4 ms·

The argument of EA is closer to: doing more of the things that currently feed 95% of the world is the way to feed 100%. How do you know it's not doing more of

by morsch 6y ago

The argument of EA is closer to: doing more of the things that currently feed 95% of the world is the way to feed 100%. How do you know it's not doing more of the things that currently leave 5% without food?

lmm 6y ago
By actually looking at how food gets produced.
- morsch 6y ago
  So this is not a general property of EA, but only true for this field, as verified by a domain expert?
  - lmm 6y ago
    The same logic applies generally; the point is to apply the same things that have worked in every other field of human endeavour.
imtringued 6y ago
>The argument of EA is closer to: doing more of the things that currently feed 95% of the world is the way to feed 100%. That is purely a political choice. Just grow the food supply faster than the population. Most developed countries have solved this on the population side. If every EU country had 0.5 - 1 billion people all of them would run into food problems.