io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 4:27 AM
Mon Nov 9
12 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/02/08
11/02/08
I need some help with the fjords.
11/02/08
11/02/08
That's what I'm doing for the environment. No problems for me, since that's more or less my natural lifestyle anyway.
I think a large part of the problem is the values of capitalism, where everyone should consume to keep the economical clockwork going.
We need to have the latest in cellphones, computers, games, movies, etc etc etc.
The thing is, we don't need them. We've just learned that we do thanks to growing up with marketing, commercials, and so on.
We need to change out attitude, and out lifestyles, and our view of nature as the eternal provider.
Rainforest's shrinking, the oceans are getting fished out, and so on. And our economy is dependent on our consumption of resources we don't have.
At least water isn't gonna be any problem for me... The rest might be tricky though.
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/03/08
11/02/08
Am I the only person who is seriously thinking a horse bike might be a solution to an oil-less transport system O_o
I been thinking and....while it seems really silly at first...human bikes are one of the most efficiant drive-trains on the planet.
In terms of energymotion they are the best.
If you could somehow design a system for a quadraped surely you'd have a very fast, very efficiant vechile?
I mean, it wouldnt be really a bike for a horse...more some method to convert 4 legged motion into circlular.
11/02/08
11/02/08
this isnt the first time that we've had too big a of population and it wont be the last. And after the plauge has ran its course, the ones that are still around then have more than enough resources to get by and resume breeding until we get to the point whre we need another plauge
the one thing i'm wondering about though is that how will it work out this time around? if a huge plauge broke out, scientists all around the world would start searching for a cure. if one was found quickly enough, then what? give everyone the cure or allow them to continue dying off until we are at an acceptable level?
sadly...i think due to the level of hygiene, medicine, and technology that we've acquired, i really think there needs to be a limit as to how many children a family can have. otherwise...we'll probably be faced with things even worse than plauges (famines on scales that we've never seen before and violence and barberism on levels than we as the human race are accustomed to) and will potentially face the possibility of extinction.
11/02/08
Also, I think most people want to avoid mass death.
Thus most sensible people are in favor of reduced breading before that happens.
11/02/08
but seriously though i am routing for post appocolyptia by then. shit i beat fallout 3 i think i'm damn well prepared.
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
(snickers)
yes why didnt i think of that.. :-P
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
why?
11/02/08
I think he means: 'Move the people from the overpopulated areas onto underpopulated settlements to ease the strain on certain ecosystems.' Or something.
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
The shock reports are counter productive as they just make people more and more cynical as the years pass.
11/02/08
11/02/08
A finite ecology is just a fact. It's only cynical if you decide you don't want to do anything about it, and continue full steam ahead until the planet dies.
11/02/08
Ludicrous? Yes. Infinite? Nope.
11/02/08
Yes it is. Period.
11/02/08
11/02/08
11/02/08
Aw, recycling's useless Lis. Once the Sun burns out, this planet is doomed. You're just making sure we spend our last days using inferior products.
11/02/08
The world population right now is 6.7 billion. By 2042, the population is expected to reach 9 billion.
11/02/08
11/02/08
But at least China has a one-kid rule in place.
Well, either way, we need to hurry up and terraform Mars.
11/02/08
Just because out populatation is stable dosnt mean its stable at a good number.
We are using up VASTELY more resources then developing countries. The impact per-person is hugely MORE.
So, yes, we should stop breading.
11/02/08
Also, according to the international law if you try and do anything about the population of any group your attempting to commit genocide.
11/02/08
(1) Western technology and infrastructure could be very helpful in solving the problem. Because people aren't interchangeable pieces, you don't actually want Americans and Europeans to stop breeding—those kids are going to be the ones who play a big role in fixing things. (I will happily agree that more people could adopt internationally, though, and I wish that process were easier.)
(2) "Yes, we should stop breeding" isn't the answer, really, simply because it's not doable without seriously infringing on the basic human rights that most of us here (I hope!) believe in. "Yes, we should have better sex ed and accept that teenagers are going to have sex and give them birth control and make overpopulation something we talk about in school" is awesome, however.
11/02/08
The fact you cant talk sanely about population controll without words like "genocide" or "nazis" cropping up is part of the problem in itself.
Without rational debates about looking at resources, and seeing how many humans can be comfortable supported, humanity dosnt have a good future. Its better to reduce births then let deaths happen in the future. Far more humane.
oh, and Europe and the US most certainly isnt anywhere near reducing population enough to compansate for its resource use extrapolated. (populations are still growing, its the rate-of-growth that has been going down incidently)
This flash thingy is good for looking at this sort of thing;
www.gapminder.org/world/
11/02/08
BTW. Poverty is also only an issue of resource management and look how well we are dealing with that. A few have almost all, some have some and rest have nothing.
11/02/08
"Okay good job on the not breeding thing. Thanks! Now hurry up and invent some really cheap and highly efficient technology to reduce the fuck out of your ecological footprint because you're still using 20 times the resources as all the rest of us! Imagine how it will get when China starts doing that?"
11/02/08
No, thats not true.
We are using about the planets ability to support *us*.
Life will be fine though. Its a lot more tough then we are.
11/02/08
11/02/08
It is if it's forcible, which it will be, if it's done at all.
11/02/08
11/02/08