3 ms·
> There is no reward for solving 80% of the problem and cooking our civilization a bit slower. Heh. The older generations said "we'll be dead by then so it d
by mcpackieh 3y ago
> There is no reward for solving 80% of the problem and cooking our civilization a bit slower.
Heh. The older generations said "we'll be dead by then so it doesn't matter." Now younger generations are thinking along the lines of "If we can delay it until after I'm dead, that'll do."
- dale_glass 3y agoNonsense. Perfection is the enemy of "good enough". There are carbon sinks on the planet, for one. We don't need to convert ourselves into some species of tree elves magically in tune with nature. We just need to be a lot better than we are now, which is a good deal easier. And yes, delaying the problem has a huge value. Because stuff takes time to build, and theoretical stuff takes a long time to develop. If you think nuclear or fusion have something to offer, then time is a huge boon to you. If we need to convert everything NOW, then there's not even a point of thinking about nuclear, it just can't be built fast enough. Let alone fusion. Certainly I wouldn't say no to complete carbon neutrality world-wide. But given how things are it's clear that this is an unrealistic goal on a short/medium term. But that doesn't mean there aren't big improvements we can't make.
- mcpackieh 3y agoJust gotta delay it until after you're dead, then it's future peoples problem to solve amirite.
- dale_glass 3y agoI've still a got of life left, hopefully. So I do hope for a fix in my lifetime. Just not very soon either, that's not realistic.