4 ms·

I have always been 'happy go lucky' type of a person about my entire life. But, earlier today, from this thread [1], I learned that we have grown from 1 billion

I have always been 'happy go lucky' type of a person about my entire life. But, earlier today, from this thread [1], I learned that we have grown from 1 billion to 7 billion people in just 200 years. I knew we are at 7 billion right now, but holy fuck... in 200 years we went up by 6 billion? This seems a little disconcerting, and not for the reasons you might think. I feel as though society is so caught up in the rat race (literally!) that we simply don't give a damn about what is happening to the planet anymore. And I know there are a lot of strong characters on HN who love to talk their way out of any conversation, but what's needed on this planet is a massive awakening to the fact that you cannot expect to exhaust Earth's resources without paying a price for it. It's kind of funny how even the tech industry (presumably smart people..) overlook the very fundamentals of supply and demand. We all know about the story of Tibet vs. China, but does everyone know that Tibet is a lithium goldmine? [2] Let me guess... China "did not" invade Tibet for its resources... it was simply an emotional grudge! And tell me even more, how safe we are and ample supply there is for all the world's necessities... The UN can't and won't do anything. And everyone who is 'using' these resources has such strong ties in the political systems that we won't see any significant change any time soon. And you know the saddest part? This is all because of money and self-projected power. And at what expense? A planet that is supposed to be taken care of by its people? This is the fundamental human flaw, exhaust everything until there is none left and move on to the next thing... I can already hear the justified screams, "Elon will take us to the Mars!". [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19247821 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19247821 [2]: https://goodelectronics.org/mining-tibet-for-electronics-raw-materials/ https://goodelectronics.org/mining-tibet-for-electronics-raw...

TeMPOraL 8y ago
> I knew we are at 7 billion right now, but holy fuck... in 200 years we went up by 6 billion? Congratulations, you're one of the today's lucky 10000 :) [0]. That's the exponential growth. It seems shocking when you fully comprehend its shape for the first time. (Also a spoiler: "we're using more of resource X now than all our use in the past combined" is true at any point in time under exponential growth, too.) People don't notice it in case of many things because it's a natural consequence of independent agents doing the same thing. I'm reminded of the story about bacteria in a bottle: on 11:00 you have a single one, their number doubles every minute, and you know that on 12:00 they'll fill the entire bottle. Q: at which point the bacteria will notice they're running out of space? A: somewhere after 11:59. > This is the fundamental human flaw, exhaust everything until there is none left and move on to the next thing... Wouldn't go that far. This is a fundamental flaw of life itself. Humans, in fact, are probably the only living thing on this planet that is capable of self-moderation. Life in general is moderated by death. Animals reproduce until they either exceed the food supply and start starving, or their abundance causes predator populations to grow (and they grow until they eat most of the prey, and then starve, starting the cycle anew) This is nature's self-regulation, and it's present at every level - from animals to bacteria. Yes, it would be best if we could moderate ourselves a bit more, but it's worth stopping and considering sometimes how unnatural moderation is, before condemning humans as some aberrant creatures. > I can already hear the justified screams, "Elon will take us to the Mars!". Oh come on :). Elon wants to take people to Mars so that they live happily on two planets, thus mitigating some x-risks like killer asteroids, or biotech fuckups. He never endorsed the idea of giving up on Earth. Settling Mars long-term ain't easier than surviving here anyway, and there's a huge overlap in technologies needed - especially if we can't coordinate internationally to unfuck the climate in the first place. -- [0] - https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
- baxtr 8y ago
  Thanks. I was looking for the xkcd, I think you posted it somewhere earlier. I saw it but I did not save it. I have been thinking about it later and thought I never find it again... :-)
- skilled 8y ago
  Thanks for the constructive response. Appreciate it! :)
XorNot 8y ago
Guys guys it's population! Definitely nothing to do with the waste products from how we source all our energy. But <nebulous authority> won't let us solve the population problem so I guess there's nothing to be done and thus no responsibility to do anything! This line of thinking is morally abhorrent at best.
- King-Aaron 8y ago
  It might come as a surprise to you, but waste generated by humans and human population is intrinsically linked.
  - pas 8y ago
    Why? We can in fact transition to perfectly renewable stuff for about 99% of what we currently put in landfills. Of course currently a lot of the externalities are not priced into products. Most important of them all is GHG emissions.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      All else equal, waste is linearly proportional to population. Not all is equal, but in the near future, many more people will transition into more wasteful lifestyle than people switching to less wasteful lifestyle.
coconut_crab 8y ago
> ...in 200 years we went up by 6 billion? It's not because of we are breeding more but much much better health care, sanitary and less people killed in war. The growth rate is lowering, some countries such as Japan, Germany or Korea will have their population shrink a lot in the future. > This is the fundamental human flaw, exhaust everything until there is none left and move on to the next thing... It's easy to think that way, but environmentalism only started to have real traction in the last 50 years (correct me if I'm wrong). And during those 50 years we have achieved a lot: patching the ozone, reduce automobile pollution by having much stricter emission standards etc... It show that humanity is capable of learning and willing to correct their errors, not just a hungry species exists only to consume.
- chewz 8y ago
  > It's easy to think that way, but environmentalism only started to have real traction in the last 50 years (correct me if I'm wrong) You are wrong. In Papua and certain other islands it had started ca 3 thousand years ago. In Japan and Central Europe in XVII century, in parts of Italy in XVIII century..
pas 8y ago
China is also full of bottled water from Tibet. But. Fun fact. The cost of the invasion and maintained military (governmental, and of other kinds) presence is probably higher than buying lithium and water treatment solutions on the market. China did it for the same reason Russia attacked Ukraine. To have more controlled territory as a buffer against "geopolitical aggression" (full out war or just friendly soft power diplomatic pushback against their totalitarianism). This made 100% sense for them just for the border control. The natural resources is just the cherry on top.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

> I knew we are at 7 billion right now, but holy fuck... in 200 years we went up by 6 billion? Congratulations, you're one of the today's lucky 10000 :) [0]. That's the exponential growth. It seems shocking when you fully comprehend its shape for the first time. (Also a spoiler: "we're using more of resource X now than all our use in the past combined" is true at any point in time under exponential growth, too.) People don't notice it in case of many things because it's a natural consequence of independent agents doing the same thing. I'm reminded of the story about bacteria in a bottle: on 11:00 you have a single one, their number doubles every minute, and you know that on 12:00 they'll fill the entire bottle. Q: at which point the bacteria will notice they're running out of space? A: somewhere after 11:59. > This is the fundamental human flaw, exhaust everything until there is none left and move on to the next thing... Wouldn't go that far. This is a fundamental flaw of life itself. Humans, in fact, are probably the only living thing on this planet that is capable of self-moderation. Life in general is moderated by death. Animals reproduce until they either exceed the food supply and start starving, or their abundance causes predator populations to grow (and they grow until they eat most of the prey, and then starve, starting the cycle anew) This is nature's self-regulation, and it's present at every level - from animals to bacteria. Yes, it would be best if we could moderate ourselves a bit more, but it's worth stopping and considering sometimes how unnatural moderation is, before condemning humans as some aberrant creatures. > I can already hear the justified screams, "Elon will take us to the Mars!". Oh come on :). Elon wants to take people to Mars so that they live happily on two planets, thus mitigating some x-risks like killer asteroids, or biotech fuckups. He never endorsed the idea of giving up on Earth. Settling Mars long-term ain't easier than surviving here anyway, and there's a huge overlap in technologies needed - especially if we can't coordinate internationally to unfuck the climate in the first place. -- [0] - https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/

baxtr 8y ago
Thanks. I was looking for the xkcd, I think you posted it somewhere earlier. I saw it but I did not save it. I have been thinking about it later and thought I never find it again... :-)
skilled 8y ago
Thanks for the constructive response. Appreciate it! :)

XorNot 8y ago

Guys guys it's population! Definitely nothing to do with the waste products from how we source all our energy. But <nebulous authority> won't let us solve the population problem so I guess there's nothing to be done and thus no responsibility to do anything! This line of thinking is morally abhorrent at best.

King-Aaron 8y ago
It might come as a surprise to you, but waste generated by humans and human population is intrinsically linked.
- pas 8y ago
  Why? We can in fact transition to perfectly renewable stuff for about 99% of what we currently put in landfills. Of course currently a lot of the externalities are not priced into products. Most important of them all is GHG emissions.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    All else equal, waste is linearly proportional to population. Not all is equal, but in the near future, many more people will transition into more wasteful lifestyle than people switching to less wasteful lifestyle.

coconut_crab 8y ago

> ...in 200 years we went up by 6 billion? It's not because of we are breeding more but much much better health care, sanitary and less people killed in war. The growth rate is lowering, some countries such as Japan, Germany or Korea will have their population shrink a lot in the future. > This is the fundamental human flaw, exhaust everything until there is none left and move on to the next thing... It's easy to think that way, but environmentalism only started to have real traction in the last 50 years (correct me if I'm wrong). And during those 50 years we have achieved a lot: patching the ozone, reduce automobile pollution by having much stricter emission standards etc... It show that humanity is capable of learning and willing to correct their errors, not just a hungry species exists only to consume.

chewz 8y ago
> It's easy to think that way, but environmentalism only started to have real traction in the last 50 years (correct me if I'm wrong) You are wrong. In Papua and certain other islands it had started ca 3 thousand years ago. In Japan and Central Europe in XVII century, in parts of Italy in XVIII century..

pas 8y ago

China is also full of bottled water from Tibet. But. Fun fact. The cost of the invasion and maintained military (governmental, and of other kinds) presence is probably higher than buying lithium and water treatment solutions on the market. China did it for the same reason Russia attacked Ukraine. To have more controlled territory as a buffer against "geopolitical aggression" (full out war or just friendly soft power diplomatic pushback against their totalitarianism). This made 100% sense for them just for the border control. The natural resources is just the cherry on top.