3 ms·

That’s a deeply flawed argument called a false equivalent. Guarantee you there are still unexplored areas in predator behavior modification and livestock manag

That’s a deeply flawed argument called a false equivalent. Guarantee you there are still unexplored areas in predator behavior modification and livestock management using technology that’s worth exploring.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
I agree that there's a lot of things worth exploring, but that doesn't mean that success is guaranteed. I've been on the other side of this for a long time with agricultural animal management, and watched dozens of technological solutions fail, including drones, lasers, sound emitters, and habitat modification. Those working in the field to have an incentive to come up with a solution and I appreciate attempts to do so. But I don't appreciate is when people flippantly dismiss the problems of others saying with certainty that there is a solution available. If you're so confident, please make it and people will happily give you millions of dollars. On the other hand, I've seen lots of people lose their livelihood because someone imposed a problem on them and hand a way of the way of the consequences
- happytiger 3y ago
  Fair enough. I have been exploring making it or investing in it on this very thread. It’s a novel problem and it often helps to study the problem with first principles as animal agriculture is 40 percent of global output and a key environmental problem is predator mitigation, however it’s done. I was doing a review of insurance products too. Interesting stuff. I’m deeply empathetic to the problems and understand some of the complexity involved. I have a fair amount of experience in ag, but not in this area. I feel like we should continue to innovate until we find solutions that work: that’s what humans do best. It’s important to keep applying new technologies to existing problems rather than entrenching ourselves in previous failures: that’s the root activity of substantive innovation.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

I agree that there's a lot of things worth exploring, but that doesn't mean that success is guaranteed. I've been on the other side of this for a long time with agricultural animal management, and watched dozens of technological solutions fail, including drones, lasers, sound emitters, and habitat modification. Those working in the field to have an incentive to come up with a solution and I appreciate attempts to do so. But I don't appreciate is when people flippantly dismiss the problems of others saying with certainty that there is a solution available. If you're so confident, please make it and people will happily give you millions of dollars. On the other hand, I've seen lots of people lose their livelihood because someone imposed a problem on them and hand a way of the way of the consequences

happytiger 3y ago
Fair enough. I have been exploring making it or investing in it on this very thread. It’s a novel problem and it often helps to study the problem with first principles as animal agriculture is 40 percent of global output and a key environmental problem is predator mitigation, however it’s done. I was doing a review of insurance products too. Interesting stuff. I’m deeply empathetic to the problems and understand some of the complexity involved. I have a fair amount of experience in ag, but not in this area. I feel like we should continue to innovate until we find solutions that work: that’s what humans do best. It’s important to keep applying new technologies to existing problems rather than entrenching ourselves in previous failures: that’s the root activity of substantive innovation.