9 ms·

I don’t understand why this is downvoted. This is exactly my perception as well: techno-optimism is dangerous, and there really is no excuse for the amount of p

I don’t understand why this is downvoted. This is exactly my perception as well: techno-optimism is dangerous, and there really is no excuse for the amount of pointless conspicuous consumption that occurs in modern life.

seiferteric 5y ago
So techno-optimism is dangerous, but social/political optimism is not? At least we somewhat know how to make technology, but I don't think anyone knows how to force this social change on the world.
- wbsss4412 5y ago
  It’s not optimism, it’s about where the solution lies. In one case we are wishing for a solution to fall out of some genuis minds. In the other we are taking responsibility for changing behavior which we have control over. That’s not optimism, it’s pragmatism.
  - seiferteric 5y ago
    > In the other we are taking responsibility for changing behavior which we have control over. Okay, propose concrete actions, political, legal even military if needed that you think will help accomplish this and could actually work globally?
    - wbsss4412 5y ago
      Im going to speak to the US as I am American, but most of this could be implemented in other countries. Global action requires diplomacy and global agreements, but these policies could be replicated in other places/it’s not like there isn’t buy in around the world to varying degrees. In no particular order: institute carbon taxes, tie in climate based criteria for fha loans including weatherization, electrification and neighborhood planning, drive industrial policy towards the expansion of green industries including renewable energy, but also on the demand planning and efficiency side (ex heat pumps in buildings, EVs etc). Shift agricultural policy to focus more heavily on climate impacts and discourage fossil fuel intensive methods. Dramatic shifts in federal fleets away from fossil fuel vehicles, etc. I’m not an expert on this stuff but these are just obvious things. Actual policy could be crafted to address these things on a number of different levels.
      - seiferteric 5y ago
        You just listed a bunch of wishes, not things that can actually pass today… that’s the problem I’m pointing out.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        Can is a matter of a small handful of people making a decision. Calling that wishful is abdicating responsibility. The point is we aren’t powerless, we just love acting like we are.
        criddell 5y ago
        The small handful of people have to answer to their constituents and voters are hostile to anything that will raise taxes or lower their quality of life today. That might change if things get bad enough, but by then it's probably too late for anything but a technological miracle. Non-democratic countries (like China and Russia) have a better chance of making the changes because there it truly is the case that a small number of people can bring about change.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        Explicitly raising taxes would be very unpopular, but there were plenty of things I listed that would get minimal pushback from the public at large. No one cares if UPS delivery trucks are electric. Very few people are policy wonks and will pay attention to changes in FHA bureaucracy. Voters have very limited bandwidth and attention. Most of what the federal government does, it does on its own initiative, with opposition from select special interests.
        moritzwarhier 5y ago
        I love how well you made that argument, although I am as disillusioned as your other respondent. Another problem is that countries are also in a global economic competition. The legislative frameworks still do not keep the costs of destroying the planet from being so low that doing so is an economic imperative.
    - germinalphrase 5y ago
      The obvious solution is to change one’s self such that other people aspire to be similar. If our lives and cities appeal to people in other countries, they may adopt our technologies, urban designs, and social policies. Part of it is development. Part of it is marketing.
criddell 5y ago
I don't think there are a lot of excuses being made. Consumption is a problem but solving that is probably more difficult than deploying technological solutions. I don't think anybody is very optimistic about our chances on either path.

seiferteric 5y ago

So techno-optimism is dangerous, but social/political optimism is not? At least we somewhat know how to make technology, but I don't think anyone knows how to force this social change on the world.

wbsss4412 5y ago
It’s not optimism, it’s about where the solution lies. In one case we are wishing for a solution to fall out of some genuis minds. In the other we are taking responsibility for changing behavior which we have control over. That’s not optimism, it’s pragmatism.
- seiferteric 5y ago
  > In the other we are taking responsibility for changing behavior which we have control over. Okay, propose concrete actions, political, legal even military if needed that you think will help accomplish this and could actually work globally?
  - wbsss4412 5y ago
    Im going to speak to the US as I am American, but most of this could be implemented in other countries. Global action requires diplomacy and global agreements, but these policies could be replicated in other places/it’s not like there isn’t buy in around the world to varying degrees. In no particular order: institute carbon taxes, tie in climate based criteria for fha loans including weatherization, electrification and neighborhood planning, drive industrial policy towards the expansion of green industries including renewable energy, but also on the demand planning and efficiency side (ex heat pumps in buildings, EVs etc). Shift agricultural policy to focus more heavily on climate impacts and discourage fossil fuel intensive methods. Dramatic shifts in federal fleets away from fossil fuel vehicles, etc. I’m not an expert on this stuff but these are just obvious things. Actual policy could be crafted to address these things on a number of different levels.
    - seiferteric 5y ago
      You just listed a bunch of wishes, not things that can actually pass today… that’s the problem I’m pointing out.
      - wbsss4412 5y ago
        Can is a matter of a small handful of people making a decision. Calling that wishful is abdicating responsibility. The point is we aren’t powerless, we just love acting like we are.
        criddell 5y ago
        The small handful of people have to answer to their constituents and voters are hostile to anything that will raise taxes or lower their quality of life today. That might change if things get bad enough, but by then it's probably too late for anything but a technological miracle. Non-democratic countries (like China and Russia) have a better chance of making the changes because there it truly is the case that a small number of people can bring about change.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        Explicitly raising taxes would be very unpopular, but there were plenty of things I listed that would get minimal pushback from the public at large. No one cares if UPS delivery trucks are electric. Very few people are policy wonks and will pay attention to changes in FHA bureaucracy. Voters have very limited bandwidth and attention. Most of what the federal government does, it does on its own initiative, with opposition from select special interests.
        moritzwarhier 5y ago
        I love how well you made that argument, although I am as disillusioned as your other respondent. Another problem is that countries are also in a global economic competition. The legislative frameworks still do not keep the costs of destroying the planet from being so low that doing so is an economic imperative.
  - germinalphrase 5y ago
    The obvious solution is to change one’s self such that other people aspire to be similar. If our lives and cities appeal to people in other countries, they may adopt our technologies, urban designs, and social policies. Part of it is development. Part of it is marketing.

criddell 5y ago

I don't think there are a lot of excuses being made. Consumption is a problem but solving that is probably more difficult than deploying technological solutions. I don't think anybody is very optimistic about our chances on either path.