3 ms·
Unfortunately, I can't access the article. I think that I take the opposite stance from you on rebooting society,in that I'm decidedly more bearish. Not only d
by tbihl 10y ago
Unfortunately, I can't access the article.
I think that I take the opposite stance from you on rebooting society,in that I'm decidedly more bearish. Not only do I not think we'd reassemble on the scraps of yesteryear, but I think it'd be frightening how fast our society could go from normal operation to unrecoverable given the complexity of things we rely on, the physical distances in our supply chains, and the general near-shortages of everything, everywhere, that just-in-time logistics affords us. Plus a lot of people are likely to flee back home before the window to do so shuts, further dismantling the complex web of interdependence.
And I'm thinking on the order of a couple weeks.
- philipkglass 10y agoI'm talking about a century or so after a mass collapse of civilization and human populations, like in the article's opening scenario: Imagine that the world as we know it ends tomorrow. There’s a global catastrophe: a pandemic virus, an asteroid strike, or perhaps a nuclear holocaust. The vast majority of the human race perishes. Our civilisation collapses. The post-apocalyptic survivors find themselves in a devastated world of decaying, deserted cities and roving gangs of bandits looting and taking by force. Bad as things sound, that’s not the end for humanity. We bounce back. Sooner or later, peace and order emerge again, just as they have time and again through history. Stable communities take shape. They begin the agonising process of rebuilding their technological base from scratch. But here’s the question: how far could such a society rebuild? Is there any chance, for instance, that a post-apocalyptic society could reboot a technological civilisation?