6 ms·

The truly sad part about your last thing is that the change isn't based on reality. If anything, it's probably much safer to roam the streets alone, partially d

The truly sad part about your last thing is that the change isn't based on reality. If anything, it's probably much safer to roam the streets alone, partially due to all those technologies you mentioned (and others).

lisper 10y ago
Very little of people's assessment of the state of the world is based on reality. Almost everything is better today than it has ever been (at least for humans, not so much for other species), but many (most?) people are still convinced that we're on the wrong track. To be sure, we have significant challenges ahead of us, and things could easily take a turn for the worse. But right now things are pretty awesome. We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. There is less poverty (in terms of percentage of the population) than ever. People are healthier and living longer than ever. And we have Pokemon! It's a golden era.
- babyrainbow 10y ago
  > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history... But what is the status of military expenses? >There is less poverty (in terms of percentage of the population) than ever. How much of that is loaned? I mean, aren't more people in perpetual, often unnecessary, debt now? >People are healthier and living longer than ever. And totally dependent on drugs, often from very young, even when they are not necessary. Not to mention obesity, depression...but hey, more drugs, cola and fast food. >And we have Pokemon! It's a golden era. Sure. I see you now. The "awesomeness" you see is very superficial, and is quite possibly short lived. Things are far rotten if you look deep down.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - lisper 10y ago
    > what is the status of military expenses? World wide? As a percentage of the size of the world economy? Compared to historical norms? I have no idea. But I'd be surprised if they weren't low. > How much of that is loaned? I'm talking about actual wealth, not bean-counting. There are fewer (again, as a percentage, not in absolute numbers) people without the basic necessities of life than ever before. > totally dependent on drugs Longevity improvements are not due to drugs on which people become dependent. They are due mainly to better nutrition and hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics. > Sure. I see you now. To be clear, I was joking about the Pokemon. > quite possibly short lived That is certainly true. We can easily squander our good fortune. But one of the ways we can do that is not to recognize our good fortune for what it is: good fortune.
    - babyrainbow 10y ago
      > people without the basic necessities of life than ever before... I think this is a bubble. Because where I live, the IT sector has a big influence. Kids straight out of college were making 10 times more money than their parents were making. But they also spend like there is no tomorrow. This spending causes this wealth to be distributed so everyone grow a bit more richer. But this is not sustainable. People are paying huge sum of money for mortgage and credit card bills every month/year. In other words, these people cannot live three months straight without a heafty pay check. The worse part is that, they are not skilled at all, even after years of employment.. >They are due mainly to better nutrition and hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics. Better nutrition? What provides better nutrition now than the past years? In my country we still get vegetables with dangerous amounts of pesticides. People are starting to have diabetics and choelesrtrol/blood pressure issue in the early thrities. But they won't rollover and die, thanks to perpetual healthcare and medication, I mean, for those who can afford. People everywhere are hooked to antibiotics. "Sneeze? Oh my god, I am having an infection. Let me just gobble down this antibiotics that my doctor prescribed me last time". "Headache? let me just take this new wonder pill for headaches". Yes. People are overstuffed with medicines. You are deluded if you think otherwise. >To be clear, I was joking about the Pokemon. Thank god.
      - lisper 10y ago
  - davidgay 10y ago
    > > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history... > But what is the status of military expenses? Looks like they've been at historically-low levels for the last 15 years: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS (I seriosuly doubt they were lower in the 40s to 80s, the period before this graph, or in the 10s - maybe the 19th century had really low expenses?) > >There is less poverty (in terms of percentage of the population) than ever. > How much of that is loaned? I mean, aren't more people in perpetual, often unnecessary, debt now? This is clearly a comment about world-wide poverty, not in your neck-of-the-woods, so: http://data.worldbank.org/topic/poverty http://data.worldbank.org/topic/poverty and just in the US, it's somewhat lower: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Number_in_Poverty_and_Poverty_Rate_1959_to_2011._United_States..PNG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#/... > >People are healthier and living longer than ever. > And totally dependent on drugs, often from very young, even when they are not necessary. Not to mention obesity, depression...but hey, more drugs, cola and fast food. As someone dependent on drugs since a young age, I'm really all for those drugs. My mother had to put up with "oh, it's just psychological", I'll take the drugs instead (this was asthma, FWIW). > >And we have Pokemon! It's a golden era. > Sure. I see you now. > The "awesomeness" you see is very superficial, and is quite possibly short lived. Things are far rotten if you look deep down. My perception: the people who think things are horrible now, and getting worse, have little to no understanding of how life was 50, 100, 1000 years ago.
- jdormit 10y ago
  > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. If you don't count the Middle East or Africa, I suppose.
  - lisper 10y ago
    Those are very minor conflicts (in terms of the percentage of the world population involved in them) compared to historical norms. Even if you killed the entire population of Syria you still would not still reach the number of people who died in WWII, not even in terms of absolute numbers, and certainly not in terms of percentage of world population (which has tripled since 1945).
    - jdormit 10y ago
      Sure, but WWII was a historical anamoly, not a "historical norm". "World peace", to my mind, implies _no_ wars, not just 'less conflict than the biggest war in history'.
      - lisper 10y ago
        > WWII was a historical anamoly Not as much as you might think. WWII was unusual, but not unprecedented. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll WWII was not even the deadliest war ever, even in terms of absolute numbers, and certainly not in terms of percentages. (Note that that Wikipedia page inexplicably does not list WWI, which killed 38M.) The last war to have a death toll over 1 million was Viet Nam. > "World peace", to my mind, implies _no_ wars On that definition there has never been world peace.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    Africa too is more peaceful than it has been pretty much since the start of the colonial era. There are a few individual wars going on, but Africa is huge, and much of the massive economic boom of large parts of Africa over the last couple of decades has been down to wars ending or slowing down.
- jdormit 10y ago
  > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. If you don't count the Middle East or Africa, I suppose.
- internaut 10y ago
  lisper, nearly everything you just mentioned is contained within the sphere of computation or information science. And this: > Genome sequencing is not a product. It doesn't do anything useful by itself. There are only 16 new biotech drugs approved each year. I am unaware of any cures for Alzheimers or other popular affliction. It is also a side effect of computation and not an advance in biological science on its own merit. No fast computer, no sequencing. This is why the Technology Stagnation Hypothesis is a serious one. It says there have been almost no advances outside of computation since '73. Which matches the plateau in real wages in the West. Eroom's Law is also a symptom of it. As I see: the world massively improved from the late 1600s to the 1970s. Then improvements continued in computation and halted in almost every other area of development. > many (most?) people are still convinced that we're on the wrong track What I am saying is far from anecdotal. > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. We have already passed what I believe to be an inflection point. You are correct about violence until the year 2007. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/03/20/breaking-a-decades-long-trend-the-world-gets-more-violent/ http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/03/20/breaking-a-... Now we're heading consistently in the wrong direction. Same with health: "Taken by itself, it could just be a random fluctuation from one year to the next," said Elizabeth Arias, a demographer with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. But the data, which was released Wednesday, also showed that Americans collectively have lost momentum when it comes to greater longevity. Life expectancy at birth has remained virtually stagnant for the nation since 2010." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/04/20/cdc-life-expectancy-for-non-hispanic-white-women-dips-for-first-time-in-decades/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/0... tldr; Not all is roses. Past trends were real and important and are not continuing. I make a similar rant here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12121172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12121172 I fully accept that we've had it good for a long time lisper, I've read my history, it's not that I'm unappreciative.
  - notahacker 10y ago
    Observing that most high profile modern innovations rely on computation is about as good a point of evidence in favour of technological stagnation today as somebody in the 1850s positing stagnation on the basis that nearly all high profile innovations in recent years had relied on steam power or somebody in the 1930s noting that nearly all high profile innovations in recent years had relied on electricity.
- johnchristopher 10y ago
  > People are healthier and living longer than ever. Nope. There are frightening reports stating that today's children will die sooner than their parents and earn less than their grand parents. (Europe, ilygt)
  - lisper 10y ago
    > today's children will die sooner than their parents Citations please? > and earn less than their grand parents What does that have to do with being healthier and living longer?
    - johnchristopher 10y ago
      >> today's children will die sooner than their parents > Citations please? I'll show you mine if you show me yours. > > and earn less than their grand parents > What does that have to do with being healthier and living longer? Really ?
      - Buttons840 10y ago
        > I'll show you mine if you show me yours. Lisper didn't claim his observations came from a report. You did.
        johnchristopher 10y ago
        Sorry but... > People are healthier and living longer than ever. ... such a bold statement call for a `citation please` even if it's not from a report or a study (that's even more the point).
      - lisper 10y ago
        https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010 https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/... And yes, really.
        10y ago

lisper 10y ago

Very little of people's assessment of the state of the world is based on reality. Almost everything is better today than it has ever been (at least for humans, not so much for other species), but many (most?) people are still convinced that we're on the wrong track. To be sure, we have significant challenges ahead of us, and things could easily take a turn for the worse. But right now things are pretty awesome. We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. There is less poverty (in terms of percentage of the population) than ever. People are healthier and living longer than ever. And we have Pokemon! It's a golden era.

babyrainbow 10y ago
> We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history... But what is the status of military expenses? >There is less poverty (in terms of percentage of the population) than ever. How much of that is loaned? I mean, aren't more people in perpetual, often unnecessary, debt now? >People are healthier and living longer than ever. And totally dependent on drugs, often from very young, even when they are not necessary. Not to mention obesity, depression...but hey, more drugs, cola and fast food. >And we have Pokemon! It's a golden era. Sure. I see you now. The "awesomeness" you see is very superficial, and is quite possibly short lived. Things are far rotten if you look deep down.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- lisper 10y ago
  > what is the status of military expenses? World wide? As a percentage of the size of the world economy? Compared to historical norms? I have no idea. But I'd be surprised if they weren't low. > How much of that is loaned? I'm talking about actual wealth, not bean-counting. There are fewer (again, as a percentage, not in absolute numbers) people without the basic necessities of life than ever before. > totally dependent on drugs Longevity improvements are not due to drugs on which people become dependent. They are due mainly to better nutrition and hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics. > Sure. I see you now. To be clear, I was joking about the Pokemon. > quite possibly short lived That is certainly true. We can easily squander our good fortune. But one of the ways we can do that is not to recognize our good fortune for what it is: good fortune.
  - babyrainbow 10y ago
    > people without the basic necessities of life than ever before... I think this is a bubble. Because where I live, the IT sector has a big influence. Kids straight out of college were making 10 times more money than their parents were making. But they also spend like there is no tomorrow. This spending causes this wealth to be distributed so everyone grow a bit more richer. But this is not sustainable. People are paying huge sum of money for mortgage and credit card bills every month/year. In other words, these people cannot live three months straight without a heafty pay check. The worse part is that, they are not skilled at all, even after years of employment.. >They are due mainly to better nutrition and hygiene, vaccines, and antibiotics. Better nutrition? What provides better nutrition now than the past years? In my country we still get vegetables with dangerous amounts of pesticides. People are starting to have diabetics and choelesrtrol/blood pressure issue in the early thrities. But they won't rollover and die, thanks to perpetual healthcare and medication, I mean, for those who can afford. People everywhere are hooked to antibiotics. "Sneeze? Oh my god, I am having an infection. Let me just gobble down this antibiotics that my doctor prescribed me last time". "Headache? let me just take this new wonder pill for headaches". Yes. People are overstuffed with medicines. You are deluded if you think otherwise. >To be clear, I was joking about the Pokemon. Thank god.
    - lisper 10y ago
- davidgay 10y ago
  > > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history... > But what is the status of military expenses? Looks like they've been at historically-low levels for the last 15 years: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS (I seriosuly doubt they were lower in the 40s to 80s, the period before this graph, or in the 10s - maybe the 19th century had really low expenses?) > >There is less poverty (in terms of percentage of the population) than ever. > How much of that is loaned? I mean, aren't more people in perpetual, often unnecessary, debt now? This is clearly a comment about world-wide poverty, not in your neck-of-the-woods, so: http://data.worldbank.org/topic/poverty http://data.worldbank.org/topic/poverty and just in the US, it's somewhat lower: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Number_in_Poverty_and_Poverty_Rate_1959_to_2011._United_States..PNG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_the_United_States#/... > >People are healthier and living longer than ever. > And totally dependent on drugs, often from very young, even when they are not necessary. Not to mention obesity, depression...but hey, more drugs, cola and fast food. As someone dependent on drugs since a young age, I'm really all for those drugs. My mother had to put up with "oh, it's just psychological", I'll take the drugs instead (this was asthma, FWIW). > >And we have Pokemon! It's a golden era. > Sure. I see you now. > The "awesomeness" you see is very superficial, and is quite possibly short lived. Things are far rotten if you look deep down. My perception: the people who think things are horrible now, and getting worse, have little to no understanding of how life was 50, 100, 1000 years ago.
jdormit 10y ago
> We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. If you don't count the Middle East or Africa, I suppose.
- lisper 10y ago
  Those are very minor conflicts (in terms of the percentage of the world population involved in them) compared to historical norms. Even if you killed the entire population of Syria you still would not still reach the number of people who died in WWII, not even in terms of absolute numbers, and certainly not in terms of percentage of world population (which has tripled since 1945).
  - jdormit 10y ago
    Sure, but WWII was a historical anamoly, not a "historical norm". "World peace", to my mind, implies _no_ wars, not just 'less conflict than the biggest war in history'.
    - lisper 10y ago
      > WWII was a historical anamoly Not as much as you might think. WWII was unusual, but not unprecedented. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll WWII was not even the deadliest war ever, even in terms of absolute numbers, and certainly not in terms of percentages. (Note that that Wikipedia page inexplicably does not list WWI, which killed 38M.) The last war to have a death toll over 1 million was Viet Nam. > "World peace", to my mind, implies _no_ wars On that definition there has never been world peace.
- vidarh 10y ago
  Africa too is more peaceful than it has been pretty much since the start of the colonial era. There are a few individual wars going on, but Africa is huge, and much of the massive economic boom of large parts of Africa over the last couple of decades has been down to wars ending or slowing down.
jdormit 10y ago
> We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. If you don't count the Middle East or Africa, I suppose.
internaut 10y ago
lisper, nearly everything you just mentioned is contained within the sphere of computation or information science. And this: > Genome sequencing is not a product. It doesn't do anything useful by itself. There are only 16 new biotech drugs approved each year. I am unaware of any cures for Alzheimers or other popular affliction. It is also a side effect of computation and not an advance in biological science on its own merit. No fast computer, no sequencing. This is why the Technology Stagnation Hypothesis is a serious one. It says there have been almost no advances outside of computation since '73. Which matches the plateau in real wages in the West. Eroom's Law is also a symptom of it. As I see: the world massively improved from the late 1600s to the 1970s. Then improvements continued in computation and halted in almost every other area of development. > many (most?) people are still convinced that we're on the wrong track What I am saying is far from anecdotal. > We're in the middle of the longest stretch of world peace in history. We have already passed what I believe to be an inflection point. You are correct about violence until the year 2007. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/03/20/breaking-a-decades-long-trend-the-world-gets-more-violent/ http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/03/20/breaking-a-... Now we're heading consistently in the wrong direction. Same with health: "Taken by itself, it could just be a random fluctuation from one year to the next," said Elizabeth Arias, a demographer with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. But the data, which was released Wednesday, also showed that Americans collectively have lost momentum when it comes to greater longevity. Life expectancy at birth has remained virtually stagnant for the nation since 2010." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/04/20/cdc-life-expectancy-for-non-hispanic-white-women-dips-for-first-time-in-decades/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/0... tldr; Not all is roses. Past trends were real and important and are not continuing. I make a similar rant here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12121172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12121172 I fully accept that we've had it good for a long time lisper, I've read my history, it's not that I'm unappreciative.
- notahacker 10y ago
  Observing that most high profile modern innovations rely on computation is about as good a point of evidence in favour of technological stagnation today as somebody in the 1850s positing stagnation on the basis that nearly all high profile innovations in recent years had relied on steam power or somebody in the 1930s noting that nearly all high profile innovations in recent years had relied on electricity.
johnchristopher 10y ago
> People are healthier and living longer than ever. Nope. There are frightening reports stating that today's children will die sooner than their parents and earn less than their grand parents. (Europe, ilygt)
- lisper 10y ago
  > today's children will die sooner than their parents Citations please? > and earn less than their grand parents What does that have to do with being healthier and living longer?
  - johnchristopher 10y ago
    >> today's children will die sooner than their parents > Citations please? I'll show you mine if you show me yours. > > and earn less than their grand parents > What does that have to do with being healthier and living longer? Really ?
    - Buttons840 10y ago
      > I'll show you mine if you show me yours. Lisper didn't claim his observations came from a report. You did.
      - johnchristopher 10y ago
        Sorry but... > People are healthier and living longer than ever. ... such a bold statement call for a `citation please` even if it's not from a report or a study (that's even more the point).
    - lisper 10y ago
      https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010 https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/... And yes, really.
      - 10y ago