uv-depression

6 ms·

1.
by uv-depression 7d ago
> not all people are able bodied, able, or willing to use public transit. Not all people are able bodied, able, or willing to use cars. Cars are killing tens of thousands a year while destroying the environment. > while going on publi
2.
by uv-depression 7d ago
Private houses aren't killing tens of thousands a year.
3.
by uv-depression 7d ago
You put the trains where the people are, not in the middle of vast unpopulated stretches. Comparing land area is misleading and unhelpful.
4.
by uv-depression 7d ago
Yeah, most places other than the US do. Good public transit is a far, far better solution than better cars. Elsewhere in the thread people are talking about ways of convincing drunk people to get their cars to drive them, and don't see
5.
by uv-depression 17d ago
> I'm saying asking people to sacrifice will both be rejected and will not do enough, and that the only answer is changing where we get energy. But energy source isn't the only problem. The problem is partially that energy use
6.
by uv-depression 17d ago
Perhaps instead of using one of the hallucination machines that's aggravating the climate crisis, you could have done some research: https://www.iea.org/commentaries/the-worlds-top-1-of-emitter... > Globally, t
7.
by uv-depression 17d ago
This is a gross misunderstanding of what degrowth means. The fantasy is that an economic system predicated on infinite growth can be made compatible with finite resources. Take, for example, the fact that renewable energy keeps growing as a
8.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
> we get to freely use all the godlike AIs Accepting for the sake of argument the absurd notion that LLMs are anywhere near AGI, does this phrasing not concern you? It deeply concerns me.
9.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
(1) Considering there are now multiple companies planning to launch their own fleets of tens of thousands, satellites need replacing, etc, even if this was completely accurate, this will be a continuous and ongoing issue as it has been for
10.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
Have you never been there? This light pollution map wildly underestimates light pollution outside of cities. I can tell you from experience you're not getting nearly 22 mpsas skies anywhere near Pemberton.
11.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
I can't just casually hop up to the Yukon for an evening of astronomy. It's about a thirty hour drive. Even relatively small towns have exurbs now because of our terrible city planning, so light pollution extends shockingly far. A
12.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
There isn't a single "dark side" of the moon that's always in darkness, the "dark side" of the moon is the side that always faces away from us (poor choice of name). It's fully illuminated during a new moo
13.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
Greenhouses here in the lower mainland of British Columbia have been devastating to the night sky. It's quite depressing how little society values the night sky, something that's been an important part of every human culture for l
14.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
Nonsense, but you clearly either haven't read my replies or don't understand that capitalism requires growth while some other economic systems don't. Even 1% growth per year is exponential growth and quickly will run into lim
15.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
You're arguing against "degrowthers", favouring the current growth-based system. What you're arguing for is a system that requires the infinite growth you don't want to think about. So in essence you're saying
16.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
You're right; sunlight will eventually run out. (Well, long before that the expanding Sun will boil the oceans). No, you couldn't have an economy in a closed system, but the Earth isn't a closed system (due to the aforement
17.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
What? Some resources are renewable. There's a finite amount of solar energy, but it doesn't "run out" (on human timescales). Growing food doesn't need to remove from the biosphere, even if the way we do it now does
18.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
If physical goods remain a constant proportion of the economy without having more of them but get more expensive, all that's happening is inflation, not economic growth.
19.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
But the claim must be that physical goods can become an arbitrarily small portion of the economy. Nobody would dispute that they've become smaller. Do you believe that food can become arbitrarily cheap relative to total wealth? Or st
20.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
You're making a very strong claim ("literally zero sense"), but you've provided no argument as to why. I don't believe that the economy can become arbitrarily decoupled from physical goods, which is a hard requireme
21.
by uv-depression 2mo ago
To believe this, you must believe that the economy can become arbitrarily decoupled from any physical good. Do you believe that food can become an arbitrarily small proportion of the economy (and so arbitrarily cheap relative to income)? St
22.
by uv-depression 6mo ago
But it objectively makes cities worse. People love visiting Europe in part because they don't do this to nearly the same extent (obviously this varies by country/city). People aren't entitled to not having their opinions be p
23.
by uv-depression 6mo ago
Americans will vehemently deny this, but you're absolutely right. Decades of car industry propaganda has convinced people that the ability to drive anywhere is true freedom, and they can't see that the freedom not to need a car (a
24.
by uv-depression 7mo ago
> With frontier LLM agents, the digital loop is happening now to an extent I see no evidence of this, just a lot of people claiming it (very loudly, for the most part). > that extent probably grows larger (research automation) soon Th
25.
by uv-depression 7mo ago
> what experiments it would do within that space are hard for us to imagine The only thing you could do in a "digital space" (a.k.a. on a computer) is a simulation. Simulations are extremely useful and help significantly with d
26.
by uv-depression 7mo ago
> I think that when the singularity occurs all of the problems in physics will solve, like in a vacuum, and physics will advance centuries if not millennia in a few pico-seconds It doesn't matter how smart you are, you still need t
27.
by uv-depression 8mo ago
> My point is is that if leftists cannot talk about immigration policy in a nuanced way Does nuance mean agreeing to your framing of a situation? If so, I guess not. That's not what it means to me. > a naive idealist Insults aren
28.
by uv-depression 8mo ago
Is that what I said?
29.
by uv-depression 8mo ago
How else am I to interpret someone seeing a group of people working low wage jobs and concluding that everyone from their country is a bad influence? > will only drive people towards right-wing extremists The right talks a big game about
30.
by uv-depression 8mo ago
> Questioning immigration policy is not racism. Anti-Indian sentiment [ justification for said sentiment ] Wild sequence of sentences. > is now widely agreed has contributed to a noticeable decline in the quality of life for all. Cita

More ›