Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

To 'save the planet' you want as many people playing video games, watching TV, or arguing on social media as possible.

If they're doing those things, consuming digital entertainment (eventually powered by renewables), then they're not out in the real world, travelling around using fossil fuels, consuming physical products, using up physical resources and emitting CO2.

Pretty bleak future though.



Or simply less people, busy doing what machine can't, with a bit less free time to spare. It's as bleak if we put ourselves in the shoes of the humans who wouldn't exist, but not that bleak for the ones who would...


Our free time is likely dwarfed by the labor spent on inefficient means towards inefficient ends if we're going to this level of analysis though


You raise an interesting question: how many people would you be able to bus how far into nature to spend how long with zero electricity consumption to make it net-negative compared to the consumption incurred in the course of their habitual lives?

My naive orders-of-magnitude guess is ~20 people in a bus going ~100 miles (each way) would only need 2-4 days before the net goes negative.

It's kinda crazy how much compute is dedicated to streaming HD video or serving an endless scroll of Instagram.


Those people out in nature are likely to be doing physical activities, even if just walking, and those extra calories will need replenishing too




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: