4 ms·
It takes new machines and they generally damage something, yes. Despites op's emphasis on low-tech, the people I know who do permaculture seemed like they were
by monetus 3y ago
It takes new machines and they generally damage something, yes. Despites op's emphasis on low-tech, the people I know who do permaculture seemed like they were excited for robot arms and computer vision to be better and cheaper.
- xyzzyz 3y ago> I know who do permaculture seemed like they were excited for robot arms and computer vision to be better and cheaper. If you need robot arms and computer vision, it sounds then like permaculture is impractical at scale necessary for replacing standard agricultural practices.
- peteradio 3y agoWe already use computer vision to sort tomatoes at scale, I'm not sure if requiring computer vision precludes a successful automation.
- xyzzyz 3y agoProbably not, but my bigger point is that all those comments about permaculture typically completely ignore practicalities of large scale agriculture that are absolutely crucial to human flourishing. Gardening is my hobby, and over the years I found a lot of practices that improve my yield tremendously without depending on chemical pesticides or artificial fertilizers. However, I would not dare suggesting to the professional farmers that they should follow my steps. These practices work in my garden, but they simply aren’t practical if you need to feed the entire world.
- antisthenes 3y agoPermaculture is incredibly labor intensive. It's why usually young or retired people tend to be interested in - 2 groups with a lot of time on their hands. People who are middle aged and raising children don't have the time necessary (or the good physical shape) to participate in permaculture on any meaningful scale beyond maybe growing some veggies for personal consumption.