News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Fusion Foolery by onlyrealcuzzo on Thursday August 17, 2023 @11:17AM (#37163009)
There's many reasons to believe that the future is going to be as unrecognizably (mostly) better to us as someone who was born in the 1940s to today.

In the 1940s - cities smelled like sh!t, were so polluted you almost never wanted to go outside, healthcare was still largely snake oil, the average person was still working 10 hours a day 6 days week, human rights outside of straight white christian men were questionable, AND we were in our second world war in 20 years - at the advent of the nuclear bomb.

Look at where we are now.

If you don't see progress, and if you can't see how people back then thought the world was surely coming to an end, and you think it's worse now, I'm honestly amazed.

At no point in time, was progress a up and to the right with no impediments. Every advance we've had, people have worked HARD for. So thank your lucky stars so many people get up every day and keep working for it.

Because it isn't easy. But it's what we do. Always have. Always will.

Eventually, we will reach the physical limits of how good technology can get. But we are laughably far away from that point in so many major aspects of life, that we've got a long way to go before the 10 & 20 year future might not be better.

Re:Fusion Foolery by ifyoubuildit on Thursday August 17, 2023 @11:29AM (#37163203)
That's all well and good, but even if progress continues as you say, you have to worry about powerful people directing that progress ineptly. As we get more advanced, room for mistakes shrinks and we get closer to a great filter situation.
Re:Fusion Foolery by jchonphoenix on Thursday August 17, 2023 @12:24PM (#37164102)
SF still smells
Re:Fusion Foolery by geodel on Thursday August 17, 2023 @01:08PM (#37164882)
You can't really compare past nasty smell with premium high tech NextGen® smelly shit of today.
Re:Fusion Foolery by tarsinge on Thursday August 17, 2023 @12:32PM (#37164261)
The catch is it’s not really progress if it’s not sustainable. It’s like living on debt, it ends up in bankruptcy. Are we really correctly investing the ecological debt for a sustainable better future, or are we just burning through it for short term "progress" and leaving a ruined earth after?

> But it's what we do. Always have. Always will.

You can’t extrapolate from the past because never before in history we had the capacity to have impacts at that scale (e.g. atomic bomb). We are in uncharted territories.

Re:Fusion Foolery by geodel on Thursday August 17, 2023 @01:06PM (#37164850)
Exactly right. Even that verified improvement is limited to very small part of the world
Re:Fusion Foolery by hcurtiss on Thursday August 17, 2023 @02:00PM (#37165639)
But depending on how you define it, our species has never been "sustainable." The very first house clobbered the meadow and mice beneath it, and that one meadow was forever "lost." Yet, we keep finding resources, and alternatives to those resources, and more efficient means of using both. We have been using nonrenewable resources for hundreds (tens of thousands?) of years, and yet we keep finding more. Ehrlich famously lost his bet, and dramatically so! On every objective measure, we live in the very best moment in the history of humanity, and while there will be ups and downs, there is every reason to believe that will be just as true ten years from now and a hundred years from now.

I'm always amused by the doomsaying Malthusians. They're always so confidently wrong.

Re:Fusion Foolery by Turskarama on Thursday August 17, 2023 @07:39PM (#37169770)
The difference here is that for the first time ever we are causing ecological damage on a _global_, rather than local scale.

If you cut down a few trees to build a house then 50 years later the forest will reclaim the land. If you instead cut down the entire forest then that can't happen.

>We have been using nonrenewable resources for hundreds (tens of thousands?) of years, and yet we keep finding more.

Multiple civilisations in the past have collapsed at least in part due to resource shortages. Again though, because none of these civilisations were _global_ the collapse was local and could be recovered from using outside resources.

Re:Fusion Foolery by hcurtiss on Thursday August 17, 2023 @07:51PM (#37169857)
And, barring an eco-religious return to the dark ages, we will soon be an interplanetary species. That sounds fantastic now, but so also did AI fifty years ago. And the moon fifty years before that.
Re:Fusion Foolery by Turskarama on Thursday August 17, 2023 @08:04PM (#37169951)
"Soon" doing a lot of work there. The majority of people vastly underestimate how hard it is to actually build a _productive_ colony (as opposed to a scientific outpost) on another planet/moon/asteroid.

Seriously, we can't even consistently land on the moon but everyone is convinced we're going to have space mines operating by the end of the century. Keep dreaming.

The rate of technological progress has if anything _slowed down_ in the last 50 years. Compare the difference if you look at the 40s vs the 60s, then the 2000s vs the 2020s.

Re:Fusion Foolery by mgfist on Thursday August 17, 2023 @03:23PM (#37166677)
Flip side of that catch is that we're the first generation that can create an emissions free society. It's never been needed before, and it's never been possible before.
Re:Fusion Foolery by ClumsyPilot on Thursday August 17, 2023 @04:05PM (#37167213)
Huh? all of pre-Medieval society was relatively emissions free and infinitely sustainable
Re:Fusion Foolery by onlyrealcuzzo on Thursday August 17, 2023 @08:48PM (#37170246)
It also ran on slavery, pillaging, and war. YMMV
Re:Fusion Foolery by ClumsyPilot on Friday August 18, 2023 @04:49AM (#37172923)
And child abuse and paedophilia.

But i do not see how thats relevant

Re:Fusion Foolery by vaccarium on Friday August 18, 2023 @08:45AM (#37174889)
Ancient Romans did enough pollution to affect the climate. https://www.earth.com/news/roman-activities-cooled-climate/
Re:Fusion Foolery by pfdietz on Thursday August 17, 2023 @04:06PM (#37167218)
To first order, the sustainability problem is the fossil fuel problem. And we're on the way to solving that.
Re:Fusion Foolery by GolfPopper on Thursday August 17, 2023 @07:38PM (#37169766)
A great term along these lines that I recently stumbled across: extinction debt.[1] "In ecology, extinction debt is the future extinction of species due to events in the past. The phrases dead clade walking and survival without recovery express the same idea."

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_debt

Re:Fusion Foolery by geodel on Thursday August 17, 2023 @12:51PM (#37164564)
Most of it is true. But Always have. Always will. seems naive to me. This improvement from 40's is very specific phenomenon in rich western countries. A lot of places I lived in my 3rd world country have become even more hellish shit-hole then they were like 30 years back.

More and more technological solution I see nowadays are the solution to problems technology created in first place.

Re:Fusion Foolery by hcurtiss on Thursday August 17, 2023 @02:04PM (#37165682)
What on earth are you talking about? More people have been pulled out of poverty in the last thirty years than ever in the history of humanity!

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2013/06/01/towards-the-end...

Re:Fusion Foolery by YeGoblynQueenne on Thursday August 17, 2023 @01:34PM (#37165313)
>> Look at where we are now.

In the middle of an environmental crisis? Are we not going to factor that outcome into our measure of progress?

Re:Fusion Foolery by bryanlarsen on Thursday August 17, 2023 @04:45PM (#37167787)
For at least the past 3500 years we've always been in the middle of an environmental crisis. Some of them have decimated populations. Climate change is forecasted to kill 0.1% of the population per year. In a population of 8 billion that's a massive number, but compared relatively to some previous environmental crises that's tiny.
Re:Fusion Foolery by jacquesm on Thursday August 17, 2023 @04:47PM (#37167825)
0.1% of the population on average, but concentrated in particular areas that percentage can go much higher. It's not as if those deaths will be spread out nicely across the world.
Re:Fusion Foolery by AlbertCory on Thursday August 17, 2023 @01:48PM (#37165489)
Arguments like "look how much progress we've made in other areas!" are just Survivor Bias.

You have to prove the analogy, not just state it.

Re:Fusion Foolery by jvm___ on Thursday August 17, 2023 @03:02PM (#37166420)
Half the houses in the USA in 1940 didn't have indoor plumbing. They didn't ask in previous censuses, probably because it wasn't a relevant question which means 50% in 1940 was a climbing number and everything below that was less than 50.

"Plumbing Facilities

In 1990, only 1 percent of our homes lacked complete plumbing facilities. But, things were much different in 1940, when nearly half lacked complete plumbing. Then, about ten States had rates approaching or exceeding 70 percent. In succeeding decades, the proportion of homes lacking complete plumbing dropped dramatically, falling to about one-third in 1950 and one- sixth in 1960. It is interesting to note the States with the lowest percent- age of such homes in 1940 were higher than Alaska, which topped the 1990 list."