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

If you were shocked to see 1 million crossing into Europe in 2015, imagine what it will be like in the near future when tens of millions face drought & famine.

The general problem is that most of the world lacks the scientific understanding to know how big & bad of a problem this may turn out to be.

Google & zuckerberg could just black out certain zip codes every so often. go to google.com & get a message about the impending doom & what the person can do about it.

To me, people should not be able to pick & choose technology. If you enjoy using a cell phone & sending email then you should accept what scientists are saying. No more doubting.

If software is eating the world, it should hurry up & start directing the herd.



> If you enjoy using a cell phone & sending email then you should accept what scientists are saying.

This is not a valid argument. The science that underlies the workings of your cell phone and email is more accurate by many orders of magnitude than climate science. "Science" is not all one thing, and climate science does not get to claim the same accuracy as, say, electrodynamics just because it has "science" in its name.


It sounds like you're advocating for totalitarianism. What scientists in what disciplines are the designated authorities? What does "no more doubting" or "you should accept what scientists are saying" even mean?

Suppose some scientists say "global warming is an imminent existential threat". Should I be forced to implement their policy proposals as well, or do I just have to nod my head in agreeance to their every decree? What is the threshold upon which scientists must be "accepted" (and presumably obeyed)? Who decides this?

This is the stuff of nightmares.




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

Search: