3 ms·

I was educated at my university that the hinge of history was actually World War I. Hundreds of millions died in horrific new waus, the world centralized aroun

I was educated at my university that the hinge of history was actually World War I. Hundreds of millions died in horrific new waus, the world centralized around a pole of power, and basically the world has only been getting better since.

lostlogin 6y ago
I was left with this impression when I listened to Blueprint for Armageddon, by Dan Carlin. It's excellent. I thought I knew the history of that era but I was very wrong. The early parts are a little boring compared to what it turns into, but I can't see how that could be avoided given the topic. https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-55-blueprint-for-armageddon-series/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-55-blu...
BurningFrog 6y ago
WW1 is a very good candidate. It created the Soviet Union and Hitler and pretty much all of history since. It's also extra interesting, because if Gavrilo Princip hadn't randomly ran into the Archduke's car, history might have turned out very differently.
- WalterBright 6y ago
  There would have just been another spark for WW1.
  - BurningFrog 6y ago
    Maybe. It is truly unknowable.
    - WalterBright 6y ago
      That's right, but the nascent combatants were spoiling for a fight and just needed an excuse.
Lammy 6y ago
> basically the world has only been getting better since You made me really curious how we measure this! Sorry this turned into a massive wall of text but considering how depressing every news cycle has been for the past few years I hoped it would feel grounding to be able to put some numbers to things, even if they aren't happy numbers :) Worldwide average human is what I want an idea of, but the closest and largest "good" or "bad" measurement I see in the news on a regular basis is USA economic health as a graph of GDP-per-capita of the entire economy, no divisions based on any geographic boundaries since the economy is borderless, with 'health' seemingly the result of Worthington's Law on the entire-economy scope. U.S. Economy health data doesn't seem to provide a path to any physical human scope at all, since . I hate the idea of defining "good life" in monetary terms at all, but it seems impossible with only the whole-USA data due to income inequality within a region like the Bay Area, huge disparities in other regions compared to the coasts, people who don't "participate" in the economy directly or at all, etc. The graph of USA GDP growth over time did show a general upward curve, never under 0%, in a way that felt like things getting "generally better" as we hope. Looking at headlines made the data more confusing though, like Bloomberg's from a 2019 report: > "U.S. GDP Grew a Disappointing 1.2% in Second Quarter — Economic growth was well below expectations; cautious business investment offset robust consumer spending" I had assumed "Good Health" (or at least "Okay" health) was growth over 0.0%, but I guess not if growing by 1.2% was disappointing. The headline is unclear if that's some sort of official expectation percentage or just theirs, but since it doesn't say what the expected rate was I dunno. I gave up on the officially-published data being usable here, but I remembered a bunch of press in 2018 about California having the 5th largest economy in the world, larger than the UK's. No "world" or even "USA" average would come from CA-only data, but at least it might be personally fulfilling for me. Unfortunately all the news websites ultimately just link back to this tweet as the original source https://twitter.com/psaffo/status/992530974515781633 https://twitter.com/psaffo/status/992530974515781633 I'm aware of the World Happiness Index, but it asks people to describe their own happiness in their own words based on their own area which is useless here. I guess I will have to trust that US GDP growth has the possibility to be an okay representation on the country-wide scale, as long as any growth is separated-equally per capita :)
- pleasedontbanme 6y ago

lostlogin 6y ago

I was left with this impression when I listened to Blueprint for Armageddon, by Dan Carlin. It's excellent. I thought I knew the history of that era but I was very wrong. The early parts are a little boring compared to what it turns into, but I can't see how that could be avoided given the topic. https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-55-blueprint-for-armageddon-series/ https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-50-55-blu...

BurningFrog 6y ago

WW1 is a very good candidate. It created the Soviet Union and Hitler and pretty much all of history since. It's also extra interesting, because if Gavrilo Princip hadn't randomly ran into the Archduke's car, history might have turned out very differently.

WalterBright 6y ago
There would have just been another spark for WW1.
- BurningFrog 6y ago
  Maybe. It is truly unknowable.
  - WalterBright 6y ago
    That's right, but the nascent combatants were spoiling for a fight and just needed an excuse.

Lammy 6y ago

> basically the world has only been getting better since You made me really curious how we measure this! Sorry this turned into a massive wall of text but considering how depressing every news cycle has been for the past few years I hoped it would feel grounding to be able to put some numbers to things, even if they aren't happy numbers :) Worldwide average human is what I want an idea of, but the closest and largest "good" or "bad" measurement I see in the news on a regular basis is USA economic health as a graph of GDP-per-capita of the entire economy, no divisions based on any geographic boundaries since the economy is borderless, with 'health' seemingly the result of Worthington's Law on the entire-economy scope. U.S. Economy health data doesn't seem to provide a path to any physical human scope at all, since . I hate the idea of defining "good life" in monetary terms at all, but it seems impossible with only the whole-USA data due to income inequality within a region like the Bay Area, huge disparities in other regions compared to the coasts, people who don't "participate" in the economy directly or at all, etc. The graph of USA GDP growth over time did show a general upward curve, never under 0%, in a way that felt like things getting "generally better" as we hope. Looking at headlines made the data more confusing though, like Bloomberg's from a 2019 report: > "U.S. GDP Grew a Disappointing 1.2% in Second Quarter — Economic growth was well below expectations; cautious business investment offset robust consumer spending" I had assumed "Good Health" (or at least "Okay" health) was growth over 0.0%, but I guess not if growing by 1.2% was disappointing. The headline is unclear if that's some sort of official expectation percentage or just theirs, but since it doesn't say what the expected rate was I dunno. I gave up on the officially-published data being usable here, but I remembered a bunch of press in 2018 about California having the 5th largest economy in the world, larger than the UK's. No "world" or even "USA" average would come from CA-only data, but at least it might be personally fulfilling for me. Unfortunately all the news websites ultimately just link back to this tweet as the original source https://twitter.com/psaffo/status/992530974515781633 https://twitter.com/psaffo/status/992530974515781633 I'm aware of the World Happiness Index, but it asks people to describe their own happiness in their own words based on their own area which is useless here. I guess I will have to trust that US GDP growth has the possibility to be an okay representation on the country-wide scale, as long as any growth is separated-equally per capita :)

pleasedontbanme 6y ago