Live data from Hacker News

Making energy too cheap to meter

worksinprogress.co

51–52 of 52 posts

Re: Making energy too cheap to meter

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you perceive as some weird religious thing is merely the rejection of the completely unfounded axiom that all logistic curves are exponentials if you want them to be. From the point of view of someone who has rejected this axiom, then the slavish devotion to growth looks like a bizarre cult where the worshippers feed more and more of the very finite resources needed for humans to flourish into a machine that doe…

What people don't seem to grasp is that the optimal growth path isn't the fastest one, it is the one that balances speed vs longevity. If you burn yourself out in the first 10 years of your career, your rate of growth might be impressive but your most productive years will barely even matter so your output will be low either way. What you want to do is reach the highest possible output and maintain it for as long as…

Alternatively, I would suggest philosophers have been arguing about what "optimal" means here for millennia. We keep learning more about the effect of our actions on the ecosystem and our own health, so I hope we are doing better over time.

If we're talking about "growth" in the sense of adding up all production before civilization collapses (to infer from your statement about individual careers), I suppose there is a perspective that says this is a proxy for how advanced the civilization can be before it collapses.

I do think maximizing total output before collapse as the main important thing may result in strange conclusions. A person's productivity famously doesn't account for happiness and the joy of going for hikes or playing video games with friends, which most would argue matter more.

You could counter by suggesting that at a civilization scale maximizing total production is the best way to guess how far along we are and since we may have initial resource limitations we need to conserve things so that we have the highest chance of getting through pinch points where things are only extremely bad instead of civilization-ending.

It's a fair point, but if you are making a metaphor to a single career's productive output it seems to imply that you assume there must be an end. Yes, there is an end to infinite growth, obviously there must be. I do think we need to worry about how to live happy lives knowing that our civilization will very probably end or stagnate. To me I don't think "productivity" in any sense measurable by energy necessarily makes me happier. Sometimes it does, but sometimes sometimes it makes me happier to not maximize my productivity.

Re: Making energy too cheap to meter

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who argue for artificially curbing ourselves are counter productive (no pun intended) but they're also not worth arguing with. (Have you met an environmentalist who doesn't wear mass-produced clothing? I've met one. One.) The whole point of curbing energy use is not to live in the dark in a hovel. Vaclav Smil points out that people in the USA in the 1960's had a pretty good standard of living, that we haven't…

None of these problems are the result of using too much energy. Many of them are a consequence of how we produce the energy we have. Most of them can be solved by using even more energy. Maybe you're right that there's some point where we need to restrict energy consumption because the universe is going to run out of hydrogen too quickly if we don't, but we have a lot of problems to solve before we get there, and the…

I think we largely agree.

FWIW, I'm not against using energy, I'm against wasting energy.

Post reply on HN