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

Study shows massive insect loss

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 213 posts

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#181

Post by [deleted] »

njarboe wrote: post #173
saiya-jin wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly do you mean by controlled burn? If it is what I think it is, you will kill many insects that call that lawn their home. Not really good for anything (plus the risk of burning down the neighborhood)

Of course burning my front lawn would never be allowed and I understand the reasons for that but ever since humans arrived (15,000 years or so ago) California grasslands would burn quite often. The "native" ecosystem was adapted to it and I think it would be fun to see what a few years of buring would do to the biological diversity of my little bit of grassland.

[deleted]

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#182

Post by Baeocystin »

njarboe wrote: post #173
saiya-jin wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly do you mean by controlled burn? If it is what I think it is, you will kill many insects that call that lawn their home. Not really good for anything (plus the risk of burning down the neighborhood)

Of course burning my front lawn would never be allowed and I understand the reasons for that but ever since humans arrived (15,000 years or so ago) California grasslands would burn quite often. The "native" ecosystem was adapted to it and I think it would be fun to see what a few years of buring would do to the biological diversity of my little bit of grassland.

California has been burning for far longer than people have been here. Human presence did, of course, alter things, but natural ignitions due to lightning strikes shaped the ecology for millennia before we showed up.

https://www.sierraforestlegacy.org/Resources/Conservation/Fi...

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#184

Post by [deleted] »

fzeroracer wrote: post #74
EGreg wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like Proof of Work mining?

Considering how much energy cryptocurrency mining sucks up I would say we would be in a much better place environment-wise if it was curtailed immensely. Unfortunately I can't see that happening any time soon.

[deleted]

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#185

Post by anonytrary »

tremon wrote: post #128
sitkack wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not convinced that life on the planet will survive. We could very well turn into Venus. Maybe we did already. In previous cataclysmic events, life was spread en masse to low earth orbit, to return after the fires died down and the earth cooled off. We have no such seed bank in orbit now.

We do not know for a fact that life does not exist on Venus, though.

"Life" means humans in this context. If the environment changes so much that it leaves microbes around but not mammals, that's what is scary. We're mammals. We're not as resilient as microbes are.

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#186

Post by anonytrary »

adrianN wrote: post #103
anonytrary wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That the environment could slowly transition its chemistry into a state which is not suitable for life is one of my biggest fears. It would be a silent killer.

Life is pretty resilient. I'm sure some bacteria would manage to survive pretty much anything. Life survived a number of extinction events where >90% of all species were lost, so the chances are good that life will go on.

I should have said "human life". A world that is no longer suitable for mammals but is suitable for microbes falls under the category of "things that scare me".

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#187

Post by sacrosurf »

AstralStorm wrote: post #153
kamaal wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same way we explored the earth. Every one won't move at once. These are gradual things that unfold over decades to centuries.

See, exploring Earth takes almost no energy, mostly time and will and supplies. Ships at super efficient. On the other hand, getting to 1st cosmic speed takes a lot of energy released in a relatively short burst or some kind of space elevator which we cannot build yet. You cannot make this "gradual" really. You either get to orbit or don't. The "gradual" phase of getting into space is done. We got to orbit. We need a…

Totally agree. I have a couple visions of attainable infrastructure evolutions, we should have every city and county helping sponsor X Prizes that would help us attain incredible improvements: • elevate all city infrastructure up off the ground, 100 feet or more. If you figure that out you get arable, natural landscapes back and you keep your city too. • How to bring light down to the ground underneath it all? I say we build transparent canals, use their shape to lense light through and around. • these canals, there could be extra channels/tubes added to store and process dirty, utility and drinkable water • create food programs that bring growing, harvesting, finishing and cooking down into the crowds of us who’d want to participate. Can we reduce the cost of food by orders of magnitude?

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#188

Post by roryisok »

moosey wrote: post #178
roryisok wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who's been through several cycles of climate related depression this year, I just want to reach out to fellow HNers and say it's not the end of the world. Our society, and our civilisation is going to change, in massive ways in the coming century, one way or another. And all of us are going to live in less luxury than we do now - simply because such luxury is unsustainable. But it doesn't mean or children…

I read the book 'World War Z', and at the risk of ruining the book for someone, there was a statement near the end that really stuck with me. Some guy was reflecting on how they'd won, and he said 'Tell that to the whales', paraphrasing. I cannot deal with the guilt of the loss of megafauna. I just can't. If justice only includes humanity, then it isn't justice. I feel as if I've reached this place using sound ethica…

> I'm culpable for what we are doing to this planet

You didn't ask to be born, and you're doing your best to avoid harming the planet. You can't hold yourself responsible for the extinction of another species. Humans are of course responsible. Without us, earth would be a verdant paradise full of wild animals eating each other. But to blame yourself for centuries of humans consuming, burning, polluting, building, paving and getting rich off the misery of others is morally flawed. You're no more responsible for that than the child of a murderer is for his father's crime. And by being vegan, driving less, espousing green values to those around you (as I'm sure you do) you're having a net positive effect, even while you consume the resources you need to survive. Earth might be better off without humans around, but humans are better off with you around.

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#189

Post by [deleted] »

zanny wrote: post #58
EGreg wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like Proof of Work mining?

I a more generalist sense just things like using Electron vs native toolkits matter. The desktop Discord app is going to use substantially more power to run day to day than if it were a native code app that just used something like C++, and across millions of gamers for hours a night every night those resource requirements and power demands add up. It isn't always just "average hardware is faster so use more ineffici…

[deleted]

Re: Study shows massive insect loss

#190

Post by 24gttghh »

antisthenes wrote: post #41
24gttghh wrote: post #9

First the climate came for the coral reefs, and I did not speak up because I am not a marine invertebrate. Then, the climate came for the rest of the arthropods, and I did not speak up because I only have two legs. Then, the climate came for the fishes of the sea, and I did not speak up because I do not have gills. Then, the climate came for the plants, and I did not speak up because I am not a tree. Then, the climat…

> Then, the climate came for me, and there was no one left for me to eat ftfy

Same result, we starve.
Post reply on HN