esarbe

98 ms·

991.
by esarbe 6y ago
> We also know fossil fuels mostly run out in around 2050-2060. We don't know that, it will just get more expensive to extract it. And given that beneath the ice shelves of the arctic are untapped vast reserves of oil, we cannot eve
992.
by esarbe 6y ago
> maybe some amebas will evolve into something more peaceful that the savages we have become. That's very unlikely. Our behavior is rooted in our biological need to consume resources and reproduce. Our failure to moderate our behavi
993.
by esarbe 6y ago
How many people are going to live there? Supported by what infrastructure? How is the infrastructure going to be maintained? Where are all the machines that you need to repair and replace the infrastructure? Where are the plants to produce
994.
by esarbe 6y ago
It's very likely an existential threat. We're currently on-track for a +5°C increase in temperature by 2050. Besides wreaking havoc to all existing ecosystems, it's also very likely that this will kill off most of the phytopl
995.
by esarbe 6y ago
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proofs.
996.
by esarbe 6y ago
I don't get what you want to say. You don't have to have full control over a complex dynamic system to wreak it. Can you rephrase your argument?
997.
by esarbe 6y ago
Haha, that's funny. Do you remember the Syrian refugee crisis and how it destabilized pretty much all of Europe and how we're still dealing (or failing to deal) with the political consequences of these upheavals? How do 1.5 billio
998.
by esarbe 6y ago
Yeah, that's very true. Things have pretty much been consistently worse than predicted.
999.
by esarbe 6y ago
That's true. I am however very pessimistic about our (as a species) ability to deal with something that's even more long-term than i.e. CFCs or SO2.
1000.
by esarbe 6y ago
The IPCC's 2 degree rise is rather optimistic and -- as others have pointed out -- doesn't take into account feedback loops and tipping points, mostly because the models are not sophisticated enough. Add that to the massive ecosys
1001.
by esarbe 6y ago
> If people stooped buying iphones (just example, not picking on Apple) Apple would stop building them. I think advertisement is a big problem here. The way that advertisement has been weaponized in the last 100 years is astounding. The
1002.
by esarbe 6y ago
Yes, humans are to blame, and corporations are the mechanism. The problem with the "corporation mechanism" is that it absolves people from any moral responsibility, because shareholder values. It's a viscous mechanism that dr
1003.
by esarbe 6y ago
Corporations not people. People have consciousness, emotions, morals, values, friends, lovers, depression, hunger, pain, hopes and dreams. Corporations are not people. Come on, repeat it with me; corporations are not people. Let it sink in,
1004.
by esarbe 6y ago
That's a good point to make.
1005.
by esarbe 6y ago
> I think this marriage between actual environmental concerns and a socialist ideology is the reason of the so called "rejection of science" by the right. I think you're making an important connection here.
1006.
by esarbe 6y ago
Granted; energy production is the source of a huge part of current CO2 emissions. But even if you could magically turn every coal-burning plant into an nuclear plant; you'd still have to account of 73% of carbon emissions from transpor
1007.
by esarbe 6y ago
I'm not convinced. I don't think that local supply chains are a hallmark of right-wing politics. Globalisation and the resulting world-spanning trade agreements were primarily driven by organisations like the WTO. Anti-Nuclear hys
1008.
by esarbe 6y ago
This is bullshit. You don't buy progress with CO2. You buy progress with investments in humans. The only reason to not go carbon neutral right away is that it would hurt the capital class (of which I'm a member).
1009.
by esarbe 6y ago
The problem is that addressing this problem (of global antropogenic climate change ) requires some quite radical changes in the way our society works. And that's not an easy sell. Just take recycling as a similar issue; how do you get
1010.
by esarbe 6y ago
They are unsustainable given the current resource consumption. There's a lot of room for improvement. We only have to make it worthwhile. It's obviously worthwhile, it's about the survival of civilization after all. But appar
1011.
by esarbe 6y ago
That sounds more like an argument for breaking up Apple, Google, etc.
1012.
by esarbe 6y ago
This. So much.
1013.
by esarbe 6y ago
Why not? I mean, seriously. Why cannot the Foundation transfer $245k to the Corporation to help fund salaries of workers? Apparently they can award $245k to an artist, so why cannot they award $245k to a developer? I'm a big fan of Moz
1014.
by esarbe 6y ago
Yeah, you know. This might not be the best move, right after they had to let go so many developers.
1015.
by esarbe 6y ago
> Every single person in the US would be considered privileged by people in nations with extreme poverty (living on less than $1 per day). I agree. I therefore propose we limit this discussion to the US (and possibly western/central
1016.
by esarbe 6y ago
> So again I do not find this law, that is actually on the books to be burdensome You might consider yourself privileged, then. Because there is extensive research about the costs that are associated with voter id laws[0]. > or are yo
1017.
by esarbe 6y ago
Just by the pure fact that you have to invest time and effort to get the necessary documentation, voter ID laws introduce another barrier that will disproportionately affect poor people that might not have the option of just not going to wo
1018.
by esarbe 6y ago
It is voter suppression if it makes voting significantly harder for certain subsets of the population. Voter id laws tend to disenfranchise poor people.
1019.
by esarbe 6y ago
Bah. The powers that be are abusing their influence over the legislative to completely pervert the original intent of the copyright system. I have not problem whatsoever with TPB existing and applaud its continued presence on the web. I gue
1020.
by esarbe 6y ago
The tool of one set of mad men might well be the tool of another set of mad men.

More ›