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

Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 265 posts

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#21

Post by aeternum »

ouid wrote: post #3

>infinite exponential growth which is impossible on a finite planet. its impossible in any space with non negative curvature. the kind of growth that is unsustainable in a finite region is any growth at all.

Also if we really value life, we should probably optimize for total lives lived. The universe will not last forever and entire galaxies are being lost to both the cosmic horizon and blackholes at an alarming rate.

For some reason Earth seems to be the only planet with life, so every second we spend without making life interplanetary we are snuffing out an unfathomable number of future human and animal lives.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#23

Post by rapind »

spullara wrote: post #7
cjsaltlake wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If trends continue, there will be 10 billion Amish in 100 years.

It is not entirely without merit to say that religious folks that encourage large families like the Amish, Catholics and Mormons will dominate in the distant future. Hell, I have 45 first cousins (on one side) and they on average have 3+ kids so it might just be my extended family :)

I can't help but wonder if large families also beget religion just as religion begets large families.

Now I personally think every religion I've encountered is ridiculous fiction (no offence, just my opinion), but I will admit that there can be some pretty significant advantages in a community. Raising a ton of kids is probably just easier in a close community of similar minded families (a.k.a. the local church/temple/mosque). It's almost like it's intentionally engineered to be this way.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#24

Post by mr_toad »

alexnewman wrote: post #6
ouid wrote: post #3

>infinite exponential growth which is impossible on a finite planet. its impossible in any space with non negative curvature. the kind of growth that is unsustainable in a finite region is any growth at all.

constant growth != infinite growth constant growth just means converging growth if the population is shrinking all we need to do is increase gdp per capita.

> constant growth != infinite growth constant growth just means converging growth if the population is shrinking all we need to do is increase gdp per capita.

In theory. In practice GDP growth is strongly correlated with things like energy use and waste/pollution generation. There will come a point when either that correlation has to be broken or growth has to halt.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#25

Post by thrown_22 »

hinkley wrote: post #19
ouid wrote: post #3

>infinite exponential growth which is impossible on a finite planet. its impossible in any space with non negative curvature. the kind of growth that is unsustainable in a finite region is any growth at all.

Part of the problem is people thinking, "myself and everyone I could ever have the notion of caring about, and everyone they could ever have a notion of caring about" is the same thing as infinity. The universe is so goddamned big that it's hard to fathom how long it would take us to actually ruin the entire thing, or at least the parts that aren't flying away from us at faster than the speed of light. But 5% annual…

If people what to have more than two children that it is absolutely impossible.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#26

Post by thrown_22 »

rapind wrote: post #23
spullara wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not entirely without merit to say that religious folks that encourage large families like the Amish, Catholics and Mormons will dominate in the distant future. Hell, I have 45 first cousins (on one side) and they on average have 3+ kids so it might just be my extended family :)

I can't help but wonder if large families also beget religion just as religion begets large families. Now I personally think every religion I've encountered is ridiculous fiction (no offence, just my opinion), but I will admit that there can be some pretty significant advantages in a community. Raising a ton of kids is probably just easier in a close community of similar minded families (a.k.a. the local church/templ…

Religion is subject to natural selection just like anything else. Religions which produce more offspring that stay in the religion will always win out over the ones that don't.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#27

Post by mr_toad »

giantg2 wrote: post #14
ericmcer wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless most work is intellectual/creative and most manual labor is automated or machine assisted 50 years from now. There are way more 70+ year olds still in the workforce currently than ever before and it isn't crazy to think retiring at 60 is a thing of the past.

Retirement for the masses is a relatively new, rich invention. It seems likely ar some point we will revert back to working until we become unable to work.

> Retirement for the masses is a relatively new, rich invention.

Average life expectancy beyond 70 years is also fairly new.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#28

Post by thrown_22 »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #20
spullara wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a long fall ahead of them. https://www.ipss.go.jp/site-ad/index_english/esuikei/econ2.h... ). Going from 128m in 2010 to 87m in 2060.

And despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth, they'll probably continue do fine, as they have since their population leveled out 30 years ago. The doomsday predictions haven't just started now, and they weren't only about events in 2060. They started decades ago about population growth slowing, population leveling, population dropping. They've been pretty consistently wrong.

>They've been pretty consistently wrong.

They haven't been wrong, they turned out to be right for everyone. People who didn't live through the boom of the 1950s can't imagine what it's like to live in a world where things improve for everyone every year.

Japan didn't start growing like it did before 1980 again, everyone else stopped too.

China has been basically the only driver of world economic growth for the last 40 years. Which is kind of astonishing considering they are communists.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#29

Post by throwawaylinux »

thrown_22 wrote: post #28
throwawaylinux wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth, they'll probably continue do fine, as they have since their population leveled out 30 years ago. The doomsday predictions haven't just started now, and they weren't only about events in 2060. They started decades ago about population growth slowing, population leveling, population dropping. They've been pretty consistently wrong.

>They've been pretty consistently wrong. They haven't been wrong, they turned out to be right for everyone. People who didn't live through the boom of the 1950s can't imagine what it's like to live in a world where things improve for everyone every year. Japan didn't start growing like it did before 1980 again, everyone else stopped too. China has been basically the only driver of world economic growth for the last 4…

> They haven't been wrong,

No, they have. I don't know who you're talking about, I'm talking about the sustainable population doomsayers.

Re: Modernity is incompatible with planetary limits: a PLAN for the future

#30

Post by junon »

aeternum wrote: post #21
ouid wrote: post #3

>infinite exponential growth which is impossible on a finite planet. its impossible in any space with non negative curvature. the kind of growth that is unsustainable in a finite region is any growth at all.

Also if we really value life, we should probably optimize for total lives lived. The universe will not last forever and entire galaxies are being lost to both the cosmic horizon and blackholes at an alarming rate. For some reason Earth seems to be the only planet with life, so every second we spend without making life interplanetary we are snuffing out an unfathomable number of future human and animal lives.

This is sort of a selfish viewpoint to take, is it not? I mean I don't necessarily disagree with you, just... the reasoning seems strange to me.
Post reply on HN