4 ms·

This reads more like sci-fi fantasy than a typical comment on hackers news.

jelliclesfarm 6y ago
Conservation of habitat as a survival hack when we are in the middle of the sixth extinction event...I ASSURE you..isn’t a ‘sci-fi’ fantasy. CRISPR would have been a ‘sci fi’ fantasy years ago. And it’s now reality. Environmental stewardship as fantasy is the sad reality we face now.
- Avicebron 6y ago
  I'm really trying to find somewhere to agree with you...but it sounds like they are taking issue with your "blade runner 2049" strategy, like I'm fairly decent at robotics, I got to the point where I make them out of organic molecules now...but we ain't there chief. I don't care how many hours you've logged on "ML SAAS" it's not where you think it is
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    I don’t know how to respond to snark. I really want to engage in meaningful discussions. This isn’t it.
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    Let me try again. My gardener has 5 children and three grandchildren at age 48. This is irresponsible procreation. An average 2.1 replacement rate in a family unit that doesn’t rely on welfare still relies on tax subsidies, incentives and free public schools. Both are unsustainable. When there is no cost and only rewards for irresponsible procreation that is resource hogging from the commons, there will be a quick deterioration of available resources for all. When there is want and scarcity and more demand in the apex predator population, they start stripping the habitat and resources of the species below them in the food chain. That will eventually threaten the apex predators survival. This is more ‘killing the golden goose’ of Aesop tales than ‘blade runner 2049’ adoption of Philip k dick’s sci fi story. If I were to explain to a child about apex predators, I would bring up sharks..if sharks eat all the little fish in the sea, when they are out of little fish in the sea, they will die because they won’t have anything more to eat to survive.
    - Avicebron 6y ago
      I will apologize for the snark, It's monday and I've been in the lab and away from my coffee. I agree with you on principle, humans are apex predators, we are remarkable efficient at fast procreation and finding ingenious ways to outpace every animal/shrub/bush we don't directly exploit. That being said, I find this a difficult conversation to have online, because "responsible restriction of childbirth" isn't something anyone short of dangerously dictorial, can fathom to hope to achieve. It's a non starter, therefore we have to approach the problem from a end that's not so...thorny.. It's easy to say, "let's just thanos this and get it done" reset at another few thousand years..but the hard question is who gets snapped?
      - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
        Ok. I never said ‘responsible restriction of childbirth’. I said ‘incentivise responsible procreation’. I don’t know if you twisted my words on purpose or you really don’t see the difference? Why is it genocide to offer incentives for a greater quality of life for their thoughtful and mindful roadmap to nurture their progeny and to protect the commons from over exploitation. We should be rewarding responsible procreation and parenting. Human beings like ‘to do the right thing’. We are rationalizing animals rather than rational animals. Supporting and incentivizing irresponsible procreation economically and empathetically simply gives people reasons to mindlessly offer themselves rationalizations to continue making wrong and harmful personal decisions. Giving people incentives and support to provide the greatest chances of their gene pool to thrive along with the rest of the human species is a rational solution to the depopulation event that is a mathematical surety to occur within a century. Having said that, maybe it’s also time to have discussions about ‘thorny’ subjects. The lack of open discourse is why even reasonable suggestions are downvoted here. Because there is nothing to compare common sense with..
        scollet 6y ago
        The problem is, regardless of the incentives, they will be manipulated to target "undesirable" groups. It's fine to tow this line of thinking, but give it 100 years or so to implement.

Conservation of habitat as a survival hack when we are in the middle of the sixth extinction event...I ASSURE you..isn’t a ‘sci-fi’ fantasy. CRISPR would have been a ‘sci fi’ fantasy years ago. And it’s now reality. Environmental stewardship as fantasy is the sad reality we face now.

Avicebron 6y ago
I'm really trying to find somewhere to agree with you...but it sounds like they are taking issue with your "blade runner 2049" strategy, like I'm fairly decent at robotics, I got to the point where I make them out of organic molecules now...but we ain't there chief. I don't care how many hours you've logged on "ML SAAS" it's not where you think it is
- jelliclesfarm 6y ago
  I don’t know how to respond to snark. I really want to engage in meaningful discussions. This isn’t it.
- jelliclesfarm 6y ago
  Let me try again. My gardener has 5 children and three grandchildren at age 48. This is irresponsible procreation. An average 2.1 replacement rate in a family unit that doesn’t rely on welfare still relies on tax subsidies, incentives and free public schools. Both are unsustainable. When there is no cost and only rewards for irresponsible procreation that is resource hogging from the commons, there will be a quick deterioration of available resources for all. When there is want and scarcity and more demand in the apex predator population, they start stripping the habitat and resources of the species below them in the food chain. That will eventually threaten the apex predators survival. This is more ‘killing the golden goose’ of Aesop tales than ‘blade runner 2049’ adoption of Philip k dick’s sci fi story. If I were to explain to a child about apex predators, I would bring up sharks..if sharks eat all the little fish in the sea, when they are out of little fish in the sea, they will die because they won’t have anything more to eat to survive.
  - Avicebron 6y ago
    I will apologize for the snark, It's monday and I've been in the lab and away from my coffee. I agree with you on principle, humans are apex predators, we are remarkable efficient at fast procreation and finding ingenious ways to outpace every animal/shrub/bush we don't directly exploit. That being said, I find this a difficult conversation to have online, because "responsible restriction of childbirth" isn't something anyone short of dangerously dictorial, can fathom to hope to achieve. It's a non starter, therefore we have to approach the problem from a end that's not so...thorny.. It's easy to say, "let's just thanos this and get it done" reset at another few thousand years..but the hard question is who gets snapped?
    - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
      Ok. I never said ‘responsible restriction of childbirth’. I said ‘incentivise responsible procreation’. I don’t know if you twisted my words on purpose or you really don’t see the difference? Why is it genocide to offer incentives for a greater quality of life for their thoughtful and mindful roadmap to nurture their progeny and to protect the commons from over exploitation. We should be rewarding responsible procreation and parenting. Human beings like ‘to do the right thing’. We are rationalizing animals rather than rational animals. Supporting and incentivizing irresponsible procreation economically and empathetically simply gives people reasons to mindlessly offer themselves rationalizations to continue making wrong and harmful personal decisions. Giving people incentives and support to provide the greatest chances of their gene pool to thrive along with the rest of the human species is a rational solution to the depopulation event that is a mathematical surety to occur within a century. Having said that, maybe it’s also time to have discussions about ‘thorny’ subjects. The lack of open discourse is why even reasonable suggestions are downvoted here. Because there is nothing to compare common sense with..
      - scollet 6y ago
        The problem is, regardless of the incentives, they will be manipulated to target "undesirable" groups. It's fine to tow this line of thinking, but give it 100 years or so to implement.