The other big reason is that we’re overdue for a major tech upgrade to out energy/material systems anyway. There’s other reasons to want the transition, like 10xing abundance. Using bits to create a lot more bang per joule or gram of earth resources.
-
-
Show this thread
-
But perhaps the most important reason is that it’s an interesting way to continue the civilization game. We’ve literally played through the Industrial Age level and it is just boring now. A post-transition game level would be new, fun, have lots of new gameplay.
Show this thread -
This is why I dislike “sustainability” frames. That’s just budgeting energy/matter to continue this level of the game indefinitely. It’s like if the only video games available were computerized board games. Sustainability is like computerizing chess. I’d like Tetris invented.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It’s a bullshit argument, but not one I’ll attempt to debunk in Twitter. And we’re transitioning so slowly anyway, “too fast” is a ridiculous concern.
End of conversation
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
10% probability is not 10% understanding
End of conversation
-
-
-
By Pascal's wager thinking you mean expected value thinking :). Pascal's wager is not a good form of argument - you can justify totally insane things
-
I mean what I said
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yup, it worth preparing for the flood, even if we didn't cause it... but we did.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.