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

The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

kemendo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 164 posts

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#51

Post by forgetfreeman »

kerkeslager wrote: post #46
forgetfreeman wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're already well past that point now given the volume of nonrenewable inputs required to sustain current agricultural yields.

"Currently used" and "required" are two different things. It's not going to happen overnight, but we have the ability to transition a lot of current agriculture toward more sustainable practices, and that's only going to improve as we learn more. I'm not talking about pie-in-the-sky stuff like vertical farming either, I'm talking about more about more proven techniques like soil restoration and permaculture.

Soil restoration requires fallow acreage cycles that are unsupportable given the acreage of idle land required when compared against the total of available arable land at present. Permaculture is little more than a product of the instagram-homesteader industrial complex intended to sell books and land speaking engagements. It produces at absolute max a third of the calories per acre of industrialized monocrop agriculture. Where to source 200% more arable acres to make that transition is conveniently left as an exercise by it's proponents, as is how to handle the massive increase in labor required to harvest from permaculture lands.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#52

Post by simonh »

keiferski wrote: post #41
wsc981 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the right circumstances, birth control happens automatically. As people get more wealthy, there seems to be less incentive to have lots of children. Perhaps due to better healthcare (less deaths in childbirth) and more securities for old age (eg. pensions). Seems Africa is at the moment the only continent that still has population growth (and quite massive). https://www.statista.com/statistics/272789/world-populat…

I think this is more a consequence of consumerism and the media-nature of modern society and not directly from increased populations. It just seems that way because science allowing for larger food crops, less child mortality, etc. coincided with the rise of media technology.

What's the mechanism by which consumerism and media lead to lower child births though?

It's easy to see that in poorer countries with minimal or no pensions or social security having more children leads to greater productive capacity for the family, and a better chance of the parents being cared for in old age. Family connections are crucial support networks everyone relies on. Each extra child is another insurance policy for the future. In wealthy countries with pensions and social security none of that is an issue.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#53

Post by [deleted] »

kerkeslager wrote: post #50
forgetfreeman wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot think of an audience more primed to ignore every word of this than Hacker News. See also: the lakehouse guy upthread.

Sure, but I think there's hope. People learn and change. I've been speaking pretty openly about how shitty the effects are of the pro-corporate, anti-human ideology that's prevalent on HN for a few years now. I've noticed more people joining me in speaking out, and less push-back. I made an aside comment a few days back about corporations being willing to murder for profit, and someone else linked a bunch of examples…

[deleted]

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#54

Post by joebig »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #44
AlexandrB wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see a point in striving for a society where most of the population is only meeting tier 1 needs. That's a human chicken farm, not a civilization.

In 100 years you'll be dead as Caesar's ghost regardless of what car you drive or how braggable your social media presence makes your life appear. Pointless bling is pointless, regardless of how it's framed. Edit: apparently that poked someone in the worldview. Nifty.

Unnecessary suffering is also pointless. Existence of life in a cold indifferent universe is pointless. The whole point is that it's all pointless, might as well make it worthwhile, whatever version of it one prefers.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#55

Post by forgetfreeman »

joebig wrote: post #54
forgetfreeman wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 100 years you'll be dead as Caesar's ghost regardless of what car you drive or how braggable your social media presence makes your life appear. Pointless bling is pointless, regardless of how it's framed. Edit: apparently that poked someone in the worldview. Nifty.

Unnecessary suffering is also pointless. Existence of life in a cold indifferent universe is pointless. The whole point is that it's all pointless, might as well make it worthwhile, whatever version of it one prefers.

K. Now you get to choose what "worthwhile" means. Borderline sociopathic self-gratification or communal striving for an improved human condition.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#56

Post by metabagel »

wsc981 wrote: post #22
hehhehaha wrote: post #7

I don't understand how any species escapes logistic growth without strict population control or interstellar travel.

In the right circumstances, birth control happens automatically. As people get more wealthy, there seems to be less incentive to have lots of children. Perhaps due to better healthcare (less deaths in childbirth) and more securities for old age (eg. pensions). Seems Africa is at the moment the only continent that still has population growth (and quite massive). https://www.statista.com/statistics/272789/world-populat…

Couple of factors...

People in developing countries tend to have children in order to boost the family's income. As the economy develops, this turns out to no longer be beneficial.

Generally, people choose to have less children as infant mortality goes down. Introduction of better medical care leads to a temporary spike in population, as more people live longer. But, lower infant mortality means that people don't need to have as many children in order to have some survive, and so they typically choose to have fewer children. The adjustment period can be a problem, as we have seen in the developing world.

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#57

Post by AlexandrB »

forgetfreeman wrote: post #55
joebig wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unnecessary suffering is also pointless. Existence of life in a cold indifferent universe is pointless. The whole point is that it's all pointless, might as well make it worthwhile, whatever version of it one prefers.

K. Now you get to choose what "worthwhile" means. Borderline sociopathic self-gratification or communal striving for an improved human condition.

Who gets to decide what "improved human condition" means and what if large segments of the population disagree on what it means?

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#58

Post by cyberax »

twothreeone wrote: post #43
hehhehaha wrote: post #7

I don't understand how any species escapes logistic growth without strict population control or interstellar travel.

And even with population control technological advancements will inevitably lead to growing energy demands (e.g., see https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/sam-altman-wants-7-trillion to spark your imagination). Medium term we're not going to get around leaving the gravity well, or else embrace decline.

> And even with population control technological advancements will inevitably lead to growing energy demands

Why?

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#59

Post by myhf »

jraedisch wrote: post #12

So when I think “every important thing in my life is scarce”, that is just incorrect imagination? 11 billion people can live on a lake with perfect child and health care?

Is an 8-acre lake ok?

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=world+water+area+%2F+wo...

Re: The Myth of Scarcity and Its Threats to Human Society [pdf] (2023)

#60

Post by kerkeslager »

defrost wrote: post #9

I prefer the Forward to the UNEP 2024 Global Resources Outlook (181 pages): Natural resources are the basis on which all economies and societies are built, making their sustainable management critical to ending poverty and reducing inequalities. They are also essential to drive the transition to net-zero. To stay below a 2°C temperature rise by 2050, we will need over three billion tonnes of energy transition mineral…

> but the full report does outline a path forward should sufficient numbers of people and companies take heed.

Sure, but a path that depends on companies caring about anything other than profit is a dead end.

Companies do not care about ethics, and exceptional (as in, exceptions to the rule) people like Yvonne Chouinard have had to go to great lengths to create atypical corporate structures that may not even work in the long run to try to make companies that don't devolve into amoral profit-seeking. Corporations aren't inherently evil--in most cases being obviously harmful scares away customers--but that's only true as long as the profits don't align with doing harm. And when the profits do align with doing harm, if the people in one company aren't willing to do harm for profit, they'll be outcompeted by a company that is.

I'm working on a degree and recently took a required business ethics class and... Jesus Christ. Corporate culture is rotten to its core. The textbook and class were primarily concerned with whitewashing corporate harms and blaming what it couldn't whitewash on consumers. I didn't do as well in the class as I could have, because I was too disgusted with the material to hide it. They literally had the audacity to talk about "balancing the needs of all stakeholders" as if shareholders matter when some of the stakeholders were slaves.

Until we stop treating companies like they're benevolent friends, problems like climate change and homelessness are going to remain intractable.

Post reply on HN