6 ms·

Ignore the crunchy comments saying don't eat meat, don't have kids, and don't drive. You have no impact as a consumer or influencer. What you can do is: * a)

Ignore the crunchy comments saying don't eat meat, don't have kids, and don't drive. You have no impact as a consumer or influencer. What you can do is: * a) find someone working on climate change, and help write software for them part-time as a volunteer * b) brainstorm an idea for a site/app, and build it yourself (and of course post it to HN) * c) quit your job, join an organization focused on climate change, and do some work * d) start researching more about climate change until you can make a better choice about a or b or c If you can't commit a big chunk of time to it, then research good orgs focused on climate change, and donate money to them (or angel invest in them). That's the next best thing you can do.

dpflan 5y ago
If you’re into AI, there is Climate Change AI which is a “global initiative to catalyze impactful work at the intersection of climate change and machine learning.” - https://www.climatechange.ai/ https://www.climatechange.ai/
- dpflan 5y ago
  More content: - Just found this: https://workonclimate.org/ https://workonclimate.org/
worstestes 5y ago
Yeah, all of this but also — stop eating meat
- invalidname 5y ago
  Yes. Parent commenter effectively says votes don't matter. Sure they don't individually, but they signal. If enough people reduce their meat, dairy and egg consumption this will change the market. Fewer industrialized farms, greater scale in vegan alternatives which brings to price reductions which further increases the popularity of vegan alternatives. Individual action matters a lot. Yes corporations are those that need to carry out the ultimate change. So the thing where corporations "blame" individuals for climate/pollution is bogus. But as consumers and as employees we have a strong impact on the environment and should advocate for that.
  - daxfohl 5y ago
    And moreover, certainly don't get on message boards where people are genuinely looking for things they can do, and say "don't do crunchy". A few misplaced comments like that can result in a huge missed opportunity. It even rings a bit hypocritical if subsequently you say support organizations that put the onus elsewhere.
- caeril 5y ago
  I would slightly amend this: Eat meat, but only meat that is sustainably raised. Depending on the size of your lawn, you probably can raise a couple meat or egg chickens on the natural flora/fauna in your yard and table scraps. There are CSAs that raise only pastured eggs/chicken/hogs/beef without fossil-based grain inputs. Meat is healthy, but yes, it is fossil-intensive in the modern era. But it doesn't have to be. There are zero-fossil options.
wsc981 5y ago
Not having kids would help a lot in reducing future emissions and pollution though. Would reduce consumption. Bill Burr put it quite succinctly: “that’s not a family photo; it’s an environmental disaster and you’ve framed it!” [0] --- [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wq_edHqpdA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wq_edHqpdA
- bluedevil2k 5y ago
  Ending your own life would be even more helpful, I’m surprised no one has suggested that yet /s
  - jazzyjackson 5y ago
    Jerry Springer had guests of this persuasion on the episode "I want to join a suicide cult." The group is being satirical but honestly they make some pretty salient points. https://youtu.be/C_TtTEw9w4s https://youtu.be/C_TtTEw9w4s https://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/coefaq.html https://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/coefaq.html
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - birksherty 5y ago
    It creates huge suffering to kill, not having own kid does not. You can just adopt instead and be a parent. Simple.
- resonious 5y ago
  The tough part with these arguments is that's it's not "if you didn't have kids", rather, it's "if a very large number of people didn't have kids". If a small group of like-minded people decide to not have kids in the name of the planet, the effect would probably pale in comparison to the masses that don't hear and/or don't care about these climate change messages. I imagine the "real" solution would have to be one that doesn't require people to willingly change their way of life.
throw63738 5y ago
As consumer you have an impact, at least it sets an example and gives credibility. This reminds me of "climate activists" who fly around the world in private jets to preach!
- kiliantics 5y ago
  Your biggest impact is as a worker. Most of us produce more than we consume (where the excess usually becomes investor profits). We really need to produce less or our consumption won't make a difference. In the past, workers formed unions and collectively bargained with governments and employers to reduce working hours down to the standard work week we know today. We could reduce this further to a 4- or a 3-day work week. We could also use collective worker power to demand many other things, such as stricter environmental standards in the workplace, just as we bargained for stricter health standards in the past. Or better environmental standards for children in schools or for public spaces, just as we bargained for children's rights and other standards in the past. (All these modern standards were fought for, they were not handed out freely)
  - throw63738 5y ago
    My work laptop uses like 50 watts. My personal consumption just from breathing is way higher. Unions are bad for environment. They block progress and force subsidies on old, inefficient and dirty technologies. Soviet Union had horrible environmental record.
    - rsd79 5y ago
      You are confusing soviet propaganda with soviet reality. There were no worker unions in Soviet Union.
- bjourne 5y ago
  It really grinds my gears when people bring up effigies that does not exist at all in the real world. Very few people fly around the world in private jets. Of those who do, none are environmentalists.
foundron 5y ago
All your points are great, but please don't discourage others to make ethical personal choices. Our culture needs to change and become more compassionate, sustainable and wise in terms the long-term impact of our actions. How does a culture change? It starts with a courageous minority [1], composed of many individuals, who have "no impact as a consumer" but collectively they do have the power to influence the majority. [1] https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15#.hr22nda85 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...
birksherty 5y ago
Not sure why not having kid is such controversial. I guess people just can't be not selfish, they will find any excuse. People will do anything that does not change their lifestyle, basically all of which are useless compared to what is going on in climate crisis. Not having kid is the most effective thing anyone can do. You can just adopt instead, raise them to be ethical. It should not be so controversial. You can be a parent without giving birth. Also bringing a kid without their consent to this dying planet and then make them fix it (which due to their ancestor's screw ups and comfort) looks like a punishment by parents, pretty selfish. These kids already have jobs to perform before even born. I sure don't want my kids to suffer this disaster and without their consent. Data conclusively indicates real-world climate change is tracking RCP8.5, the IPCC’s “worst case scenario”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fliCxyAwBWU&t=719s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fliCxyAwBWU&t=719s
- bluedevil2k 5y ago
  > People will do anything that does not change their lifestyle Clearly you don’t have children if you think having a child doesn’t change your lifestyle. > Also bringing a kid without their consent to this dying planet and then make them fix it…looks like a punishment by parents, pretty selfish Here’s a tip, don’t use this line on a first date.
  - birksherty 5y ago
    It's not about dating. It's truth that you didn't want to hear. Because accepting truth is difficult, so fight it, deny it instead. Regarding lifestyle, I chose wrong word, not my first language. It's what and how you want your life that you don't want to compromise for climate crisis.
- gameman144 5y ago
  I don't think not having a kid is, itself, controversial. I think that telling others who want children not to have them is the controversial bit. On the one hand, it is a very effective way to reduce your carbon footprint if you can do it. On the other hand, for many people it conflicts with one of the most basic human desires, which is life-defining for lots of the population. As an analogy, if you asked people to be celibate you could guarantee that no new babies would come along even if birth-control-methods failed; a huge net positive! Despite that, sex is a basic human experience that many see as integral to their vision of a life, and it'd be controversial to seemingly impose that restriction on others. tl;dr: no controversy in you doing you, sometimes controversy in you asking others to similarly do you
JensRantil 5y ago
I did just c) - I'm joining https://normative.io https://normative.io as an engineer at the beginning of next year for this particular reason. The company helps other companies decrease carbon emissions by generating sustainability reports. I'm _very_ excited to be a tiny part in helping humanity solve one of our biggest problems.
AzzieElbab 5y ago
10 to 1 the person you will be helping will get you to develop software that tells everyone not to eat meat and not to have kids. There are very few serious people in climate science.
- andrewljohnson 5y ago
  Getting people not to eat heavy-carbon-usage-meat at scale might be impactful... like found a lab meat company or something. I just don't think being a vegetarian has impact... it's something you do to keep consistent with your worldview or morality, not to mitigate climate change.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    How can a "no impact" activity like not eating meat scale to be impactful? An individual's actions does have an impact, albeit a small one. It is measurable (CO2 savings from not eating that meat). Discouraging individuals from participating in individual efforts will prevent the group from achieving scale.
    - andrewljohnson 5y ago
      I'm not discouraging an individual from eating meat... I'm encouraging an individual to not buy into the idea that not eating meat will achieve their stated goal.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        Isn't the stated goal to reduce their contribution to climate change through eliminating meat related CO2 emissions? Seems like it works.
        AzzieElbab 5y ago
        Doesn’t sound measurable. The whole “don’t eat meat, save the environment” debate should be centred around corn fed beef to begin with
giantg2 5y ago
"Ignore the crunchy comments saying don't eat meat, don't have kids, and don't drive. You have no impact as a consumer or influencer." Yet each of these actions can be quantified in terms of CO2 no emitted or resources preserved. There is an impact, and that impact becomes apparent given sufficient scale and time. One's choice not to have kids could very well provide exponential savings when compared to one's personal lifetime emissions/consumption when looking over generations.
RickJWagner 5y ago
I don't like this tactic. It might well be more effective, but it just doesn't seem right. Al Gore has arguably done more than anyone else (at the upper levels) but his ownership of multiple houses (with heated pools) goes against the message he preached. Bernie Sanders owns multiple houses, too. John Kerry famously flies a private jet all over the place and parties on yachts (which he parks in places to minimize taxes). I actually dislike people who don't take the personal action, yet work to make others sacrifice for the cause. On the other hand, I have respect for people like Ralph Nader and Jimmy Carter, who actually lead humble lives and lead by example.

dpflan 5y ago

If you’re into AI, there is Climate Change AI which is a “global initiative to catalyze impactful work at the intersection of climate change and machine learning.” - https://www.climatechange.ai/ https://www.climatechange.ai/

dpflan 5y ago
More content: - Just found this: https://workonclimate.org/ https://workonclimate.org/

worstestes 5y ago

Yeah, all of this but also — stop eating meat

invalidname 5y ago
Yes. Parent commenter effectively says votes don't matter. Sure they don't individually, but they signal. If enough people reduce their meat, dairy and egg consumption this will change the market. Fewer industrialized farms, greater scale in vegan alternatives which brings to price reductions which further increases the popularity of vegan alternatives. Individual action matters a lot. Yes corporations are those that need to carry out the ultimate change. So the thing where corporations "blame" individuals for climate/pollution is bogus. But as consumers and as employees we have a strong impact on the environment and should advocate for that.
- daxfohl 5y ago
  And moreover, certainly don't get on message boards where people are genuinely looking for things they can do, and say "don't do crunchy". A few misplaced comments like that can result in a huge missed opportunity. It even rings a bit hypocritical if subsequently you say support organizations that put the onus elsewhere.
caeril 5y ago
I would slightly amend this: Eat meat, but only meat that is sustainably raised. Depending on the size of your lawn, you probably can raise a couple meat or egg chickens on the natural flora/fauna in your yard and table scraps. There are CSAs that raise only pastured eggs/chicken/hogs/beef without fossil-based grain inputs. Meat is healthy, but yes, it is fossil-intensive in the modern era. But it doesn't have to be. There are zero-fossil options.

wsc981 5y ago

Not having kids would help a lot in reducing future emissions and pollution though. Would reduce consumption. Bill Burr put it quite succinctly: “that’s not a family photo; it’s an environmental disaster and you’ve framed it!” [0] --- [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wq_edHqpdA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wq_edHqpdA

bluedevil2k 5y ago
Ending your own life would be even more helpful, I’m surprised no one has suggested that yet /s
- jazzyjackson 5y ago
  Jerry Springer had guests of this persuasion on the episode "I want to join a suicide cult." The group is being satirical but honestly they make some pretty salient points. https://youtu.be/C_TtTEw9w4s https://youtu.be/C_TtTEw9w4s https://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/coefaq.html https://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/coefaq.html
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- birksherty 5y ago
  It creates huge suffering to kill, not having own kid does not. You can just adopt instead and be a parent. Simple.
resonious 5y ago
The tough part with these arguments is that's it's not "if you didn't have kids", rather, it's "if a very large number of people didn't have kids". If a small group of like-minded people decide to not have kids in the name of the planet, the effect would probably pale in comparison to the masses that don't hear and/or don't care about these climate change messages. I imagine the "real" solution would have to be one that doesn't require people to willingly change their way of life.

throw63738 5y ago

As consumer you have an impact, at least it sets an example and gives credibility. This reminds me of "climate activists" who fly around the world in private jets to preach!

kiliantics 5y ago
Your biggest impact is as a worker. Most of us produce more than we consume (where the excess usually becomes investor profits). We really need to produce less or our consumption won't make a difference. In the past, workers formed unions and collectively bargained with governments and employers to reduce working hours down to the standard work week we know today. We could reduce this further to a 4- or a 3-day work week. We could also use collective worker power to demand many other things, such as stricter environmental standards in the workplace, just as we bargained for stricter health standards in the past. Or better environmental standards for children in schools or for public spaces, just as we bargained for children's rights and other standards in the past. (All these modern standards were fought for, they were not handed out freely)
- throw63738 5y ago
  My work laptop uses like 50 watts. My personal consumption just from breathing is way higher. Unions are bad for environment. They block progress and force subsidies on old, inefficient and dirty technologies. Soviet Union had horrible environmental record.
  - rsd79 5y ago
    You are confusing soviet propaganda with soviet reality. There were no worker unions in Soviet Union.
bjourne 5y ago
It really grinds my gears when people bring up effigies that does not exist at all in the real world. Very few people fly around the world in private jets. Of those who do, none are environmentalists.

foundron 5y ago

All your points are great, but please don't discourage others to make ethical personal choices. Our culture needs to change and become more compassionate, sustainable and wise in terms the long-term impact of our actions. How does a culture change? It starts with a courageous minority [1], composed of many individuals, who have "no impact as a consumer" but collectively they do have the power to influence the majority. [1] https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15#.hr22nda85 https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...

birksherty 5y ago

Not sure why not having kid is such controversial. I guess people just can't be not selfish, they will find any excuse. People will do anything that does not change their lifestyle, basically all of which are useless compared to what is going on in climate crisis. Not having kid is the most effective thing anyone can do. You can just adopt instead, raise them to be ethical. It should not be so controversial. You can be a parent without giving birth. Also bringing a kid without their consent to this dying planet and then make them fix it (which due to their ancestor's screw ups and comfort) looks like a punishment by parents, pretty selfish. These kids already have jobs to perform before even born. I sure don't want my kids to suffer this disaster and without their consent. Data conclusively indicates real-world climate change is tracking RCP8.5, the IPCC’s “worst case scenario”. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fliCxyAwBWU&t=719s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fliCxyAwBWU&t=719s

bluedevil2k 5y ago
> People will do anything that does not change their lifestyle Clearly you don’t have children if you think having a child doesn’t change your lifestyle. > Also bringing a kid without their consent to this dying planet and then make them fix it…looks like a punishment by parents, pretty selfish Here’s a tip, don’t use this line on a first date.
- birksherty 5y ago
  It's not about dating. It's truth that you didn't want to hear. Because accepting truth is difficult, so fight it, deny it instead. Regarding lifestyle, I chose wrong word, not my first language. It's what and how you want your life that you don't want to compromise for climate crisis.
gameman144 5y ago
I don't think not having a kid is, itself, controversial. I think that telling others who want children not to have them is the controversial bit. On the one hand, it is a very effective way to reduce your carbon footprint if you can do it. On the other hand, for many people it conflicts with one of the most basic human desires, which is life-defining for lots of the population. As an analogy, if you asked people to be celibate you could guarantee that no new babies would come along even if birth-control-methods failed; a huge net positive! Despite that, sex is a basic human experience that many see as integral to their vision of a life, and it'd be controversial to seemingly impose that restriction on others. tl;dr: no controversy in you doing you, sometimes controversy in you asking others to similarly do you

JensRantil 5y ago

I did just c) - I'm joining https://normative.io https://normative.io as an engineer at the beginning of next year for this particular reason. The company helps other companies decrease carbon emissions by generating sustainability reports. I'm _very_ excited to be a tiny part in helping humanity solve one of our biggest problems.

AzzieElbab 5y ago

10 to 1 the person you will be helping will get you to develop software that tells everyone not to eat meat and not to have kids. There are very few serious people in climate science.

andrewljohnson 5y ago
Getting people not to eat heavy-carbon-usage-meat at scale might be impactful... like found a lab meat company or something. I just don't think being a vegetarian has impact... it's something you do to keep consistent with your worldview or morality, not to mitigate climate change.
- giantg2 5y ago
  How can a "no impact" activity like not eating meat scale to be impactful? An individual's actions does have an impact, albeit a small one. It is measurable (CO2 savings from not eating that meat). Discouraging individuals from participating in individual efforts will prevent the group from achieving scale.
  - andrewljohnson 5y ago
    I'm not discouraging an individual from eating meat... I'm encouraging an individual to not buy into the idea that not eating meat will achieve their stated goal.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      Isn't the stated goal to reduce their contribution to climate change through eliminating meat related CO2 emissions? Seems like it works.
      - AzzieElbab 5y ago
        Doesn’t sound measurable. The whole “don’t eat meat, save the environment” debate should be centred around corn fed beef to begin with

giantg2 5y ago

"Ignore the crunchy comments saying don't eat meat, don't have kids, and don't drive. You have no impact as a consumer or influencer." Yet each of these actions can be quantified in terms of CO2 no emitted or resources preserved. There is an impact, and that impact becomes apparent given sufficient scale and time. One's choice not to have kids could very well provide exponential savings when compared to one's personal lifetime emissions/consumption when looking over generations.

RickJWagner 5y ago

I don't like this tactic. It might well be more effective, but it just doesn't seem right. Al Gore has arguably done more than anyone else (at the upper levels) but his ownership of multiple houses (with heated pools) goes against the message he preached. Bernie Sanders owns multiple houses, too. John Kerry famously flies a private jet all over the place and parties on yachts (which he parks in places to minimize taxes). I actually dislike people who don't take the personal action, yet work to make others sacrifice for the cause. On the other hand, I have respect for people like Ralph Nader and Jimmy Carter, who actually lead humble lives and lead by example.