China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990 • Hacker News Board

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#371

Post by wahnfrieden » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:13 AM UTC

yanhangyhy wrote: post #357

vishnugupta wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m really curious to better understand what aspects of China’s government would hurt your day to day life. From what I read online the people there are free to rant and get things fixed. Their local government representative is held accountable if the people in his/her province are unhappy. Not too different from a typical democratic setup I guess? But this could be off because I don’t know anyone personally there.

I can answer this question. I’m a native-born Chinese, and I’ve never studied abroad. This year I just completed my first trip overseas, visiting the UAE. First of all, I don’t think China is a fully democratic system, but it’s not an outright dictatorship either. At the same time, I don’t think the two-party voting system in the U.S. qualifies as democracy either. One of the biggest drawbacks of Western criticism of…

What do you think of Naomi Wu's case?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#372

Post by raincole » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:14 AM UTC

voxelghost wrote: post #182

mdeeks wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the places where per capita doesn't matter as much as total emissions. We have one planet. The yearly total and cumulative matters the most. China is by far the leading emitter. Over double of the US as of 2023 (latest available data I can find). China's emissions also aren't falling, they are skyrocketing. The US emissions ARE falling. The US dominates in cumulative, which is essentially the measure o…

Why wouldnt per capita matter? By that logic, you are saying it would be OK for Tuvalu to emit the same amount as the US? Or actually, if per capita doesn't matter. Then China could fracture into 10 separate nations, and their output would sudenly be negliable?

Per captia doesn't matter.

> Then China could fracture into 10 separate nations, and their output would sudenly be negliable?

Don't you see the argument goes both ways? If the US merge with a few Africa countries, does it count as an "improvement" in regard of carbon emission?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#373

Post by swagasaurus-rex » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:21 AM UTC

I think they’re doing a great thing.

My area has seen some wildfire smoke season near the end of summer. It never happened when I was a kid. Now every summer there’s wildfire smoke for several days or several weeks.

The climate appears to be changing and heavily forested areas of midwest US and canada are on fire every summer.

Planting trees could be great for the environment, but without the moisture it could become a tinderbox for wildfires.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#374

Post by yanhangyhy » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:23 AM UTC

wahnfrieden wrote: post #371

yanhangyhy wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can answer this question. I’m a native-born Chinese, and I’ve never studied abroad. This year I just completed my first trip overseas, visiting the UAE. First of all, I don’t think China is a fully democratic system, but it’s not an outright dictatorship either. At the same time, I don’t think the two-party voting system in the U.S. qualifies as democracy either. One of the biggest drawbacks of Western criticism of…

What do you think of Naomi Wu's case?

To be honest, I roughly searched around, including asking AI, but I couldn’t really figure out what happened. I hardly have any impression of her; her videos can be found on Chinese internet, but the recommendation algorithms have never suggested them to me. From what I’ve found so far, she seems quite controversial. She might have been limited in reach on Chinese internet. Maybe the government found a suitable reason, or maybe not — I really haven’t clarified that part.

Also, Linux is invovled?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#375

Post by wahnfrieden » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:34 AM UTC

yanhangyhy wrote: post #374

wahnfrieden wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think of Naomi Wu's case?

To be honest, I roughly searched around, including asking AI, but I couldn’t really figure out what happened. I hardly have any impression of her; her videos can be found on Chinese internet, but the recommendation algorithms have never suggested them to me. From what I’ve found so far, she seems quite controversial. She might have been limited in reach on Chinese internet. Maybe the government found a suitable reaso…

It seems she was silenced for publicly advocating for LGBT and visited by agents multiple times about it. But there are a lot more details I'm sure.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#376

Post by coffeebeqn » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:34 AM UTC

somenameforme wrote: post #322

andrewflnr wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would really respect the hell out of the nation of China if it wasn't for the authoritarianism and imperialism.

Not to be coy, but what do you mean by that? The reason I ask is because I think many of us use these terms, but without ever thinking about exactly which behaviors we're critiquing, or how they relate to what we truly value. For instance both the Roman and Greek Empires deserve immense respect, yet they were both often imperial empires ruled by dictators. The same is no less true of many societies that played key ro…

> who is incompetent

I just hope we never go back to Mao-levels of incompetence

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#377

Post by samarthr1 » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:37 AM UTC

catmanjan wrote: post #353

shubhamjain wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Partially, yes! Population is #1 strain on resources. However, the political climate around 1970s was more like population would create large scale food shortages, famines, and without interventions, population would keep on growing forever. We at least now know that population peaks with prosperity, and food is largely a solved problem.

>food is largely a solved problem It really isn't...

*logistics of food is not solved?

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#378

Post by adrianN » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:37 AM UTC

catmanjan wrote: post #353

shubhamjain wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Partially, yes! Population is #1 strain on resources. However, the political climate around 1970s was more like population would create large scale food shortages, famines, and without interventions, population would keep on growing forever. We at least now know that population peaks with prosperity, and food is largely a solved problem.

>food is largely a solved problem It really isn't...

Production of calories is a solved problem. Distribution of food to people in need on the other hand…

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#379

Post by zdragnar » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:37 AM UTC

GolfPopper wrote: post #345

shubhamjain wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Although low birth rates have now become a problem, back then it seemed like a solution. They haven't, imo. I am from India, and I have been hearing for the last two decades how we have avoided same mistakes as China and the latter is headed for a demographic collapse. China is only marching forward, and focusing more on automation to hedge its bets. While overpopulation in India has choked almost every city in Ind…

> Just like 1970s claim "overpopulation will destroy the planet" turned out to be exaggerated Seems to me like that prediction is pretty on track.

The predictions of Ehrlich in "the population bomb" and the club of rome were undone within a few years with the "green revolution" which saw massive increases in food production.

Ehrlich in particular was suggesting mass starvation by the 1980's. Conceivably, it is possible that too many people will cause problems, but nothing like what they actually predicted has come to pass.

Re: China has added forest the size of Texas since 1990

#380

Post by darkmarmot » Thu, Oct 30, 2025, 6:38 AM UTC

shubhamjain wrote: post #348

GolfPopper wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just like 1970s claim "overpopulation will destroy the planet" turned out to be exaggerated Seems to me like that prediction is pretty on track.

Partially, yes! Population is #1 strain on resources. However, the political climate around 1970s was more like population would create large scale food shortages, famines, and without interventions, population would keep on growing forever. We at least now know that population peaks with prosperity, and food is largely a solved problem.

We're on the verge of ecological collapse, undergoing an insane mass extinction event with ocean acidification and methane release going off the charts. I can't even begin to conceive of your reality.