6 ms·

In most reasonable collapse scenarios I could imagine, energy isn't so much a technological concern as it might be a political concern. Slightly scarcer perhaps

In most reasonable collapse scenarios I could imagine, energy isn't so much a technological concern as it might be a political concern. Slightly scarcer perhaps, but there's a ubiquity of old alternators, plenty of shit to burn, and I guarantee the extractive industries will be among the first to come online, if they ever went out in the first place, and can be coaxed to function in a degraded state without globalized supply chains or too much esoteric knowledge. Computers are much more difficult to bring back: much of their manufacture and distribution is highly dependent on a globalized supply chain, which in turn is dependent on the security guarantees of an international order backed by military force. Many of their parts are proprietary by nature, and individual components can at their simplest require rare expertise in multiple niche fields of science before their production can even be considered.

pjc50 6y ago
> energy isn't so much a technological concern as it might be a political concern This is what irks me about these kinds of "collapse fantasy". Somebody described the apocalypse novels of John Wyndham (Day of the Triffids etc) as "cosy catastrophe", and that very much applies here. The laser focus on technological detail-hoarding while having blinders on to any consideration of the politics of the situation, or what might be called "material conditions". Historically few societies collapsed without external pressure. Societies do not collapse, they are collapsed. And the force that's doing the collapsing is the thing you need to worry about. It also can take a very long time to wane; while Rome may have split from the Roman Empire in 395, the eastern successor Holy Roman Empire lasted until 1806. And the microstates provide even weirder examples, like the Maltese feudal knights with a WW2 air force!
- Guthur 6y ago
  Yeah, the brief thinking I've ever done about the collapse in these scenarios is to potentially band together with some like minded friends and try to setup some subsistence group with hunting, light farming and security. Firearms are highly regulated where I am from which makes the first and last a little more difficult than they potentially could be. I really never gave it that much thought to be perfectly frank. Though the point is I feel semi conductors are pretty far down the order of priorities.
  - Meph504 6y ago
    Firearms are highly regulated where I am from which makes the first and last a little more difficult than they potentially could be. In a collapse they won't be, and those willing to seize them, will be at a great advantage, police dept. military bases, even countries whose population don't have access to an abundance of guns doesn't mean there isn't an abundance in the country. In almost any scenario where government collapse can occur, people will become the largest threat to survival. The problem with security against other humans in the long term, is that we are damn clever, and determined. Even with an overwhelming firepower, if you are in a fixed location, people will find a way. As for Hunting, it can be done without firearms, Crossbows and Traps can be highly effective, and simply constructed. What you have to think about is how much and what sort of wildlife their is around you, and how rapidly they will be depleted by others. As they say, Hell is other people, best bet since the time of the plague, you want to survive go where others aren't.
    - Guthur 6y ago
      Crossbows require a permit as well :) Can't have the population undermining that monoploy on force ;) But I get your point. Like I said I hadn't given it much thought, though if one could get a sustainably large commune group with reasonable access to weaponry it would hopefully be a deterrent for most small groups. I'm in Australia which rather large. Clean water is the likely the most valuable commodity. It would be interesting to see how much of the population would actually survive such a collapse.
      - Meph504 6y ago
        If you have a collapse, I don't think permits on weapons are going to be a large concern. And after the collapse, they are one of the more simple to craft, and easy to operate weapons. MadMax should be your go to guide right? (just kidding) Large targets, can be whittled away over time, you basically become under siege, your attackers can leave anytime in small groups to gather supplies, you would be stuck at your parameter. Think castles, after a while, they all fall through starvation, contamination, sabotage, etc..
      - 6y ago
- vermilingua 6y ago
  That’s the western HRE. The ERE only survived until the 1400’s.
  - flohofwoe 6y ago
    Nitpicking: If the Holy Roman Empire is seen as a continuation of the Western Roman Empire, then the Russian Empire can be seen as the continuation of the Eastern Roman Empire (e.g. see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow,_third_Rome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow,_third_Rome), and this lasted until 1917. Both claims are dubious at best though (IMHO).
- fractallyte 6y ago
  It was Brian Aldiss who coined that description, and I despise it. It's as though he never actually read any of Wyndham's books...
londons_explore 6y ago
> Computers are much more difficult to bring back In all post apocalyptic scenarios I can imagine, there will still be billions of already existing computers. Rebuilding humanity will fulfill its computing needs by mining for a MacBook. Some will survive whatever natural disasters hit. As the supply of working ones dwindles, repairers will thrive. The skills and equipment necessary to repair waterlogged or crushed computers is still orders of magnitude less than that required to build a new one. "Mining and repairing macbooks" as a strategy could last for 1000 years or so if necessary. Of the billions out there, at least a few will be working in 1000 years, if there are humans around with the desire to repair them. As the repairs get harder and the supply dwindles, there will be more and more incentive to reinvent processes to make new ones. It wont be anywhere near as hard 2nd time round, because I'm sure across all of those billions of buried macbooks there are designs of all the machines necessary.
- herogreen 6y ago
  Unless the apocalypse is due to a solar flare similar to the Carrington event, which could destroy a lot of computers.

pjc50 6y ago

> energy isn't so much a technological concern as it might be a political concern This is what irks me about these kinds of "collapse fantasy". Somebody described the apocalypse novels of John Wyndham (Day of the Triffids etc) as "cosy catastrophe", and that very much applies here. The laser focus on technological detail-hoarding while having blinders on to any consideration of the politics of the situation, or what might be called "material conditions". Historically few societies collapsed without external pressure. Societies do not collapse, they are collapsed. And the force that's doing the collapsing is the thing you need to worry about. It also can take a very long time to wane; while Rome may have split from the Roman Empire in 395, the eastern successor Holy Roman Empire lasted until 1806. And the microstates provide even weirder examples, like the Maltese feudal knights with a WW2 air force!

Guthur 6y ago
Yeah, the brief thinking I've ever done about the collapse in these scenarios is to potentially band together with some like minded friends and try to setup some subsistence group with hunting, light farming and security. Firearms are highly regulated where I am from which makes the first and last a little more difficult than they potentially could be. I really never gave it that much thought to be perfectly frank. Though the point is I feel semi conductors are pretty far down the order of priorities.
- Meph504 6y ago
  Firearms are highly regulated where I am from which makes the first and last a little more difficult than they potentially could be. In a collapse they won't be, and those willing to seize them, will be at a great advantage, police dept. military bases, even countries whose population don't have access to an abundance of guns doesn't mean there isn't an abundance in the country. In almost any scenario where government collapse can occur, people will become the largest threat to survival. The problem with security against other humans in the long term, is that we are damn clever, and determined. Even with an overwhelming firepower, if you are in a fixed location, people will find a way. As for Hunting, it can be done without firearms, Crossbows and Traps can be highly effective, and simply constructed. What you have to think about is how much and what sort of wildlife their is around you, and how rapidly they will be depleted by others. As they say, Hell is other people, best bet since the time of the plague, you want to survive go where others aren't.
  - Guthur 6y ago
    Crossbows require a permit as well :) Can't have the population undermining that monoploy on force ;) But I get your point. Like I said I hadn't given it much thought, though if one could get a sustainably large commune group with reasonable access to weaponry it would hopefully be a deterrent for most small groups. I'm in Australia which rather large. Clean water is the likely the most valuable commodity. It would be interesting to see how much of the population would actually survive such a collapse.
    - Meph504 6y ago
      If you have a collapse, I don't think permits on weapons are going to be a large concern. And after the collapse, they are one of the more simple to craft, and easy to operate weapons. MadMax should be your go to guide right? (just kidding) Large targets, can be whittled away over time, you basically become under siege, your attackers can leave anytime in small groups to gather supplies, you would be stuck at your parameter. Think castles, after a while, they all fall through starvation, contamination, sabotage, etc..
    - 6y ago
vermilingua 6y ago
That’s the western HRE. The ERE only survived until the 1400’s.
- flohofwoe 6y ago
  Nitpicking: If the Holy Roman Empire is seen as a continuation of the Western Roman Empire, then the Russian Empire can be seen as the continuation of the Eastern Roman Empire (e.g. see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow,_third_Rome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow,_third_Rome), and this lasted until 1917. Both claims are dubious at best though (IMHO).
fractallyte 6y ago
It was Brian Aldiss who coined that description, and I despise it. It's as though he never actually read any of Wyndham's books...

londons_explore 6y ago

> Computers are much more difficult to bring back In all post apocalyptic scenarios I can imagine, there will still be billions of already existing computers. Rebuilding humanity will fulfill its computing needs by mining for a MacBook. Some will survive whatever natural disasters hit. As the supply of working ones dwindles, repairers will thrive. The skills and equipment necessary to repair waterlogged or crushed computers is still orders of magnitude less than that required to build a new one. "Mining and repairing macbooks" as a strategy could last for 1000 years or so if necessary. Of the billions out there, at least a few will be working in 1000 years, if there are humans around with the desire to repair them. As the repairs get harder and the supply dwindles, there will be more and more incentive to reinvent processes to make new ones. It wont be anywhere near as hard 2nd time round, because I'm sure across all of those billions of buried macbooks there are designs of all the machines necessary.

herogreen 6y ago
Unless the apocalypse is due to a solar flare similar to the Carrington event, which could destroy a lot of computers.