• susieq0044@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    humans were not made to live in the harshness of space. Perhaps first create really fantastic robots, and let them do the hard work. Or even better: invest more in saving Earth.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          That formerly perfect environment could not support the current human population. And I’m not saying we’re doing a good job in terms of long term planning here. I’m merely pointing out that we have the ability to shape our environment, and that’s what allowed for our civilization to exist in the first place.

          • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 days ago

            Great at shaping our own environment for the immediate stuff like shelter, temperature, food, logistics. But the more foundational long-term stuff, like an atmosphere or a local ecology? We don’t have a great track record.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              To be fair, there was no evolutionary driver for that kind of large scale and long term planning. Humans evolved in an environment where it was important to prioritize immediate survival over long horizon goals. So, we’re notoriously bad at making any sacrifices in the short term for the benefit of the long term. And on top of it all, capitalism makes the whole problem a whole lot worse by rewarding the most destructive and wasteful behaviors.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          We very obviously do, most of the human population lives in cities and wouldn’t make it through a single week in the wild.

          • susieq0044@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 days ago

            I see, yes I see where you are coming from. On the other hand, I was thinking of climate change, plastic in the oceans, PFAS and so on. Human products that are damaging the ecosystem around us and that will mostly hit humanity in the back of its neck in the near future. So we DO shape our environment- but not to our ACTUAL needs.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Sure, we create a lot of problems in our shaping of the environment, and we tend to prioritize short term needs over long term ones.

            • myszka@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              That’s just a contradiction of our current mode of production. The negative effect is sure there, but it’s outweighed by the positive outcomes. This gigantic mechanized monolithic production system that turns the whole humanity into one big voracious machine is what eventually will allow us to fully decentralise the way we produce things while keeping the automation and thus avoid the destruction we’ve been causing for so long.

              Think of this: you don’t need packaging if you consume in the same place where you produce. You can also much more easily recycle used materials if you don’t need them to travel for thousands miles and can instead use them right where you are. If you use local small and natural sources of energy instead of burning millions of tons of coal, you also don’t pollute the enviranment as much. All of this will only be possible thanks to this destructive phase we’re currently in. So ultimately we do cater our actual needs - somewhat contradictory at times, but still.

              • susieq0044@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                That’s a lot of wishful thinking to digest ;-). There’s zero evidence to support this vision , and human egoism (wars, revenue-focus, …) seem to be IMHO completely ignored. I witnessed these type of predictions in the 70s, 90s, 10s… they never materialized.

                • myszka@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  The ongoing automation is the evidence. The trend is to fully automate the whole production chain and that will lead to decentralisation, because centralisation only makes sense with human labour.

                  Human egoism isn’t bad in itself. The problem is that it conflicts with altruism. That’s where it gets destructive. But this can be solved. If everyone can automatically produce what they need themselves, there’s no more competing for who’s going to be the one providing and the one taking. The roles merge. Egoism and altruism become the same thing and neither stays destructive.

                  • susieq0044@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 days ago

                    But that’s all theory. Fact is that automation costs energy, and energy creates CO2. So climate change is the force that works against your plan, and since we are heading to 2.8C, time is quickly running out. In addition, trends such as urbanization (which has been taking place for about 5000 years), the rise of fascism etc also don’t seem to be in favor. Taken together, humanity may very well collapse first. So instead of working on your dream, become active; vote, protect.