this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2024
94 points (69.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35882 readers
1575 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I know the real answer is reddit but I really don't want to go back now that I've already grown used to life without it. I was hoping for Lemmy to be a viable substitute but it isn't. I can see how this place is wonderful for the certain type of person but that person is not me. My experience during the past 6+ months has been a net negative and I'm pretty much ready to move on. I just don't know where else to go.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

First two sound like tankies, but communism definitely could work :P

[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Commune-ism sounds like a lovely idea on a small scale, you gotta solve a lot of political problems to make it work on anything bigger. Social democracies like the scandinavians seem to be the best way we currently know to run a humanitarian society.

[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Are they though? I just feel like we aren't solving the issues we ought to.

First, nobody gets hungry ever again.

Then, everybody gets roof over their head.

After that, we can start discussing the next steps.

And yes, we need to do this globally, with nobody left behind.

[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That’s neither exclusive to communism nor has it been achieved in most purportedly communist states (I hear Vietnam’s actually been having a good run of things but I can’t speak to specifics).

Socialism != communism.

[–] msage@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's definitely not happening now under any social democracy.

Socialism is supposed to be a transformative period, leading to communism. I have no idea why people write the !=.

[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Because exclusively that’s the communist viewpoint. There are different socialist ideologies than communism. It’s a rectangle vs square situation.

[–] msage@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But everyone knows that. Nobody even remotely suggested anything close to it.

[–] Shiggles@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

“Socialism will transition to communism” is just a communism thing. Social democracy is different. It doesn’t involve communism. Because communism is cringe.

[–] msage@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago

Communism isn't cringe, wtf are you talking about. And yes, if we want to discuss communism, we need to take into account that it was suggested to start with socialism beforehand.

Social democracy has jack all to do with socialism, if we want to keep being pedantic. And social democracy does not fare all that well in poorer countries, even after massive EU funds. Which is the real cringe.

[–] avonarret1@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If you aren’t human, perhaps

[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

It's like saying we are too stupid to survive.

[–] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That is not an unthinkable scenario. The universe is so vast yet there is no sign of life anywhere else. Why? Perhaps intelligent life simply isn't intelligent enough and they always end up destroying themselves. A so called "great filter". Is it behind us or ahead? Who knows.

[–] msage@programming.dev 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Given the state of our climate, I would say it's very closely ahead of us, and we are not going to make it. Which is a shame, we are so close.

[–] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] msage@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Right now I don't see how our current society can survive. We are doing nothing at all to stop burning fossil fuels (renewables go up, but so does fossil burning), the richest find more and more absurd ways to waste energy (bitcoin, LLMs), everywhere more and more people go poor even in developed nations (prices skyrocketing, mainly food and rent), and we are just starting to see that climate is starting to change, and not to our optimistic scenarios.

I don't think we are going to make it.

[–] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

For me it's more about the political climate. I don't see the actual climate change as an existential threat to the human race in a way something like nuclear war, a pandemic, asteroid or AI could be. It's bad but it's not that bad. I never really understood why so many seem to think this way when I don't even hear scientists making such apocalyptic claims.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't see the actual climate change as an existential threat to the human race in a way something like nuclear war, a pandemic, asteroid or AI could be. It's bad but it's not that bad.

"My ignorance is worth more than your knowledge."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/03/20/climate-change-ipcc-report-15/

Beyond that threshold, scientists have found, climate disasters will become so extreme that people will not be able to adapt. Basic components of the Earth system will be fundamentally, irrevocably altered.

The report reveals thresholds in how much warming people and ecosystems can adapt to. Some are “soft” limits — determined by shortcomings in political and social systems. For example, a low-income community that can’t afford to build flood controls faces soft limits to dealing with sea level rise.

But beyond 1.5 degrees of warming, the IPCC says, humanity will run up against “hard limits” to adaptation. Temperatures will get too high to grow many staple crops. Droughts will become so severe that even the strongest water conservation measures can’t compensate. In a world that has warmed roughly 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) — where humanity appears to be headed — the harsh physical realities of climate change will be deadly for countless plants, animals and people

"I've never understood why..."

And I can bet you never tried to understand.

[–] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Nothing in your post indicates an existential threat. Sure some places will become unhabitable but not the entire earth. I also don't understand why you need to include the passive agressive ad-hominems and belittling tone instead of just making your point. People like you is why I'm considering leaving this platform. You make the experience worse for everyone.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Because you're a willfully ignorant dolt, that's why the tone.

People like you is why I’m considering leaving this platform.

Good.

People like you make the world worse for everyone.

So you think AI is more of an existential threat to humanity than climate change? This informs me that you really think some Skynet type of shit is more likely to happen than extreme weather phenomena. Do you know what an ice-age is? Do you have any idea what it means when we don't have enough water to grow crops? You think Alexa will hunt you down because you programmed it poorly, but you can't understand why a category 4 hurricane is deadly af.

Please, the faster you leave, the better. Head to Wikipedia to get rid of some of that ignorance. Here's a few bit of material to get you started.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_climate_change

Perhaps you're more of a... ehm "visual learner". Here: Here's a handy flowchart. and here's some examples in a video form Europe’s climate in 2050

There's a reason the deserts of our world aren't populated, and I'm sure you can figure out what that reason is.

"I don't see an existential threat in permanently and majorly fucking up the only known world to support life" - You

[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Maybe I understood the situation too bleakly, but my impression was, that we are losing topsoil (used to grow almost all our food), biodiversity is plummeting (which can trigger chain reaction of massive die-offs), the ice is melting (blue ocean event, likely irreversible) causing billions of people to lose their homes, and depleting aquifies (drinking water). Hotter climate will cause runaway effects, that will multiply all of this, which could lead to decimating most of life in the oceans (food for majority of people), meaning more hungry people inland, politically already unstable, now without soil, water, and getting severe droughts and much more acidic rain. There are possibilities of new diseases appearing from the thawing permafrost, as well as newly mutated ones.

Everything will be made worse by the current trends in politics, but I suspect those politics are trending because some people are aware where are we heading.

[–] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Much of those things will to some extent surely happen but despite it still being really bad, it's still not going to make us go extinct. That atleast is my current understanding of it. The worst case scenario rarely actually happens and given enough motivation we humans are pretty good at problem solving aswell. I have a strong feeling, that if we're going to end ourselves, it's going to more or less be an accident and will happen rather quickly. I still tend to be (techno)optimist about it. It's all I've got.

[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 7 months ago

Complete wipe? Certainly not. Reverting our society in standards of living and numbers? Heavily and quickly. People as a species may survive, but will pale in comparison to what we as a society are and can do now. Unless we get cheap fusion power distributed all over the world in the next 20 years, we are gone.

[–] avonarret1@programming.dev 1 points 7 months ago

How about “There will always be someone exploiting the system/people”