3 ms·

On behalf of everyone in your country younger than you: cheers for not giving a fuck. Don't expect much sympathy when you all have alzheimer's. This is what I

On behalf of everyone in your country younger than you: cheers for not giving a fuck. Don't expect much sympathy when you all have alzheimer's. This is what I mean when I talk about the death of inter-generational good faith. Unless of course you're working on some sort of synthetic biology to eat trash, in which case, carry on I guess. We're all (desperately) rooting for you.

ars 14y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_arc_waste_disposal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_arc_waste_disposal We need to get energy sorted first, but the waste is not going anywhere. But seriously, landfills are really not a big environmental problem.
- rayiner 14y ago
  Only if you don't drink water.
- JonnieCache 14y ago
  It's not specifically about landfills. It's the wilful ignorance of the consequences of exponential growth curves, just because we personally happen to live on the left side of the graph where things are kind of OK. It's the same kind of thinking that caused the financial crisis, it's the same kind of thinking that will probably cause the death of our species, if that happens. It's utterly morally reprehensible, and we're all guilty of it. Our entire modern civilisation is founded on it.
  - lotharbot 14y ago
    What "exponential growth curves"? People used to think population was exponential back in 1798 [0] before they had enough data. Now we know population is logistic [1], which looks like an exponential on the left side of the curve but flattens out on the right; you can see a very clear divergence from the exponential if you look at real data [2]. Human population growth passed its peak (annual growth of 1.1% down from 2.2% in the 60s; numerical growth of 75 mil down from 88 mil in the 80s [3]) and is on the way to leveling out at around 9 billion, or about 20% more than today's population [4]. Things that go along with population -- like waste production -- are, obviously, also not exponential. Worrying about the consequences of exponential growth curves is like worrying that a potted plant is going to consume your entire house by the end of the month because it went from seed to sprout in just a few days. The only reason the "exponential" myth persists is scaremongering and willful ignorance. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Po... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function#In_ecology:_modeling_population_growth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function#In_ecology:_m... [2] http://www.growth-dynamics.com/articles/Kurzweil_files/image004.gif http://www.growth-dynamics.com/articles/Kurzweil_files/image... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth#Human_population_growth_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth#Human_populat... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growt...

ars 14y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_arc_waste_disposal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_arc_waste_disposal We need to get energy sorted first, but the waste is not going anywhere. But seriously, landfills are really not a big environmental problem.

rayiner 14y ago
Only if you don't drink water.
JonnieCache 14y ago
It's not specifically about landfills. It's the wilful ignorance of the consequences of exponential growth curves, just because we personally happen to live on the left side of the graph where things are kind of OK. It's the same kind of thinking that caused the financial crisis, it's the same kind of thinking that will probably cause the death of our species, if that happens. It's utterly morally reprehensible, and we're all guilty of it. Our entire modern civilisation is founded on it.
- lotharbot 14y ago
  What "exponential growth curves"? People used to think population was exponential back in 1798 [0] before they had enough data. Now we know population is logistic [1], which looks like an exponential on the left side of the curve but flattens out on the right; you can see a very clear divergence from the exponential if you look at real data [2]. Human population growth passed its peak (annual growth of 1.1% down from 2.2% in the 60s; numerical growth of 75 mil down from 88 mil in the 80s [3]) and is on the way to leveling out at around 9 billion, or about 20% more than today's population [4]. Things that go along with population -- like waste production -- are, obviously, also not exponential. Worrying about the consequences of exponential growth curves is like worrying that a potted plant is going to consume your entire house by the end of the month because it went from seed to sprout in just a few days. The only reason the "exponential" myth persists is scaremongering and willful ignorance. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Population http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Essay_on_the_Principle_of_Po... [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function#In_ecology:_modeling_population_growth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_function#In_ecology:_m... [2] http://www.growth-dynamics.com/articles/Kurzweil_files/image004.gif http://www.growth-dynamics.com/articles/Kurzweil_files/image... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth#Human_population_growth_rate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_growth#Human_populat... [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projections_of_population_growt...