My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse” • Hacker News Board

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#231

Post by jollybean » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:28 AM UTC

We thought we would hit 'peak oil' in the 1980's but then we learned to drill in deep water.

When we learned to make fuel from Oilsands, the world's reserves tripled.

When we learned to drill sideways, it grew.

When we learned how to make more efficient use of the tapping, it grew.

This notion of 'finite resources' is a very bad constraint. Obviously there are limits but we adapt quickly.

If we decided to use 1980's style Nuclear Reactors - we could power the world for 10 000 years using known reserves. And it would be clean.

Trees? We grow them. Metal? We recycle. Even soil we are starting to figure out sustainably.

There are very few hard limits we're facing on that front.

Chocolate and Cork might run in short supply but that means we kind spend our folly money on 'pure chocolate' as a delicacy instead of NFT's and we just can't have proper wine corks.

'Societal Collapse' won't come from resource extraction, it will come from warring ideologues in a population of materially satiated plebes who have too much time on their hands and so they argue over the meaning of words until someone tries and actual coup and it comes apart from there.

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#232

Post by zug_zug » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:29 AM UTC

tanbog4 wrote: post #185

cjohnson318 wrote: post #163

I love that there's a "technology will fix things" model. This assumes we'll discover some magical bullet, that we haven't thought of, that will counteract erosion of topsoil, water shortages, and climate change. Another implicit assumption is that we'll be able to move forward unilaterally with such a solution, instead of it becoming a political football until it's too late to do anything, like climate change. A lot…

It's not that silly to model as historically that has also happened. To use the "peak oil" example this work also influenced, the technology of fossil oil reserves was a response in part to "peak whale" (not a joke). The main source much commercial 'oil' for things like Street lamps in the 1800s was whale blubber. As whales got overfished fossilised oil reserves were developed and not only took over those markets but…

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "peak whale" and "peak oil" are naturally self-correcting in a free-market, because as the resources become scarce their prices goes up hence leading to technological incentives to find alternative sources.

This would also apply to topsoil erosion. However this isn't the case with carbon emissions for example, unless we had some financial feedback loop (e.g. some carbon tax).

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#233

Post by tomcooks » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:33 AM UTC

"To keep reading this story, get the free app or log in."

Why keep things behind walled gardens, if you write them for others to read? Thanks to those who shared the archive link.

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#234

Post by ktzar » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:33 AM UTC

cjohnson318 wrote: post #163

I love that there's a "technology will fix things" model. This assumes we'll discover some magical bullet, that we haven't thought of, that will counteract erosion of topsoil, water shortages, and climate change. Another implicit assumption is that we'll be able to move forward unilaterally with such a solution, instead of it becoming a political football until it's too late to do anything, like climate change. A lot…

There's a number of technologies and traits that, if adopted en-masse, would definitely reduce our energy and material consumption and extend the sustainability of our planet.

Stop eating meat, extended warranties in home products and designing goods in a way they can be easily repaired, led bulbs, better insulation for buildings, solar water heaters, heat pumps, bicycles...

We could easily consume a fifth of the resources we use now and be as happy if twenty selected things were banned in the world. But we live in a capitalist world, there's only hope in people taking the initiative.

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#235

Post by premium-gecko » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:34 AM UTC

dvt wrote: post #176

yongjik wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, I do agree that the world, especially the climate system, may veer off into uncharted territory soon. (Maybe it already started.) I'm just saying these particular "predictions" don't seem to contain any useful information. Anyone can say "things can go wrong." Hell, I can say that, and I may even be right.

> Hell, I can say that, and I may even be right. Not only may you be right, you are in fact guaranteed to be right. Of course, predicting exactly when things go wrong is another ballgame altogether. Edit: the downvotes on HN are becoming so reactionary lately, it feels like it's slowly turning into reddit. Or maybe people just aren't familiar with Poincaré recurrence, etc.?

For the preservation of (inauthentic) harmony, HN has a special rule that says you can't mention the roving mob of the HN equivalent of Twitter blue checkmarks who don't have any substantive rebuttal, but just don't want your comment to be seen, so they downvote or flag it. It's common knowledge, but you can't acknowledge it, or you get the treatment.

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#236

Post by zug_zug » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:36 AM UTC

Everyone: We were wrong about peak oil! Models aren't always right! Me: Couldn't our models be wrong in the wrong direction?

Is the burden of proof to do nothing until it's scientifically definitive for societal collapse? Or is the burden to intervene until it's definitive that there is no risk of societal collapse (even if our models underestimate).

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#237

Post by panta » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:39 AM UTC

fennecfoxen wrote: post #151

hogFeast wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing that people underestimate with Malthusian thinking is that we live in a dynamic system. The amount of oil that is "out there" is connected to the oil price. Sometimes that supply effect of higher prices is limited (we are, potentially, seeing this with copper) but if you are projecting linear trends, you don't understand economics (and btw, this was the issue with the original Limits to Growth and almost al…

Economic growth is not just energy consumption. We measure it in dollars, not watts, because energy is just an input. We have ways of optimizing to use less or do more valuable things with it.

Yes, there are ofc different byproducts (knowledge, health, leisure, fulfillment of needs, …) but, at the end of the chain, a dollar spent is ultimately converted into energy/resource consumption, no?

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#238

Post by downWidOutaFite » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:41 AM UTC

krrrh wrote: post #224

xxpor wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US Supreme Court. And there's a very good chance the entire world look different if Gore won. There may have not been a 9/11, for one. There would have certainly not been an Iraq war.

We’ll never know for sure, but this seems like revisionist history and motivated reasoning. Gore and his advisors supported regime change in Iraq when he was in office and intelligence failures didn’t suddenly start in early 2001, nor were they restricted to the United States.[0] It’s possible that the tone around climate change would have been different under a Gore administration, but the entire composition of Cong…

It was not intelligence failures that got us into Iraq. The politicians lied us into the war on purpose and hid, obstructed, and made up the intelligence as they saw fit. One of the biggest crimes in American history should be remembered correctly.

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#239

Post by wongarsu » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:42 AM UTC

emteycz wrote: post #203

mercy_dude wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It means if one was asked to bet on an event between 100k death from a virus outbreak and 100k death from climate change, one would place their bet largely on climate change. Even though we have been warned the hidden systemic risk of pandemic preparedness l.

You live in a bubble. The majority of people still deny climate change entirely.

Source? A quick google search would suggest that around 70% of Americans agree that climate change is real. That's way too low, but still a solid majority.

According to an UN poll, 65% of Americans and 64% of the world think that climate change is a global emergency [1]. In every questioned country, a majority said it's a global emergency.

1: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jan/27/un-globa...

Re: My take on the study from MIT that predicts “societal collapse”

#240

Post by anonleb4 » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 6:48 AM UTC

swader999 wrote: post #186

Doom scrolled about halfway down. I'm a bit flabbergasted by all the esoteric commentary when we have a real life example of this happening right now in South Africa.

There are countless examples all around the world as we speak, but some people, mostly "occidentals", are stuck in bubbles full of assumptions and theories. Maybe it's denial, as mentioned.