Conversation

The reason I don’t really care about climate skeptics is that I don’t need to believe they’re 100% wrong or that I’m 100% right to want to help undertake meaningful climate action. Pascal’s wager thinking applies. Even a 10% chance climate scientists are right is enoughto act on
5
108
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.
1
31
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.
1
26
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.
4
33
Replying to
I completely agree that the technology game is way more fun than the 'careful conservation and budgeting' game. How'd you account for the unpredictability of new tech, though?
1
Replying to
Unpredictability of new tech is cool. But I meant to refer to an unpredictability of there being a new tech frontier. Would your answer be different? Maybe a conservationist point could be made to not rely on the randomness of tech leaps (although I'm not sure I hold that view)
1
Show replies