3 ms·

he is saying the first world lifestyle is fundamentally unsustainable with a multi billion person population on one earth sized planet and he is probably correc

he is saying the first world lifestyle is fundamentally unsustainable with a multi billion person population on one earth sized planet and he is probably correct.

jchw 7y ago
Well, I think it’s clear that the prospect of deep lifestyle changes, specifically downgrades, will never prove very popular. Especially since upper class lifestyles are not likely to change nearly as much as working class. But also, measures to control population strike deeply dystopian chords, and result in similarly adverse reactions. I think most people realize things have long not been sustainable... but it isn’t obvious what to do about that. I think that’s why the focus has been on technology that can buy us more time. Anything else that could help is probably not gonna happen in short order...
- slfnflctd 7y ago
  As long as so many people still consider it a personal affront to even hear the slightest suggestion that one of the easiest things they can do to contribute to a better world is simply eat less meat, I don't have a whole lot of hope.
  - alacombe 7y ago
    Really subjective as well. It's just as easy to argue that calories dense meat/fat is more efficient that calories starved greens or fattening processed carbs.
  - CamperBob2 7y ago
    This problem will fix itself soon enough when synthmeat reaches its tipping point. At some point on the price/quality curve, social signal theory will kick in, and it will become unacceptable to kill actual animals for meat. We'll save a lot of water when that happens, which isn't a bad thing regardless of your position on animal rights. Civilization isn't a zero-sum game. Everyone, without exception, who has ever claimed otherwise, has been wrong. In order for someone living in the middle of Africa or India to live better, you and I don't have to live worse.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  > measures to control population strike deeply dystopian chords This is only a matter of time though. What happens when we hit 10B, then 15B? This idea will start to gain more appeal as time goes on.
  - jchw 7y ago
    To be fair: are we going to hit 15B? With the rate population growth is declining, I don’t think that is a guarantee anymore. I’m not saying I disagree FWIW. Just saying I think the problem is nearly intractable; humanity as a whole may literally rather see the end of itself than make lifestyle concessions.
- fallingfrog 7y ago
  I think deep lifestyle changes are shortly to become very popular, in the same sense as drowning suddenly becomes in vogue when one’s neighborhood is hit by a tsunami.

he is saying the first world lifestyle is fundamentally unsustainable with a multi billion person population on one earth sized planet and he is probably correct.

jchw 7y ago

Well, I think it’s clear that the prospect of deep lifestyle changes, specifically downgrades, will never prove very popular. Especially since upper class lifestyles are not likely to change nearly as much as working class. But also, measures to control population strike deeply dystopian chords, and result in similarly adverse reactions. I think most people realize things have long not been sustainable... but it isn’t obvious what to do about that. I think that’s why the focus has been on technology that can buy us more time. Anything else that could help is probably not gonna happen in short order...

slfnflctd 7y ago
As long as so many people still consider it a personal affront to even hear the slightest suggestion that one of the easiest things they can do to contribute to a better world is simply eat less meat, I don't have a whole lot of hope.
- alacombe 7y ago
  Really subjective as well. It's just as easy to argue that calories dense meat/fat is more efficient that calories starved greens or fattening processed carbs.
- CamperBob2 7y ago
  This problem will fix itself soon enough when synthmeat reaches its tipping point. At some point on the price/quality curve, social signal theory will kick in, and it will become unacceptable to kill actual animals for meat. We'll save a lot of water when that happens, which isn't a bad thing regardless of your position on animal rights. Civilization isn't a zero-sum game. Everyone, without exception, who has ever claimed otherwise, has been wrong. In order for someone living in the middle of Africa or India to live better, you and I don't have to live worse.
Aeolun 7y ago
> measures to control population strike deeply dystopian chords This is only a matter of time though. What happens when we hit 10B, then 15B? This idea will start to gain more appeal as time goes on.
- jchw 7y ago
  To be fair: are we going to hit 15B? With the rate population growth is declining, I don’t think that is a guarantee anymore. I’m not saying I disagree FWIW. Just saying I think the problem is nearly intractable; humanity as a whole may literally rather see the end of itself than make lifestyle concessions.
fallingfrog 7y ago
I think deep lifestyle changes are shortly to become very popular, in the same sense as drowning suddenly becomes in vogue when one’s neighborhood is hit by a tsunami.