2 ms·
The article talks about all threats, not just climate, and notes the same pattern of avoidance and rationalisation as you mention in your comments. My focus is
by nonrandomstring 5y ago
The article talks about all threats, not just climate, and notes the
same pattern of avoidance and rationalisation as you mention in your
comments. My focus is on 'cyber' [1] where I see looming catastrophe
for all the same reasons - that there's an entire industry depending
on convincing us that nothing is wrong.
Another respondent mentions the structural group dynamics in regard to
the HBO Chernobyl dramatisation (which I have on good authority is a
realistic take on Soviet era dynamics).
Feynman was always pointing out the gap between the world as it is and
the world as we wish it to be to suit our expedient economic and
political ends. His magic-show with the O-rings at the Challenger
hearing is a masterpiece of calm iconoclasm of smug idiocracy.
But there aren't enough Feynmans, so reality is not taking precedence
over public relations, especially in tech. There are plenty of people
right here who are happily, silently going along with creating our
societal downfall through reckless projects like a "fully cashless
economy" and an unnecessary, unchecked, and largely unwanted "Internet
of Things".
But you cannot convince people whose salary depends on them not being
convinced.
[1] https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/why-we-cant-teach-cybersecurity/ https://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/why-we-cant-teach-cyber...