Bitcoin Forum
July 18, 2018, 07:04:44 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]
  Print  
Author Topic: Thirty seconds to live  (Read 2455 times)
usagi
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 1000


13


View Profile
January 12, 2013, 05:20:04 AM
 #1

Stop me if you've heard this one. There are a bunch of bacteria in a bottle and they double in number every minute. The bacteria are really small of course, but the bottle is expected to fill up after just 24 hours of growth. So one bacteria says to the other, "ahh, there's so much room in this bottle. Why, I look around me and I see that there is so much free and open space! Why, for every manbacteria womanbacteria and childbacteria in our bottle, there is enough land for ten!" and the other bacteria says "yes, that's true. What a wonderful place to live. Oh, I'm late for work, what time is it?" and the first bacteria says, "it's 11:56 pm.. four minutes before midnight".

Now, it should be mentioned, each bacteria only lives for one minute. After their minute is up, they shuffle off their mortal coil.

Three minutes and thirty seconds later, the current crop of bacteria are having a meeting. They look around. The bottle is about 75% full. However all the bacteria have started to become nervous because they can see and recognize they are running out of space. A giant effort is launched and the bacteria send out scout ships in the lab and luckily find an entire whole new bottle to populate. Celebrations are made, parties are thrown, and the new bottle is annexed in the name of bacteria-dom. All is good.

Then strangely, in the same generation, the bacteria which were teenagers during the first crisis, now old, see the same crisis repeating only this time it is approaching twice as quickly, and they are at a loss for a solution. It becomes apparent to them that their children will no longer be able to reproduce or the bottles will break and everyone will die. In a panic, having babies is made a crime.

Over the next several minutes, 90% of the population in both bottles dies. Many call the problem resolved, and the ban on babies is removed. But just a few generations later, the grandchildren of all children at the time of the ban being lifted find themselves facing the same problem. This time no one is able to react and there comes a food shortage; and as food is only added to the bottle each minute 99.99% of all the bacteria starve to death. Only a very small fraction is left in the bottle to start civilization anew.

Stop me if you've heard this before. The world population growth rate is just over 1%. Which means that it doubles in the span of one human lifetime. It's been stated that the upper limit on sustainable human population is between 10 and 12 billion. In fact, "According to UN's 2010 revision to its population projections, world population will peak at 10.1bn in 2100 compared to 7bn in 2011." (-wikipedia 'population growth').

So here we are at 7.5 billion people. The bottle is 75% full. But in stark contrast to the bacteria of the bottle most people I talk to have absolutely no idea of the need to find an entirely new planet to inhabit within our generation just so that our children can gnash their teeth at the hell they will have to go through of being forbidden to reproduce. It's either that or we need to put a worldwide ban on population growth now. Failing to do so will cause it to happen naturally (or worse, break the bottle).

I wonder what the UN is planning. A population growth rate of 1% implies a population of 17 or 18 billion in 2100 -- not 10 billion. Their figures do not make sense. The crisis will not come in 2100. It will come in our lifetimes.
1531940684
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531940684

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531940684
Reply with quote  #2

1531940684
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1531940684
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1531940684

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1531940684
Reply with quote  #2

1531940684
Report to moderator
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
January 12, 2013, 05:26:28 AM
 #2

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246
Merit: 1001


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
January 12, 2013, 05:34:00 AM
 #3

I'm convinced, we need more bottles for sure.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Grant
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100


View Profile
January 12, 2013, 05:46:38 AM
 #4

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

+1
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001


Academy


View Profile WWW
January 12, 2013, 06:46:18 AM
 #5

Karl Marx saw this exact same problem, when he saw that we do not have enough tractors and enough farmers to produce all the food needed to feed all the people that will soon be born (and the world population was only around 1 billion back then). He saw the exact same issue, and had the exact same concerns as you, and that was one of his main reasons for coming up with the solution he called communism.
Of course, 100 years later we have robotic tractors that require very few farmers to operate, and advances in chemicals and genetics that allow us to grow much more food from the same amount of space. Don't forget, we have barely tapped the power of the sun. Worst comes to worse, we'll all live off solar panels, and eat algae grown in vats in the sun. As others have said, still plenty of space here.

MysteryMiner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 12, 2013, 07:02:36 AM
 #6

Most of european nations have negative growth, some nations can disappear in next 100 years. If there is too much people in other countries or continents it is their problem, not ours! If they want to migrate to our bottle, well nothing a FAL FN or MG-42 cant solve!

Globally yes, the problem of human population is growing, locally we lost about million of people, roughly a 33% of our population. If accounted for whole country a large city is depopulated because more people die than are born. This is unaccounting the people who emigrated seeking adequately paid jobs elsewhere.

Do not trust commercial VPN to save You from oppressive government! Get VPN service offered by a real cyber-dissenter https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4426691.0

1PG5HMwN51j8xYHKVFv9h1Tw4Jzc3fWXw3
gabbergabe
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42
Merit: 0


Some songs just take you back..


View Profile WWW
January 12, 2013, 07:58:43 AM
 #7

Stop me if you've heard this one. There are a bunch of bacteria in a bottle and they double in number every minute. The bacteria are really small of course, but the bottle is expected to fill up after just 24 hours of growth. So one bacteria says to the other, "ahh, there's so much room in this bottle. Why, I look around me and I see that there is so much free and open space! Why, for every manbacteria womanbacteria and childbacteria in our bottle, there is enough land for ten!" and the other bacteria says "yes, that's true. What a wonderful place to live. Oh, I'm late for work, what time is it?" and the first bacteria says, "it's 11:56 pm.. four minutes before midnight".

Now, it should be mentioned, each bacteria only lives for one minute. After their minute is up, they shuffle off their mortal coil.

Three minutes and thirty seconds later, the current crop of bacteria are having a meeting. They look around. The bottle is about 75% full. However all the bacteria have started to become nervous because they can see and recognize they are running out of space. A giant effort is launched and the bacteria send out scout ships in the lab and luckily find an entire whole new bottle to populate. Celebrations are made, parties are thrown, and the new bottle is annexed in the name of bacteria-dom. All is good.

Then strangely, in the same generation, the bacteria which were teenagers during the first crisis, now old, see the same crisis repeating only this time it is approaching twice as quickly, and they are at a loss for a solution. It becomes apparent to them that their children will no longer be able to reproduce or the bottles will break and everyone will die. In a panic, having babies is made a crime.

Over the next several minutes, 90% of the population in both bottles dies. Many call the problem resolved, and the ban on babies is removed. But just a few generations later, the grandchildren of all children at the time of the ban being lifted find themselves facing the same problem. This time no one is able to react and there comes a food shortage; and as food is only added to the bottle each minute 99.99% of all the bacteria starve to death. Only a very small fraction is left in the bottle to start civilization anew.

Stop me if you've heard this before. The world population growth rate is just over 1%. Which means that it doubles in the span of one human lifetime. It's been stated that the upper limit on sustainable human population is between 10 and 12 billion. In fact, "According to UN's 2010 revision to its population projections, world population will peak at 10.1bn in 2100 compared to 7bn in 2011." (-wikipedia 'population growth').

So here we are at 7.5 billion people. The bottle is 75% full. But in stark contrast to the bacteria of the bottle most people I talk to have absolutely no idea of the need to find an entirely new planet to inhabit within our generation just so that our children can gnash their teeth at the hell they will have to go through of being forbidden to reproduce. It's either that or we need to put a worldwide ban on population growth now. Failing to do so will cause it to happen naturally (or worse, break the bottle).

I wonder what the UN is planning. A population growth rate of 1% implies a population of 17 or 18 billion in 2100 -- not 10 billion. Their figures do not make sense. The crisis will not come in 2100. It will come in our lifetimes.

As a child this is what I hoped and expected from sea monkeys. You know the packet of micrscopic type of shrimp.They package all badass of course making you assume as a child that this is what your in for. Sadley  though not true. If your wondering what im talking about search youtube for southparks episode they did on it.

Check out my soundcloud and help support up and coming EDM artists like myself!!  soundcloud.com/killvisionseattle  and if you would like to donate and help support please do thank you so much!!!
15yVnpEZhDFX89EpvPc2s3qK5owNe8pihk
benjamindees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 12, 2013, 12:21:17 PM
 #8

Why Malthus got his Forecast Wrong

At the level of currently-economical renewable energy technologies, you consume the equivalent of approximately 20 acres worth of sunlight, in fossil fuels.  Fossil fuels won't last forever.

In the US, with relatively low population density, there are only approximately 6.5 acres per capita.

You can choose to fill the gap with land, with water, with investment in renewable energy technologies (both economical and uneconomical), or with some 80-odd human slaves.

But you will have to fill the gap, or accept lower energy consumption (and a likely lower standard of living), regardless, before the fossil fuels run out.

100 years later we have robotic tractors that require very few farmers to operate, and advances in chemicals and genetics that allow us to grow much more food from the same amount of space.

And we have a quasi-socialist mixed economy to manage them, just as Marx predicted.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
January 12, 2013, 03:37:39 PM
 #9

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

True.  Without nuclear energy we have already passed the carrying capacity of the earth.  If we keep using polluting fresh water (with mercury) and keep polluting the air at this rate we will start to die off from disease at a faster rate.   With nuclear we can have a much higher population without damaging the earth to the point where it damages us back. 

Akka
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1204
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 12, 2013, 03:50:34 PM
 #10

This is oversimplified.

We basically have already 206 bottles, which are on average filled to ~75%.

Some of them are only filled 25%, while others are filled by over a 100% and can only survive by getting resources from other bottles.

The interesting part will begin when the average comes near to a 100%, while some bottles are still <50%. That will be fun.

All previous versions of currency will no longer be supported as of this update
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2520
Merit: 1006



View Profile
January 12, 2013, 04:03:31 PM
 #11

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

At the same time there will be limiting factors: the rubber tension and pressure within is rising on inflation of the balloon.

This will lower the rate of reproduction / survival of offspring until reproduction.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
wachtwoord
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1694
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 12, 2013, 04:14:10 PM
 #12

It's not primarily room to live but lack of resources (especially water) that will become a problem. I am convinced there will be wars over sources of water in my lifetime. This does not mean I will be in physical danger as I had the luck to be born in a wealth country (lowering the chances I'll be in harms way).
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
January 12, 2013, 09:18:19 PM
 #13

and eat algae

but SOYLENT GREEN IS PEOPLE !!!1!  Angry

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
foggyb
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 12, 2013, 09:21:20 PM
 #14

Overpopulation: The Perennial Myth
SEPTEMBER 01, 1993 by DAVID OSTERFELD

http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/overpopulation-the-perennial-myth/
DoomDumas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1001
Merit: 1000


Bitcoin forever !


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2013, 04:04:33 AM
 #15

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

+1

On that one, I'm fully with Myrkul !

Technology can bring the carrying capacity of the earth well beyond we think possible.

The monetary system and corrupted values that it promotes make the actual "beleived carying capacity" !

Capitalism puts breaks on technological advancement, and whitout those outdated-capitalist constraint, we could have 100x more effectiver solar panel, lab grown meat that is exactly the same as the actual meat we eat, cure for cancer... etc..

Remove $ and we can more than double the carrying capacity of the earth.  We are not short on space to live, we are short on food and energy, because of the $ system.
DoomDumas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1001
Merit: 1000


Bitcoin forever !


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2013, 04:10:57 AM
 #16

Why Malthus got his Forecast Wrong

At the level of currently-economical renewable energy technologies, you consume the equivalent of approximately 20 acres worth of sunlight, in fossil fuels.  Fossil fuels won't last forever.

In the US, with relatively low population density, there are only approximately 6.5 acres per capita.

You can choose to fill the gap with land, with water, with investment in renewable energy technologies (both economical and uneconomical), or with some 80-odd human slaves.

But you will have to fill the gap, or accept lower energy consumption (and a likely lower standard of living), regardless, before the fossil fuels run out.

100 years later we have robotic tractors that require very few farmers to operate, and advances in chemicals and genetics that allow us to grow much more food from the same amount of space.

And we have a quasi-socialist mixed economy to manage them, just as Marx predicted.

Remove the word economy from your tought : problem solved.  Solar panels more than double production per square inch, every year.. those technology are just not economicaly viable.. so remove the actual monetary sytem = problems solved !
Beans
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 492
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
January 13, 2013, 04:13:33 AM
 #17

It's disturbing reading posts from people who think our current reproduction rates are sustainable in the long term. I would prefer giving everyone the right to have one child, along with the ability to sell the rights to someone else. It would decrease poverty as well. If we wait until nature does it for us, there won't be much nature left.

DoomDumas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1001
Merit: 1000


Bitcoin forever !


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2013, 04:15:34 AM
 #18

It's not primarily room to live but lack of resources (especially water) that will become a problem. I am convinced there will be wars over sources of water in my lifetime. This does not mean I will be in physical danger as I had the luck to be born in a wealth country (lowering the chances I'll be in harms way).

desalination and distilation of water = problem solved

Thanks to human knowledge and well applied science !
myrkul
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 532
Merit: 500


FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2013, 04:18:48 AM
 #19

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

+1

On that one, I'm fully with Myrkul !

Technology can bring the carrying capacity of the earth well beyond we think possible.
You had me right up to here.

The monetary system and corrupted values that it promotes make the actual "beleived carying capacity" !
Now, when you say "monetary system," do you mean the debt-as-money the world runs on now, or sound money, as well?

Capitalism puts breaks on technological advancement, and whitout those outdated-capitalist constraint, we could have 100x more effectiver solar panel, lab grown meat that is exactly the same as the actual meat we eat, cure for cancer... etc..
Capitalism drives progress. Every time capitalism is suppressed, progress is stagnated.

Remove $ and we can more than double the carrying capacity of the earth.  We are not short on space to live, we are short on food and energy, because of the $ system.
Could you please explain how money limits food and energy artificially?

BTC1MYRkuLv4XPBa6bGnYAronz55grPAGcxja
Need Dispute resolution? Public Key ID: 0x11D341CF
No person has the right to initiate force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. VIM VI REPELLERE LICET
usagi
VIP
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 812
Merit: 1000


13


View Profile
January 13, 2013, 05:04:53 AM
 #20

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

+1

On that one, I'm fully with Myrkul !

Technology can bring the carrying capacity of the earth well beyond we think possible.
You had me right up to here.

The monetary system and corrupted values that it promotes make the actual "beleived carying capacity" !
Now, when you say "monetary system," do you mean the debt-as-money the world runs on now, or sound money, as well?

Capitalism puts breaks on technological advancement, and whitout those outdated-capitalist constraint, we could have 100x more effectiver solar panel, lab grown meat that is exactly the same as the actual meat we eat, cure for cancer... etc..
Capitalism drives progress. Every time capitalism is suppressed, progress is stagnated.

Remove $ and we can more than double the carrying capacity of the earth.  We are not short on space to live, we are short on food and energy, because of the $ system.
Could you please explain how money limits food and energy artificially?

I agree, that technology can increase the carrying capacity of the earth. But that is in fact my point -- technology has (and may continue to) increase the carrying capacity of the earth.

But technology requires energy. For example take some supercomplex cryptography algorithm where brute force is written off because solving it would take more energy than exists in the solar system. It's like that. How can we use technology to solve the world's ills when there is not enough energy to apply that technology all over the world? There are going to be serious issues even if we transition to solar right now, because it costs more energy to build a solar panel using today's technology that will be realized by said solar panel in it's lifetime. The reason why it feels cheap now, is because of the reliance on fossil fuels which are a diminishing resource.

I don't know how to solve this problem.
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680
Merit: 1001


Academy


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2013, 07:05:59 AM
 #21

Easy: continue to make our technologies more energy efficient, as we have been throughout our existence. Our cars went from 5 miles per gallon to 50, or lightbulbs went from 100 watts to 10, our computers went from taking up buildings and using up kilowatts of power to fitting in our hands and using a fraction of power, etc. And we have yet to start seriously using our natural gas reserves, nuclear power is still practically in the "dirty coal-powered stream engine" stage, solar is still only beginning to be explored (I like where advances in solar stirling engines is going), and we have yet to tap into fusion power. We still have a very long way to go.

molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2520
Merit: 1006



View Profile
January 13, 2013, 08:05:27 AM
 #22

It's disturbing reading posts from people who think our current reproduction rates are sustainable in the long term. I would prefer giving everyone the right to have one child, along with the ability to sell the rights to someone else. It would decrease poverty as well. If we wait until nature does it for us, there won't be much nature left.

Now this, my man, is an idea worth thinking about.

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
Schleicher
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 673
Merit: 500



View Profile
January 13, 2013, 06:44:25 PM
 #23

There are going to be serious issues even if we transition to solar right now, because it costs more energy to build a solar panel using today's technology that will be realized by said solar panel in it's lifetime.
No, that's not true.
Energy payback time is less than 2 years for european panels. For chinese panels a little bit more.

hashman
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 1010
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 14, 2013, 10:29:20 AM
 #24


...the hell they will have to go through of being forbidden to reproduce.



Eh?  I think most people would disagree with you about "that hell", though of course "forbidden" is never a nice thing.   

Remember the ultimate punishment described for original sin: go forth and multiply.
Notice also that birth rate tends to drop in places with higher consumer surplus. 
Other than that, yeah this is a discussion worth having.


Quote
and advances in chemicals and genetics that allow us to grow much more food from the same amount of space.

I wish you were right about this one.  Unfortunately it looks like the chemicals and genetics are instead often used to keep food out of peoples hands (Terminator genes, desertification, crops requiring more expensive chemical purchases) in the usual attempt to "make very rich people even richer".  American agricultural science thousands of years ago was more advanced. 




████ ████ ████████████▄▄▄               
█  █ █  █ ██          ▀▀▀▀██▄▄         
████ ████ ██████████▄▄▄▄    ▀▀█▄       
██   ██           ▀▀▀▀▀██▄▄   ▀█▄     
██   ██  █████████▄▄▄    ▀▀█▄   ▀█▄   
██   ██  ██      ▀▀▀▀██▄▄   ▀█▄   █▌   
██   ██  ██            ▀▀█▄  ▀█▌   █▌ 
██   ██  ██   ██████▄▄    ██  ▐█    █ 
██   ██  ██   ██   ▀▀▀█▌   █▌  ▐▌   █▌
██   ██  ██   ██      ▐█   ▐█   █   ▐█
██   ██  ██   ██       █▌   █▌  █   ▐█▌
██   ██  ███████      ▐█   ▐█  ▐█   ▐█
██   ██              ▄█▌   █▌  █▌   █▌
██   ███████████████▀▀    ▄█  ██    █ 
██                      ▄█▀  ▄█    █▌ 
████████████████████████▀  ▄█▀    █▌   
▄▄▄▄                      ▄█▀    ▄█▀   
█  ██████████████████████▀▀    ▄█▀     
▀▀▀▀                        ▄▄█▀       
▄▄▄▄                 ▄▄▄▄▄█▀▀           
█  ████████████████████▀▀               
▀▀▀▀                                   

       JOIN OUR TOKEN SALE       

FACEBOOK   TWITTER   LINKEDIN   GITHUB   ONE PAGER
rudrigorc2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1064
Merit: 1000



View Profile
January 14, 2013, 10:45:46 AM
 #25

Quote
advances in chemicals and genetics that allow us to grow much more food from the same amount of space.

I am sure using this has HUGE drawbacks but I just cant explain it. and sooner or later the nature will charge us very bad because of this unbalanced techniques. especially if by genetics you mean transgenics.
wachtwoord
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1694
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 16, 2013, 06:50:59 PM
 #26

Nature isn't a living entity, it cannot charge or do anything  Roll Eyes. Transgenesis is great and all genetic modification sciences could have been much further along if it wasn't for big influential groups (primarily religious) in the western world that lobby to slow it down. They use bogus arguments like yours. These groups piss me off.
foggyb
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1372
Merit: 1000


View Profile
January 19, 2013, 11:44:24 PM
 #27

There are going to be serious issues even if we transition to solar right now, because it costs more energy to build a solar panel using today's technology that will be realized by said solar panel in it's lifetime.
No, that's not true.
Energy payback time is less than 2 years for european panels. For chinese panels a little bit more.

It is very likely that solar panel efficiencies will continue to improve. Along with other energy technologies.

I believe global cheap electricity is coming soon.
Richy_T
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000


1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


View Profile
January 20, 2013, 09:37:15 PM
 #28

Colonizing other planets is not a solution to population problems (real or imagined) on earth.

Not that it's not a good idea for other reasons.

1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k
The Fool
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 21, 2013, 08:49:07 AM
 #29

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

+1

On that one, I'm fully with Myrkul !

Technology can bring the carrying capacity of the earth well beyond we think possible.
You had me right up to here.

The monetary system and corrupted values that it promotes make the actual "beleived carying capacity" !
Now, when you say "monetary system," do you mean the debt-as-money the world runs on now, or sound money, as well?

Capitalism puts breaks on technological advancement, and whitout those outdated-capitalist constraint, we could have 100x more effectiver solar panel, lab grown meat that is exactly the same as the actual meat we eat, cure for cancer... etc..
Capitalism drives progress. Every time capitalism is suppressed, progress is stagnated.

Remove $ and we can more than double the carrying capacity of the earth.  We are not short on space to live, we are short on food and energy, because of the $ system.
Could you please explain how money limits food and energy artificially?

I agree, that technology can increase the carrying capacity of the earth. But that is in fact my point -- technology has (and may continue to) increase the carrying capacity of the earth.

But technology requires energy. For example take some supercomplex cryptography algorithm where brute force is written off because solving it would take more energy than exists in the solar system. It's like that. How can we use technology to solve the world's ills when there is not enough energy to apply that technology all over the world? There are going to be serious issues even if we transition to solar right now, because it costs more energy to build a solar panel using today's technology that will be realized by said solar panel in it's lifetime. The reason why it feels cheap now, is because of the reliance on fossil fuels which are a diminishing resource.

I don't know how to solve this problem.

You increase the productional output of one watt of electricity. You make things more efficient.
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 04, 2015, 01:01:27 PM
 #30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z760XNy4VM
Mouse utopia

         ▄█▄  ▄▄▄▄
          ▀ ▄██████▄
    ▄▄▄   ▄███▀▀███
  ▄█████▄ ▀█▀ ███▄ ▀▀
 ███▀  ▀██▄    ████▄   
 █▀ ▄██▄ ▀█▀ ▄██▀ ▀█▀ ▄██
  ▄██▀     ▄██▀     ▄██▀
 ██▀ ▄█▄ ▄██▀ ▄█▄  ██▀ ▄▄
      ▀███▀    ▀██▄  ▄██▀
     ▄▄ ▀██▄ ▄█▄ ▀█████▀
     ███▄▄██▀   ▀▀
      ▀██████▀
        ▀▀▀▀   ██▀

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █


▄███▄    ▄███▄
███  ██▄ █▀▀▄
████████  ███▀
██▀ ▄███      
████████▄▄  ▄█▀
 ██████▀▀██▀▀
  ▀███▀▄▄   ▄
   ▀██▄██ ▄█▀
     ▀▀██▀▀
FULLY
ANONYMOUS

━━━━━
/

    ██▄▄              ▄▄██
   █▀  ▀█▄ ▄▄▄▄████▄██▀  ▀█
  █▀   ▄███▀▀▀       █▄   ▀█
 █▀   ▄███▄ ▄▄█▄▄     █▄   ▀█
██▄  ▄████████████▄▄  █▄  ▄██
  ▀▀██▀███████████████▄███▀▀
      ▀█▄█▀███████████▀▀
        ▀███▀███████▀
           ▀▀▀▀██▀▀
INSTANT
TRANSFER

━━━━
/

     ▄████▄
 ▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▀██▀ ▀█  ▀█ ███▀
 ██ ▀ █ ▀▄█ ███
▄██▄█▄█▄███▄███▄
▀██████████████▀
 ▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
     ▀████▀
API FOR YOUR
PROJECTS

━━━━

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █
PARTNER PROGRAM
TOR MIRROR
MIX WALLET
.FAQ
ANN THREAD
TELEGRAM
leen93
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 490
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
April 04, 2015, 01:08:11 PM
 #31

Stop me if you've heard this one. There are a bunch of bacteria in a bottle and they double in number every minute. The bacteria are really small of course, but the bottle is expected to fill up after just 24 hours of growth. So one bacteria says to the other, "ahh, there's so much room in this bottle. Why, I look around me and I see that there is so much free and open space! Why, for every manbacteria womanbacteria and childbacteria in our bottle, there is enough land for ten!" and the other bacteria says "yes, that's true. What a wonderful place to live. Oh, I'm late for work, what time is it?" and the first bacteria says, "it's 11:56 pm.. four minutes before midnight".

Now, it should be mentioned, each bacteria only lives for one minute. After their minute is up, they shuffle off their mortal coil.

Three minutes and thirty seconds later, the current crop of bacteria are having a meeting. They look around. The bottle is about 75% full. However all the bacteria have started to become nervous because they can see and recognize they are running out of space. A giant effort is launched and the bacteria send out scout ships in the lab and luckily find an entire whole new bottle to populate. Celebrations are made, parties are thrown, and the new bottle is annexed in the name of bacteria-dom. All is good.

Then strangely, in the same generation, the bacteria which were teenagers during the first crisis, now old, see the same crisis repeating only this time it is approaching twice as quickly, and they are at a loss for a solution. It becomes apparent to them that their children will no longer be able to reproduce or the bottles will break and everyone will die. In a panic, having babies is made a crime.

Over the next several minutes, 90% of the population in both bottles dies. Many call the problem resolved, and the ban on babies is removed. But just a few generations later, the grandchildren of all children at the time of the ban being lifted find themselves facing the same problem. This time no one is able to react and there comes a food shortage; and as food is only added to the bottle each minute 99.99% of all the bacteria starve to death. Only a very small fraction is left in the bottle to start civilization anew.

Stop me if you've heard this before. The world population growth rate is just over 1%. Which means that it doubles in the span of one human lifetime. It's been stated that the upper limit on sustainable human population is between 10 and 12 billion. In fact, "According to UN's 2010 revision to its population projections, world population will peak at 10.1bn in 2100 compared to 7bn in 2011." (-wikipedia 'population growth').

So here we are at 7.5 billion people. The bottle is 75% full. But in stark contrast to the bacteria of the bottle most people I talk to have absolutely no idea of the need to find an entirely new planet to inhabit within our generation just so that our children can gnash their teeth at the hell they will have to go through of being forbidden to reproduce. It's either that or we need to put a worldwide ban on population growth now. Failing to do so will cause it to happen naturally (or worse, break the bottle).

I wonder what the UN is planning. A population growth rate of 1% implies a population of 17 or 18 billion in 2100 -- not 10 billion. Their figures do not make sense. The crisis will not come in 2100. It will come in our lifetimes.
we'll not keep that 1%  Cheesy You'll never see over 10 billion people in your life  Grin


1BROKER.com ❰⊗❱ Buy stocks ✔ Commodities ✔ Forex!!!! ✔✔✔

███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
Spendulus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946
Merit: 1011



View Profile
April 04, 2015, 01:15:56 PM
 #32

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.

+1

On that one, I'm fully with Myrkul !

Technology can bring the carrying capacity of the earth well beyond we think possible.
You had me right up to here.

The monetary system and corrupted values that it promotes make the actual "beleived carying capacity" !
Now, when you say "monetary system," do you mean the debt-as-money the world runs on now, or sound money, as well?

Capitalism puts breaks on technological advancement, and whitout those outdated-capitalist constraint, we could have 100x more effectiver solar panel, lab grown meat that is exactly the same as the actual meat we eat, cure for cancer... etc..
Capitalism drives progress. Every time capitalism is suppressed, progress is stagnated.

Remove $ and we can more than double the carrying capacity of the earth.  We are not short on space to live, we are short on food and energy, because of the $ system.
Could you please explain how money limits food and energy artificially?

I agree, that technology can increase the carrying capacity of the earth. But that is in fact my point -- technology has (and may continue to) increase the carrying capacity of the earth.

But technology requires energy. For example take some supercomplex cryptography algorithm where brute force is written off because solving it would take more energy than exists in the solar system. It's like that. How can we use technology to solve the world's ills when there is not enough energy to apply that technology all over the world? There are going to be serious issues even if we transition to solar right now, because it costs more energy to build a solar panel using today's technology that will be realized by said solar panel in it's lifetime. The reason why it feels cheap now, is because of the reliance on fossil fuels which are a diminishing resource.

I don't know how to solve this problem.
A famous economist named Julian Simon studied resources and resource depletion, and laid bets with Paul Erlich on the subject.  He won, of course.

One of his most famous comments, was that the only scarce resource which was in danger of becoming scarcer was human intelligence, talent and skill applied to practical problems...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Simon
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 04, 2015, 01:19:37 PM
 #33

In the mouse utopia experiment, with increasing population resulted in less care being given from parent to offspring, resulting in more violent behavior and overall less intelligence (in the conventional sense). It wasn't a lack of resources that led to their undoing, but themselves.

         ▄█▄  ▄▄▄▄
          ▀ ▄██████▄
    ▄▄▄   ▄███▀▀███
  ▄█████▄ ▀█▀ ███▄ ▀▀
 ███▀  ▀██▄    ████▄   
 █▀ ▄██▄ ▀█▀ ▄██▀ ▀█▀ ▄██
  ▄██▀     ▄██▀     ▄██▀
 ██▀ ▄█▄ ▄██▀ ▄█▄  ██▀ ▄▄
      ▀███▀    ▀██▄  ▄██▀
     ▄▄ ▀██▄ ▄█▄ ▀█████▀
     ███▄▄██▀   ▀▀
      ▀██████▀
        ▀▀▀▀   ██▀

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █


▄███▄    ▄███▄
███  ██▄ █▀▀▄
████████  ███▀
██▀ ▄███      
████████▄▄  ▄█▀
 ██████▀▀██▀▀
  ▀███▀▄▄   ▄
   ▀██▄██ ▄█▀
     ▀▀██▀▀
FULLY
ANONYMOUS

━━━━━
/

    ██▄▄              ▄▄██
   █▀  ▀█▄ ▄▄▄▄████▄██▀  ▀█
  █▀   ▄███▀▀▀       █▄   ▀█
 █▀   ▄███▄ ▄▄█▄▄     █▄   ▀█
██▄  ▄████████████▄▄  █▄  ▄██
  ▀▀██▀███████████████▄███▀▀
      ▀█▄█▀███████████▀▀
        ▀███▀███████▀
           ▀▀▀▀██▀▀
INSTANT
TRANSFER

━━━━
/

     ▄████▄
 ▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▀██▀ ▀█  ▀█ ███▀
 ██ ▀ █ ▀▄█ ███
▄██▄█▄█▄███▄███▄
▀██████████████▀
 ▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
     ▀████▀
API FOR YOUR
PROJECTS

━━━━

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █
PARTNER PROGRAM
TOR MIRROR
MIX WALLET
.FAQ
ANN THREAD
TELEGRAM
Nemo1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
April 08, 2015, 04:13:00 PM
 #34

By a strange coincidence, this thread was revived when I was finishing Dan Brown's "Inferno"...

#101Life
Save Donbass

“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right.”
“We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided.”
“It is important to fight and fight again, and keep fighting, for only then can evil be kept at bay, though never quite eradicated.”
vokain
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 08, 2015, 04:24:02 PM
 #35

By a strange coincidence, this thread was revived when I was finishing Dan Brown's "Inferno"...

Welcome to the Age of Aquarius Smiley

         ▄█▄  ▄▄▄▄
          ▀ ▄██████▄
    ▄▄▄   ▄███▀▀███
  ▄█████▄ ▀█▀ ███▄ ▀▀
 ███▀  ▀██▄    ████▄   
 █▀ ▄██▄ ▀█▀ ▄██▀ ▀█▀ ▄██
  ▄██▀     ▄██▀     ▄██▀
 ██▀ ▄█▄ ▄██▀ ▄█▄  ██▀ ▄▄
      ▀███▀    ▀██▄  ▄██▀
     ▄▄ ▀██▄ ▄█▄ ▀█████▀
     ███▄▄██▀   ▀▀
      ▀██████▀
        ▀▀▀▀   ██▀

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █


▄███▄    ▄███▄
███  ██▄ █▀▀▄
████████  ███▀
██▀ ▄███      
████████▄▄  ▄█▀
 ██████▀▀██▀▀
  ▀███▀▄▄   ▄
   ▀██▄██ ▄█▀
     ▀▀██▀▀
FULLY
ANONYMOUS

━━━━━
/

    ██▄▄              ▄▄██
   █▀  ▀█▄ ▄▄▄▄████▄██▀  ▀█
  █▀   ▄███▀▀▀       █▄   ▀█
 █▀   ▄███▄ ▄▄█▄▄     █▄   ▀█
██▄  ▄████████████▄▄  █▄  ▄██
  ▀▀██▀███████████████▄███▀▀
      ▀█▄█▀███████████▀▀
        ▀███▀███████▀
           ▀▀▀▀██▀▀
INSTANT
TRANSFER

━━━━
/

     ▄████▄
 ▄▄▄████████▄▄▄
▄██████████████▄
▀██▀ ▀█  ▀█ ███▀
 ██ ▀ █ ▀▄█ ███
▄██▄█▄█▄███▄███▄
▀██████████████▀
 ▀▀▀████████▀▀▀
     ▀████▀
API FOR YOUR
PROJECTS

━━━━

  █
  █
  █
████
  █
████
  █
████
  █
  █
  █
PARTNER PROGRAM
TOR MIRROR
MIX WALLET
.FAQ
ANN THREAD
TELEGRAM
BADecker
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1736
Merit: 1037


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 05:14:16 PM
 #36

Is thirty-seconds to live longer or shorter than thirty-thirds to live?   Grin


Science is on the verge of eliminating telomere shortening via activation and replenishment of telomerase. when this happens, nobody will have to die any longer.

Smiley

EDIT: TA-65 works. There is, however, controversy about how effective it is.
Wilikon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 05:20:18 PM
 #37

Karl Marx saw this exact same problem, when he saw that we do not have enough tractors and enough farmers to produce all the food needed to feed all the people that will soon be born (and the world population was only around 1 billion back then). He saw the exact same issue, and had the exact same concerns as you, and that was one of his main reasons for coming up with the solution he called communism.
Of course, 100 years later we have robotic tractors that require very few farmers to operate, and advances in chemicals and genetics that allow us to grow much more food from the same amount of space. Don't forget, we have barely tapped the power of the sun. Worst comes to worse, we'll all live off solar panels, and eat algae grown in vats in the sun. As others have said, still plenty of space here.


Communism was born thanks to someone with a lack of scientific anticipation and foresight ...

 Smiley


criptix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1582
Merit: 1038


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 05:48:54 PM
 #38

alot of post here i read actually didnt describe the main problem per se.

from the viewpoint of science humanity has neither a space nor a energy problem.

mankinds main problem is a socio-economical one - everything is a question of profit and loss.

without it, we would already explore different galaxies(!!!).


Bounty Management & ICO Consulting
Inquire
Beliathon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU


View Profile WWW
April 09, 2015, 06:45:36 PM
 #39

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.
Yeah, about that...



What do you think happens on this graph now that we're slowly running out of fossil fuel?

Remember Aaron Swartz, a 26 year old computer scientist who died defending the free flow of information.
lophie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000

Unlimited Free Crypto


View Profile
April 09, 2015, 09:53:03 PM
 #40

"The planet is fine, The people are fucked!"
                                    - George Carlin

Will take me a while to climb up again, But where is a will, there is a way...
toddtervy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2015, 01:12:41 AM
 #41

The carrying capacity of the earth is not static. Technological advancements continually expand it. We aren't living in a glass bottle, but a rubber balloon.
Yeah, about that...



What do you think happens on this graph now that we're slowly running out of fossil fuel?

Well said, sometimes a graph gets the point across much quicker and better.

Get off my c@ck !
Rmcdermott927
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1005


View Profile
April 10, 2015, 05:33:16 AM
 #42

In the words of Dave Chapelle "5 seconds left until the end of the world, that's just enough time to suck a titty."

ObscureBean
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134
Merit: 1000


View Profile WWW
April 10, 2015, 09:01:30 AM
 #43

It really can't be that bad, the entire world population can in theory fit (albeit uncomfortably) on the Isle of Wight which is only about 380 sq km. I think we can start worrying when it takes the whole of the US.. Ok on second thoughts we might not last that long  Cheesy

Some stats:
http://www.overpopulationmyth.com/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/posts/can_the_worlds_population_real
Snail2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1428
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 10, 2015, 10:01:14 AM
 #44

The same usual overpopulation (myth) BS again and again and again Smiley. At first our world is not a closed environment, therefore there are no theoretical population cap. Secondly more than 50% of the population living in cities what makes those places overcrowded, but overcrowding not equal to overpopulation. Thirdly, currently we are producing food and drinking water for more than 10 billion ppl, so there are no food and water scarcity issue, the crap what you see in many places is happening only because of the unequal distribution and extensive wasting.

Please do not believe in all the crap what the MSM trying to push to us.

First blockchain based marketplace of trading algorithms]
_______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________
TRADINGENE JOIN NOW
ICO 4 April 2018
_______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________
ANN THREAD |BOUNTY | TELEGRAM | TWITTER | FACEBOOK | MEDIUM | GOLOS
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1000



View Profile WWW
April 10, 2015, 11:13:46 AM
 #45

Thirdly, currently we are producing food and drinking water for more than 10 billion ppl, so there are no food and water scarcity issue, the crap what you see in many places is happening only because of the unequal distribution and extensive wasting.

Exactly that, plus everyone could theoretically produce all the food they need right in their living room, e.g. with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquaponics

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!