4 ms·

I can't help noticing that while we are making these exponential advances in technology, we are also using exponential amounts of our limited supplies of cheap

by jcl 19y ago

I can't help noticing that while we are making these exponential advances in technology, we are also using exponential amounts of our limited supplies of cheap resources -- things like oil, coal, copper, gold, and helium. I sure hope Kurzweil gets his singularity before any of these limiting factors kick in, or it could put a nasty kink in his graph.

Prrometheus 19y ago
One of the most striking features of the 20th century is that the economy has gotten lighter per unit of wealth. New goods are made of fewer raw materials and more ideas. Greenspan has a famous piece on this, which unfortunately I was not able to google up. I am with Julian Simon on the issue, I doubt that raw material scarcity will be a significant brake on human advancement.
- pchristensen 19y ago
  Exactly, they're only overused as long as they're cheap. We'll find alternatives quickly once the price signals that it's worth it. (The alternative might be a lower standard of living because no alternative can be found, but that's life). And usually, that shift creates an arbitrage opportunity that someone is going to make money off of. For instance, while many people fear rising gas and oil prices, I'm pretty sure motorcycle manufacturers, bicycle shops, and rental property owners in dense, transit-rich cities are licking their chops. $10/gal gas makes NYC rent more reasonable.
- david927 19y ago
  That's a good point but it's only one aspect. Another striking feature of the late 20th century is our ability to use advanced technology to extract resources optimally. So instead of getting a slow decline in supply and a corresponding higher prices slowing demand (the ubiquitous bell curve), you get a diagonal line followed by a vertical -- in other words, a cliff. That sounds alarmist but it's just because you don't notice until you're on the wrong side of the graph. Cod was one of the most plentiful fish around and because it was good and cheap it became the base of the "fish and chips" British staple. Cod is now an endagered species. 90% of all large fish have disappeared from the world's oceans in the past half century. And that's just fish. We have new technology to extract oil efficiently sometimes called "super straws". So instead of sputtering to a stop, we'll get there at full speed. It's easy to say, "Oh we'll just slow down or find alternatives." That's like going 150mph and saying if the curve is too tight, we'll just slow down. Sure we will. James Dean style.
  - Prrometheus 19y ago
    The situation that you mentioned with the cod fits the "tragedy of the commons" scenario. Where property rights are hard to define, resources are over-extracted because there is no owner with the incentive to conserve. I challenge you to name one resource with normal property rights that fits the "diagonal line/cliff" scenario. I know of none, although it appears to be the common wisdom of the internet at the moment.
Novash 19y ago
I thought about the problem of the entropy too. This is the thing that worries me most about the future at all. One thing that I hope for, but I am not sure, is that the number of atoms in the universe is somehow a constant (might be true for smaller, more essential particles) and if those atoms could once be created (I am a creationist, but it holds true for evolution as well), they COULD be recreated, replenishing the supplies. In fact, we could become very very good at recycling and turn all our trash into a source, instead of waste. Maybe with nanotech? I believe it would be very easy for a bunch of nanorobots to grab atoms of gold in an old discarded motherboard and pile them up, creating a fresh gold bar from them. Is it too far fetched?

by jcl 19y ago

Prrometheus 19y ago

One of the most striking features of the 20th century is that the economy has gotten lighter per unit of wealth. New goods are made of fewer raw materials and more ideas. Greenspan has a famous piece on this, which unfortunately I was not able to google up. I am with Julian Simon on the issue, I doubt that raw material scarcity will be a significant brake on human advancement.

pchristensen 19y ago
Exactly, they're only overused as long as they're cheap. We'll find alternatives quickly once the price signals that it's worth it. (The alternative might be a lower standard of living because no alternative can be found, but that's life). And usually, that shift creates an arbitrage opportunity that someone is going to make money off of. For instance, while many people fear rising gas and oil prices, I'm pretty sure motorcycle manufacturers, bicycle shops, and rental property owners in dense, transit-rich cities are licking their chops. $10/gal gas makes NYC rent more reasonable.
david927 19y ago
That's a good point but it's only one aspect. Another striking feature of the late 20th century is our ability to use advanced technology to extract resources optimally. So instead of getting a slow decline in supply and a corresponding higher prices slowing demand (the ubiquitous bell curve), you get a diagonal line followed by a vertical -- in other words, a cliff. That sounds alarmist but it's just because you don't notice until you're on the wrong side of the graph. Cod was one of the most plentiful fish around and because it was good and cheap it became the base of the "fish and chips" British staple. Cod is now an endagered species. 90% of all large fish have disappeared from the world's oceans in the past half century. And that's just fish. We have new technology to extract oil efficiently sometimes called "super straws". So instead of sputtering to a stop, we'll get there at full speed. It's easy to say, "Oh we'll just slow down or find alternatives." That's like going 150mph and saying if the curve is too tight, we'll just slow down. Sure we will. James Dean style.
- Prrometheus 19y ago
  The situation that you mentioned with the cod fits the "tragedy of the commons" scenario. Where property rights are hard to define, resources are over-extracted because there is no owner with the incentive to conserve. I challenge you to name one resource with normal property rights that fits the "diagonal line/cliff" scenario. I know of none, although it appears to be the common wisdom of the internet at the moment.

Novash 19y ago

I thought about the problem of the entropy too. This is the thing that worries me most about the future at all. One thing that I hope for, but I am not sure, is that the number of atoms in the universe is somehow a constant (might be true for smaller, more essential particles) and if those atoms could once be created (I am a creationist, but it holds true for evolution as well), they COULD be recreated, replenishing the supplies. In fact, we could become very very good at recycling and turn all our trash into a source, instead of waste. Maybe with nanotech? I believe it would be very easy for a bunch of nanorobots to grab atoms of gold in an old discarded motherboard and pile them up, creating a fresh gold bar from them. Is it too far fetched?