(Untitled)

[languishinghack]

oh man's! it's been exactly a year since i last used this doohickey

new plan: let's play the lj game w/ less emo and more worthwhile

k.. so maybe i don't really have much worthwhile to say, seems like i'm only really good at taking things in, but no so much with the reworking them into something new

--

Comments

[languishinghack]

"I think you'd just get a bounce back to a globalized society relatively quickly"

how? globalization requires shipping on a scale that has only been possible since containerization in the 1960s. without the oil to power ships and railroads, globalized society doesn't happen. sure you might still have trade due to a reemergence of sails and maybe even steam (though the number of trees wouldn't support that for long), but there's no way you could have tomatoes in january like we do now.

"There'd still be the resources for continued innovation"

which ones? peak oil has either already hit or is just about to (depending on who you listen to), and if we replace it all with nuclear, the entire supply of uranium might last 10 years. at best. coal is just ridiculous, and even then, the supplies aren't exactly sustainable. that leaves hydro, solar, and wind. but hydro is also out of the question since we've already hit capacity with it, not to mention the drying up of rivers like the colorado and volga. (nor even to begin to mention the huge environmental catastrophe that is each and every dam) that leaves solar and wind, not a lot of megawatts there, not without drastic infrastructure upgrades at least.

"view of local governance is a mistake"

it's hopeful, but not a mistake.

[nekokaze]

I'm using your imaginary world. You're the one who specified power would be available, albeit on a limited scale. Humanity is not particularly known for giving control of its environment to fate just because to not do so is time consuming, difficult, and potentially wasteful. What I mean is people tend to be better at figuring out the impossible than anyone would ever expect. If they have evidence of past achievement this is probably even more true. By "relatively quickly" I may mean a century, but given enough time with minimal power extravagant things can be done. I mean I could certainly be wrong or overly optimistic about lengths of time but to forecast against past evidence indefinitely into the future seems more wrong and overly .... well, optimistic or pessimistic depending on your view.

To be hopeful beyond all reality is to be mistaken in my mind. It's a sort mistake you can easily live with, but also the type you should be aware of.

[languishinghack]

if people are so keen at averting disaster and adapting, why does our entire economy still rely on unsustainable practices and resources when we know full well that they are not sustainable.

humanity as a whole may be awesome, but the driving force today are multinational corporations with an eye out for the next quarter's earning and no further.

by the time shit hits the fan and everyone catches on to the fact that those in charge are not looking out for the interests of humanity, there won't be any manufacturing left to produce "miraculous technology" that will save the day and everyone's lifestyle

[nekokaze]

Oh, anyone who thinks otherwise of companies is foolish, and anyone who expects otherwise is naive. (Basically morality is sort of an intractable thing when applied to a non-person entity given the rights of a person.)

Really what I mean is that A) something will be found by those who are plugging away now (but this is a "who knows!!!" sort of thing) B) the panic towards a crash will make a critical research mass to create change (but yes, resources may constrain this) or C) people over a long time with limited resources will overcome those limited resources (although this takes significant amounts of time). Like if you understand the caveats I don't think any of these are really unreasonable (unless you're one of those people who think there's some extra law of thermodynamics that says that no solution to power exists because despite the amount of structured energy in the universe there's not enough to give a little species its desires).

Changes

[languishinghack]

Changes are actually occuring. Possibly too slowly, but they are. There really is a shift in mentality going on, at this point, at least in the US and other places. Hopefully that will continue.

Many corporations are changing as well. It is beginning to pay off to have integrity and be more environmentally sound. At least for companies based in first world nations.

Hmm, wealth disparity and industrializations... that is an interesting topic.

Re: Changes

[azzil]

grack... me again

Steam

[azzil]

Steam would use coal, not trees, for the most part.