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

I Choose Optimism

secularhumanism.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 222 posts

Re: I Choose Optimism

#71

Post by Karrot_Kream »

systemvoltage wrote: post #54
adrianN wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The economy gets better for more people in more places than ever before. Environmental destruction is also progressing faster than ever before. Many crucial ecosystems are on the brink of collapse (e.g. the rainforests) and we show no signs of intending to protect them.

Media doesn't report good things that happen in the environment. From 2013-2019, they hammered constantly on how the Great Barrier Reef was dying. But, not a peep when they found that it is healthiest its ever been in recent history: https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/parts-australia... No wonder the trust in media has fallen to the lowest. Reuters/AP are informative as a root source, but I have stopped tru…

I'm active in my community advocating for greater transit and modeshare and our transit advocacy network is much better at trumpeting good news than the MSM and many Twitter doomers for a simple reason: nobody will give us more funding until we tell them how $X was spent on initiative Y which led to great outcome Z. It's our job to tell everyone how this little bike lane in this neighborhood decreased car trips and increased safety. The MSM faces no existential risk when it trumpets bad news all day, but we have to convince our neighbors that the money they're spending or the traffic blockage they're facing as new infrastructure is built is worthwhile.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#72

Post by oceanplexian »

shepherdjerred wrote: post #52
salt-thrower wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. The author is living in a middle/upper class suburbian bubble. Bigger and bigger houses that consume more and more resources is a problem, not a sign of progress. It is a glaring sign of the consumerism and resource depletion that is fueling the crisis we're in. There is no amount of renewable energy that will make "average homes are 2,657 square feet and have air conditioning" a sustainable way of living.

> There is no amount of renewable energy that will make "average homes are 2,657 square feet and have air conditioning" a sustainable way of living. Why not? Do you think it's impossible for energy to become 'to cheap to meter'?

They are also missing the fact that new, large homes are much more efficient. My 3600 sq/ft new construction consumes less energy to heat and cool than the 900 sq/ft 1960s ranch I used to live in, due to more advanced construction techniques, HVAC technology improvements, and better materials science.

The same applies to cars. Take something like a Rivian and it’s easily more efficient than a Prius or a subcompact car, while being larger, faster, more performant, and more comfortable. Bigger and more comfortable does not necessarily mean worse for the planet.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#74

Post by thrown_22 »

NovaVeles wrote: post #25
mrandish wrote: post #4

It's easy (and popular) to be a pessimist but when I look at objective global data on decade+ time scales, the only rational conclusion is that things are generally getting better for more people in more places than ever before (data like global poverty, infant mortality, literacy, etc). That doesn't mean we don't still have a ways to go and it certainly doesn't mean that things aren't terrible for some people in som…

I am in the camp of we are in overshoot, have been for a very long time. In the same way that a someone can spend way above their income by using the credit card. Looks great now but that looming cloud of debt is coming. Societal wise we have done this via the monkey pore wish for "unlimited energy" in the form of fossil fuels. We got energy unlike anything else in history but at the cost of environmental blow back a…

Or we just stop pretending that nuclear is bad and build the plants to keep an industrial base going past 2050.

Hell at this point whoever does will just conquer whoever doesn't. Just like the industrial revolution let whoever burn coal take over the rest. I'm hoping to be in a country that isn't conquered, but the west seems to have entered a death spiral of self delusion.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#75

Post by tick_tock_tick »

NovaVeles wrote: post #26
philipashlock wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ecological and resource extractive debt is not magic, they have limits and externalities that most financial systems don't fully account for in their balance sheets.

This is something I have to remind people of all the time - usually I just get blank stares. Forget the dollars and cents tokens on wealth, they can and are manipulated but intentionally and unintentionally. How much energy and resources that gets us do we have? That is the real currency we have to work with. All the debt in the world means nothing if we cannot produce the goods with the token we produced assuming th…

> How much energy and resources that gets us do we have?

Millions of years worth..... Like really of course you get blank stares it's not an issue that exists.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#76

Post by tick_tock_tick »

salt-thrower wrote: post #28
narcraft wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there hypothetically was a magical source of near infinite renewable energy that could be harnessed without negative side effects, would you be ok with 2600+ sqft homes and air conditioning? I sometimes get the impression that sustainability advocates/environmentalists are more anti-technolgy or anti-human than they are pro-nature and saying things like "there is no amount of renewable energy that will make [enjoy…

> If there hypothetically was a magical source of near infinite renewable energy that could be harnessed without negative side effects, would you be ok with 2600+ sqft homes and air conditioning? Yes. In a world with zero negative externalities for massive resource consumption, then by all means, give everyone a mansion and a yacht. > What number of humans can the Earth ideally sustain in your estimation? If it's sub…

> TL;DR the famous book "Limits to Growth" was very prescient and it mostly hit the mark.

Didn't he get pretty much everything wrong? Like embarrassing wrong even messing up, or intentionally misunderstanding, basic economic theories?

Re: I Choose Optimism

#77

Post by barrysteve »

Comevius wrote: post #2

Humans no longer seeing themselves as the pawns of nature is nothing to be proud of. We still depend on nature, nothing have changed, only this dependence is now obfuscated. There is a buffer between us and nature, which makes us utterly blind to the consequences of our actions. We are not living in the best of times, we are living the biggest lie ever. Our way of life is utterly unsustainable, and by our way of life…

It's not just being free from being a pawn of nature is a silly idea, you don't go far enough. Anything that's not built on nature is temporary and is going to fall apart at some point. The people who blind themselves to that fact, are going to have a bad time. Whether you quote the bible or physics to support the fact, the outcome is the same.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#78

Post by blfr »

There are two issues with OP.

First, is that this optimism is indefinite in words of Peter Thiel. It's gonna be fine but without any directions how to make that future actually happen. Can we just sit and wait?

Second, it addresses factors that just aren't important.

Doesn’t she know that Christian nationalism has largely taken over the Republican Party and that the Enlightenment values of freedom of inquiry, tolerance, and reason are being threatened from the political Right as well as—to a worrying extent—the political Left?

These are downright silly concerns in the world with collapsing birth rates on the verge of a world war with Russia and China trying to use their last gasp for empire building.

Living five years longer in a larger house with AC is nothing to sneeze at but perhaps not quite the win in the world of record-breaking obesity and drug addiction. We're trading biological capital for material comforts. And not even at a good exchange rate.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#79

Post by adrianN »

systemvoltage wrote: post #54
adrianN wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The economy gets better for more people in more places than ever before. Environmental destruction is also progressing faster than ever before. Many crucial ecosystems are on the brink of collapse (e.g. the rainforests) and we show no signs of intending to protect them.

Media doesn't report good things that happen in the environment. From 2013-2019, they hammered constantly on how the Great Barrier Reef was dying. But, not a peep when they found that it is healthiest its ever been in recent history: https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/parts-australia... No wonder the trust in media has fallen to the lowest. Reuters/AP are informative as a root source, but I have stopped tru…

As far as I know the barrier reef is already dead because we emitted enough GHG to force sufficiently high water temperatures that the reef can't survive. It's only a matter of a couple of decades before the temperatures catch up with our emissions.

Re: I Choose Optimism

#80

Post by eddyparkinson »

The book learned optimism covers the value of both optimism and pessimism. He wrote the book to help people become more optimistic.

The main thing I learned from the book, is knowing when it is good to be optimistic or pessimistic. There is a time and a place for each. But, on average, optimists tend to win, because they keep trying longer.

Post reply on HN