3 ms·

I'm curious what would be an optimal measure of biodiversity. As in, if certain species decreases, but another increase, it's not clear to me one is more bad t

I'm curious what would be an optimal measure of biodiversity. As in, if certain species decreases, but another increase, it's not clear to me one is more bad than another. Obviously, wouldn't want entire ecosystems wiped out. I'm just curious what a good measurement of ecosystem health would be. I'm sure there's one out there hopefully, as technology advances, we'll be able to mitigate the effects we have on the environment, and occasionally, maybe even help it.

sillywalk 3y ago
> I'm sure there's one out there hopefully, as technology advances, we'll be able to mitigate the effects we have on the environment, and occasionally, maybe even help it. Forgive my, bluntness, but statements like "optimal measure of biodiversity" are perhaps part of the problem. What the does that even mean? So where advanced technology can mitigate the effects of previously miraculous advanced technology, say micro-plastics, 'forever chemicals', pesticide residues? I am enjoying my comfort from technology, to include the glasses that allow me to "read", and post on Hacker News, but the negative externalities both to myself, and others, .. are substantial.