4 ms·
No, the most important one is to overweight working on these problems directly through technology to create leveragable, economically incentivized solutions. In
by gfodor 6y ago
No, the most important one is to overweight working on these problems directly through technology to create leveragable, economically incentivized solutions. Instead of removing 2 lives from the picture, reduce the impact of all current and future lives by some meaningful margin.
As an example to illustrate this - if you create software solution that reduces the need for air travel by a very small percentage, you'll have more impact on carbon emissions over its amortized lifetime than most humans who have ever lived, particularly if you make personal sacrifices to ensure its widespread use and availability.
- ianai 6y agoAgreeing to not have kids feels like some sort of gut instinct appeal. Not entirely sure from where it stems - maybe guilt for climate change and mass extinctions? The people who would look to do better for the planet would just maybe have children who would do the same. It’s not assured, of course, but such a parent certainly loads the deck in favor if they’re otherwise good, supportive and informative parents. Wish society did more to give people reasons to care about and for one another.