Hypothetically, would it be better to triple the number of humans to have the resources to build sustainable technology to save the planet, or would it be better to cap/limit the number humans in order to slow the damage we are doing? Discuss
-
If you triple the number of humans, you triple the number of
@elonmusk's. Not all humans are created equal both in their potential to be Elon Musk and their carbon emissions. For example, most of the world's young are in poor education, low-carbon emission Africa.
In any case, I say triple the number of humans. We have plenty of space and I'm optimistic that triple the brainpower outweighs triple the waste.
-
-
I don't think you realize that you or I could be an "Elon". Its a matter of will power plus some variables, not innate genius. Just look at the populations of the Netherlands, Israel, or India. 3x/30x more or less humans does not have an effect on this equation.
-
You made 3 points. First is wrong. Second is right. Third is wrong; talent is bell curved. If, as you say, more people can be Elon than people think, then increasing population increases the number of Elon’s by increasing the population of those who can be. 70 IQ cannot be Elon.
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.