3 ms·

> We honestly can't plan for it. We can only try to do our best today. The article mentions "long-range planning" as an aspect of intelligence. People incapab

> We honestly can't plan for it. We can only try to do our best today. The article mentions "long-range planning" as an aspect of intelligence. People incapable of effectively affecting their future by taking action now (requiring "planning") are generally considered hapless. No one anyone'd want to work with, except to assist as with a helpless baby. The article also mentions sustainable anarchist visions, in contrast to the shadowy "global government we created to 'solve' the environmental problem" you mention. (Or does that somehow mean the US, the world hegemon?) In fact, he mentions our "global economic system in the form of institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund", which obviously aren't designed for environmental sustainability.

jerf 12y ago
"The article mentions "long-range planning" as an aspect of intelligence." But our intelligence is dominated by the unpredictability of the world, including the six billion other approximately-equally-intelligent beings taking an active interest in affairs. The "time value of money" isn't just an economic concept, it's a fundamental truth that the further in the future you look, the less you can predict it, exponentially, and frankly disturbingly quickly. We do not know what the future will hold, and anyone trying to plan 50 years in advance will be laughed at by those 50 years in the future. That includes you, that includes me, and I say that without any regard to the IQ either of us has, collectively or separately. We do not know, and the only thing I guarantee is that any plans you make will be laughably wrong. But before you think this is just defeatism, remember, I said that we can try to do our best today. We should do what we can based on the problems we see today... not just because they will compound tomorrow, but because they are problems today. However, claimed plans justified by any vague handwavings more than a decade or so into the future should simply be discounted. Heck, step back a mere 17 years and read about "the end of history". Sure hope you're not still following any plans based on how that worked out.
- Retric 12y ago
  Playing the devils advocate. While I don't agree with his long term idea, looking at the last 17 years don't really suggest he was all that wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man#mediaviewer/File:Freedom_in_the_world.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last... As to predicting things, the last 50 years have changed things far less than you might expect. 50 years ago we had Jet aircraft, satellites, cars did 80+MPH, computers used silicon transistors, nuclear reactors, H-Bomb, ICBM's, you could talk to people on the other side of the planet. Doctors could easily write a prescription for antibiotics or order an XRay to see what's wrong with you. There where even some video games. As far as peoples day to day lives transistors got really cheap which enabled lot's of stuff. But, the top 500 super computers pull 274 Pflop/s vs 223 Pflop/s the same time last year so that seems to be slowing down. http://www.top500.org/lists/2014/06/ http://www.top500.org/lists/2014/06/ Sure, tech has been improving but most of the tech that's changing peoples lives is actually fairly old. The Internet is about to hit 40, Cat scans are 47, Cellphones are 41, and DNA was discovered 61 years ago. Politicly things have changed a lot less than you might think. Most borders are about where they where 50 years ago, Israel was still having issues with it's neighbors abortion was a major political issue in the US etc etc.

jerf 12y ago

"The article mentions "long-range planning" as an aspect of intelligence." But our intelligence is dominated by the unpredictability of the world, including the six billion other approximately-equally-intelligent beings taking an active interest in affairs. The "time value of money" isn't just an economic concept, it's a fundamental truth that the further in the future you look, the less you can predict it, exponentially, and frankly disturbingly quickly. We do not know what the future will hold, and anyone trying to plan 50 years in advance will be laughed at by those 50 years in the future. That includes you, that includes me, and I say that without any regard to the IQ either of us has, collectively or separately. We do not know, and the only thing I guarantee is that any plans you make will be laughably wrong. But before you think this is just defeatism, remember, I said that we can try to do our best today. We should do what we can based on the problems we see today... not just because they will compound tomorrow, but because they are problems today. However, claimed plans justified by any vague handwavings more than a decade or so into the future should simply be discounted. Heck, step back a mere 17 years and read about "the end of history". Sure hope you're not still following any plans based on how that worked out.

Retric 12y ago
Playing the devils advocate. While I don't agree with his long term idea, looking at the last 17 years don't really suggest he was all that wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man#mediaviewer/File:Freedom_in_the_world.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last... As to predicting things, the last 50 years have changed things far less than you might expect. 50 years ago we had Jet aircraft, satellites, cars did 80+MPH, computers used silicon transistors, nuclear reactors, H-Bomb, ICBM's, you could talk to people on the other side of the planet. Doctors could easily write a prescription for antibiotics or order an XRay to see what's wrong with you. There where even some video games. As far as peoples day to day lives transistors got really cheap which enabled lot's of stuff. But, the top 500 super computers pull 274 Pflop/s vs 223 Pflop/s the same time last year so that seems to be slowing down. http://www.top500.org/lists/2014/06/ http://www.top500.org/lists/2014/06/ Sure, tech has been improving but most of the tech that's changing peoples lives is actually fairly old. The Internet is about to hit 40, Cat scans are 47, Cellphones are 41, and DNA was discovered 61 years ago. Politicly things have changed a lot less than you might think. Most borders are about where they where 50 years ago, Israel was still having issues with it's neighbors abortion was a major political issue in the US etc etc.