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

61–70 of 164 posts

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

#61

Post by pdonis »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #23

Excited to answer any questions and happily surprised to see it on the front page. Thank you. I noted elsewhere that this is undergoing major revisions ahead of submissions to IJPS[1]. Riane Eisler read it and asked that I submit. I started working with a co-author a few months ago and he is a published anthropologist so my hope is to have a version done just focusing on the core claims this year. [1] https://pubs.li…

From the paper:

"[I]n-groups controlling abundance have increasingly chosen to produce non-necessary goods, rather than produce services to distribute necessary goods to regions with less abundance of necessary goods"

This claim seems, to say the least, highly implausible given the amount of aid and charity that developed countries give to less developed countries. The chief obstacle to that aid having more of an effect at relieving scarcity in less developed countries is political corruption in those countries: the governments of those countries confiscate the aid and use it to enrich themselves and their cronies, instead of getting it distributed to the people it is supposed to be for.

In other words, solutions to the scarcity problems you describe in less developed countries appear to me to be primarily political, not economic.

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

#62

Post by ETH_start »

There is absolutely no evidence that prior to the megafauna extinctions, hunter gatherers groups were any less violent and murderous [1] than after the megafauna extinctions. Scarcity would have always existed by virtue of the population always growing to the environment's carrying capacity for that population's level of technology.

If killing a neighbor, or wiping out a neighboring tribe, isn't an expression of competitive scarcity-based mentality, I don't know what is. That kind of behavior has steadily declined as civilization has advanced.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/ethnographic-and-archaeological-e...

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

#63

Post by ETH_start »

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.

Vilifying opposing views on "worthwhile" as "borderline sociopathic self-gratification" seems dogmatic and perhaps even projective.

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

#64

Post by AndrewKemendo »

joe_the_user wrote: post #13

I am happy to see discussion of the them here though I'm not in complete agreement with the article. One interesting quote: "The question of “Alignment” then is an Absurd question - as humanity cannot align internally due to our structural impediments" I agree in the sense that I think "alignment" is a poor conceptualization of the problem of avoiding destructive AGIs. But I don't think the conclusion here is you don…

> But I don't think the conclusion here is you don't have to worry about destructive AGIs.

In fact my argument is precisely that you should worry because there is no possibility of anything but destructive or Nerfed, AGIs if we continue on the current data generation path

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

#65

Post by wnc3141 »

kerkeslager wrote: post #42
wnc3141 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look up the "Simon–Ehrlich wager" - essentially a economist and naturalist held a very public bet about whether certain critical resources would dramatically rise on price due to scarcity constraints. Essentially the economist, who bet that we would not see those prices spike as market forces drive resource efficiency. In the case of this wager the economist was correct. Ultimately you are right. We will ultimately a…

> Ultimately you are right. We will ultimately and inevitably face resource constraints. How we respond and which resources will provide the limiting constraint is unclear. Why? Keep in mind that it is not evident that population will continue to grow.

You are absolutely right. In ecology (which mimics the scaling of any physical system) population responds to resource stresses. I consider this a signal of resource scarcity.

As for why it's inevitable: we have unbounded ability to innovate and become resource efficient -market forces will guide this. However there are fixed constraints that will stress human behavior in ways we can't necessarily predict. Some of this is being seen now with shocks to supply chains with climate change. Prices will rise across society as more of our productive capacity is dealt with dealing with the effects of climate change.

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

#66

Post by pdonis »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #23

Excited to answer any questions and happily surprised to see it on the front page. Thank you. I noted elsewhere that this is undergoing major revisions ahead of submissions to IJPS[1]. Riane Eisler read it and asked that I submit. I started working with a co-author a few months ago and he is a published anthropologist so my hope is to have a version done just focusing on the core claims this year. [1] https://pubs.li…

"[A]ccess to resources is determined strictly by how competent individuals are at acquiring and hoarding resources"

This claim seems highly implausible to me as well. There is enough food in my house to feed its occupants for about a week. Is that "hoarding"? I have retirement savings put by so that I will be able to support myself once I stop working. Is that "hoarding"?

What determines what you call "access to resources" (itself a misleading way to put it, IMO) in developed countries is trade. People trade goods or services they produce for money, which they then trade for things they need or want. And this is not "competition for resources". It is cooperation in creating wealth. Practically nobody in a developed country produces goods or services purely by their own efforts; we all cooperate with many other people in the course of doing our jobs. (Which, btw, is perfectly compatible with private property rights--indeed, it requires them. See below.)

The reason this doesn't happen in less developed countries is that it's not allowed to: just as corrupt governments in those countries confiscate aid from developed countries, they also confiscate any wealth that is created by their people. So their people have no incentive to create any wealth through cooperation and trade, since they're not going to gain any benefit from it anyway. In other words, they know they will have no private property rights in what they produce, so they don't bother producing.

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

#67

Post by djantje »

kerkeslager wrote: post #38
djrobstep wrote: post #20

Pure ideology.

What ideology could be more pure than dismissing an entire well-cited paper with the phrase, "Pure ideology." and no further evidence or thought? The irony is rich with this one.

It depends, you could also interpret it as a compliment or recognition, as the paper is about (pure) ideology

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

#68

Post by oezi »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #11
cosmic_shame wrote: post #8

Unrelated but I really wish there were an easier way to read PDFs on mobile devices.

I made the web version optimized to use with mobile reader mode https://kemendo.com/Myth-of-Scarcity.html

I think OP meant a general solution to this.

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

#69

Post by kerkeslager »

keiferski wrote: post #28

Also worth thinking about in this context is the so-called “repugnant conclusion”: In Derek Parfit’s original formulation the Repugnant Conclusion is stated as follows: “For any possible population of at least ten billion people, all with a very high quality of life, there must be some much larger imaginable population whose existence, if other things are equal, would be better even though its members have lives that…

> Also worth thinking about in this context is the so-called “repugnant conclusion”:

I disagree, elaborate ponderings in the absence of non-hypothetical evidence are not worth talking about.

I mean, read the section, "Arriving at the Repugnant Conclusion" with any critical eye at all and it becomes clear that it's total nonsense. They're treating "postponing a pregnancy" (not even aborting an existing pregnancy to have a later pregnancy--literally having sex at a later date) as if it's equivalent to killing the potential child. They've strung together a lot of fancy-sounding words but what they've said is stupid. It doesn't get better from there.

The best philosophers don't call themselves philosophers, because they have enough real-world knowledge to call themselves something else like a politician or an engineer. I have no interest whatsoever in the sort of philosopher who logics themselves around in the absence of any empirical connection to reality.

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

#70

Post by smokel »

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…

I hear this argument a lot, but it makes no sense.

How would an economic phenomenon (requiring a typical form of green leaves to guarantee a happy life at old age) precisely counter a biological phenomenon (a desire to procreate)?

It seems more likely that readily available birth control and a particular willingness of women to join the labour force is the cause here.

What is stopping extremely rich narcissists from creating thousands of children once technology allows for it? We're in for a horrible population growth if you ask me.

Post reply on HN