has said this theoretically remains a possibility, while not thought the most likely

Try "extremely unlikely" instead. More like they can't rule it out with absolute certainty, but not a particularly reasonable hypothesis. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55996728

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#16

Don't forget the anthropic principal: the reason we haven't yet encountered any civilization-destroying black balls is because we wouldn't be here to wonder why if we had. Similarly, there's a probabilistic argument that we actually are on the cusp of some humanity-destroying event. If human population grows exponentially until it faces a civilization-destroying crisis, then a large fraction of the people who will ev…

the Doomsday Argument seems plausible, but assuming you are selected uniformly at random from all possible humans results in a hidden assumption that the future can have an effect on the past, which doesn't seem reasonable.

I realize this PDF from 2005 by a member of "The Futurists Guild" may not seem like a reliable academic source, but it lays out some good thought experiments on the topic.

http://cogprints.org/4045/1/Causality.pdf

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#17
The properties that make nuclear bombs so destructive also make them hard to manufacture., so the kitchen nuclear bomb would have never been possible according to any laws of physics we ae familiar with . A bioengineered plague is probably worse than threat than bombs imho, given how bad Covid was for example

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#19
The tragedy is the growing consensus that the world is going to shit and it's our fault. Even worse is that all this technology, social media, and so on isn't even making us more happy or fulfilled. Yet, most just sit on their hands not doing much at all. Content to eek out what comfort and pleasure we can get now and try our best to ignore the knowledge that devastation awaits us.

It's amazing that in tens of thousands of years, we've developed the power of gods yet have the same minds. And if anything our culture and values in many ways have gotten worse.

The solution to all of this mess isn't going to come from the same mindset that created the same problems (looking at you carbon capture tech).

What's needed most is an entire global shift in what we value and a concerted effort and funding to make that happen.

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#20
Very related: The Precipice - a book by Toby Ord

https://theprecipice.com/

"[Existential risks] have only multiplied, from climate change to engineered pandemics and unaligned artificial intelligence. If we do not act fast to reach a place of safety, it may soon be too late. The Precipice explores the science behind the risks we face."

Post reply on HN