Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich

Re:Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich by jessriedel on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @01:28PM (#13484280)

Significant controlled influence on the world at large that leads back to a detectable benefit you? Not a chance. The probability of societal meltdown is small, but it's larger than any of our individual impacts. Heck, just the risk of meltdown through accidental nuclear war (easily 0.1%/century, and arguably at least 10 or 100 times that) is already large enough.

This is a question of altruism, or of whether all of these possibilities are too small to be worth spending spending time on.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich by erikpukinskis on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @02:20PM (#13484954)

Why do you think it is so unlikely that you could do some good in your community that would come back to you in a way that makes your own life more stable?

I am pretty sure there are lots of people in my city who are watching my back because of kindnesses I have extended.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich by jessriedel on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @02:29PM (#13485068)

We're talking about civilization / the world, not your local community.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Doomsday Prep for the Super-Rich by erikpukinskis on Wednesday January 25, 2017 @05:13PM (#13486737)

What's the difference? My community is part of the world, so if I change it I change the world.

Also, changing your community is the first step to changing your city, is the first step to changing the region. At each step my same assertion applies: there is a path for having an effect. Consider changing your community "changing the world by induction".

[ Parent | on HN ]