The job of CEO seems the far easier to replace with AI. A fairly basic algorithm with weighted goals and parameters (chosen by the board) + LLM + character avatar would probably perform better than most CEOs. Leave out the LLM if you want it to spout nonsense like this Amazon Cloud CEO.

Look up “megasites”, these are large settlements not called cities as they lack signs of being dominated by a subset of themselves. One I’ve heard of is called “Nebelivka” but I believe there are at least a few others known and probably others either not yet found or misunderstood as cities.

Humans existed for well over 200,000 years without government. There is strong evidence of massive settlements that existed for extended periods without any sign of being ruled, just people living and cooperating.

In fact, it’s the formation of governments that could enforce exploitative economic systems that started the ecological collapse of this planet in the first place. Humans without government live in balance with the rest of the world.

The idea that humans, to survive and thrive, require the formation of an entity (government/state) that allows the subset of the population in control of the it to exploit the subset not in control of it is a dangerous fallacy.

A ballsière

I not sure this is true.

As I understand, humans have an extremely acidic stomach compared to other animals, even carnivores. Our stomach acid is on the level of scavengers, and this is to kill bacteria and parasites in the food we eat. Humans could be more tolerant of spoiled food than most other species.

The modern western diet/lifestyle can damage our digestive tract in ways that affect our pH and microbiome making us susceptible to what we should normally be tolerant of. Anyone taking antacids or dealing with heartburn type issues I would expect to more vulnerable to food poisoning since any pathogens can more easily pass deeper into their digestive tract.

The short digestive tract in a dog is all that is needed to extract nutrients from animal sources, digesting plants requires help from a microbiome and they need somewhere to live and do their work, this is why plant eaters have extensive digestive tracts that are not very acidic so they don’t kill them off. Humans (not sure about other animals) neutralize the “chime” exiting your stomach so that it’s pH is appropriate for the microbiome living in the intestines.

The human digestive tract suggest sit evolved for adaptability, a healthy human can safely eat anything from carrion (not saying it’s fine, just that we evolved to be able to survive it), be a vegetarian, or eat mostly meat and thrive.

Singapore is more fucked up than aspirational if you ask me. It might look nice but it’s a capitalist place that totally misses the spirit of solarpunk.

Check out “radiative sky cooling”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDRnEm-B3AI

There might be some way to do something with this.

All the waste a plant ever produces in its lifetime can be contained with ease on site.

Won’t that create a bunch of targets all over the country? Then terrorists or enemy states can use simple small bombs to make whole areas uninhabitable for the next millennium.

I don’t disagree with you, but this is unrealistic.

But…we don’t have a choice if we are to survive. Continuation with any system like our current system (i.e. exploitation of nature for economic growth) will lead to obvious ecological collapse. Why is certain ecological collapse viewed as the more realistic choice?

This is akin to a person well on their way to a heart attack saying “well, eating healthy is unrealistic, so let’s switch to diet coke and pretend that’s enough”

Sometimes I use the term “psychopathic hoarder class” when referring to this group of people.

Larry Finger, your work has made a significant positive impact on my life and I’m sure many others. Thank you.

Now can you work on a driver to allow communication between the living and the dead?

USA! USA! USA!!11!!

That’s like half of the training I got to get my A+ certificate to work on personal computers.

I was shocked about this, I’d assumed it was well trained trauma doctors in the ambulance with you at your most critical moment.

I think the key would be to not use any additional resources to grow, harvest, etc.

This could be done for example by landscaping companies that put their waste through a retort (which could be anything from a stove made of mud bricks, to a mobile trailer that does on-site pyrolysis and use the resulting biochar to fertilize their customer’s plants. Farms could put their waste through it, innoculate the biochar with animal waste, and use it as fertilizer.

I make biochar from my backyard waste in my firepit using a can like this guy.

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9boXHuzMFsA
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChVxPpnPT-I

Any other method of carbon capture I’ve ever heard about makes no sense. Having hundreds of engineers and workers drive to work for years to engineer and build giant metal and plastic factory/machines with parking lots that require staff that has to drive and park there, etc is nonsense. And even if they work, what would they do with the carbon? Biochar provides a cycle that is accessible to everyone, can be done on-site, uses no fancy technology, nothing is patented, and doesn’t require all this nonsense.

Biochar (created in a retort) is how you sustainably sequester carbon for the long-term using trees (and similar biomass).

This is only a slight exaggeration, all cookies are slowly being replaced by versions of Oreos.

Right!? 30 mins for Age of Sin!? Are they kidding? Is this shrinkflation?

Nate is amazing, he and some of his guests are exactly who I learned this from.

To some degree, fission also, though it has a few other problems like safety and security concerns around nuclear materials, locations of fuels and whether they are in friendly nations, other things the fuels can be used for and all the politics that goes with that, etc.

But we need more than just energy. At some point, regardless of our energy, we are going to destroy Earth’s ecosystems using up other resources, using this energy to mine unsustainably, etc. More energy just means we kill ourselves faster. We should not be looking for more or cleaner energy with which to kill ourselves with, we should be looking to continuity of our species and that requires living sustainably within the bounds of our environment.