My suggestion would be to move to a higher level of abstraction, change the way which you view the system.
Maybe becoming full stack? Maybe understanding the industry a little deeper? Maybe analyzing your company's competitors better? That would increase your value for the business (a bit of overlap with product management though). Assuming you can now deliver the expected tech part more easily, that's what I'd do.
As for me, I've moved to a permanent product management position.
We’re at a terrible crossroads. If climate scientists are right, we’re headed for unavoidable disruption. Some now say it’s already too late — all we can do is mitigate and adapt. Start local. Know your neighbors. Build resilience.
But if they’re wrong, that’s also bad news. It means our scientific institutions failed us, and the political trust placed in “studies” will collapse. The next time someone says “science says…”, society may not listen.
Either way, it’s a precarious place to be.
Until then, enjoy the summer — it might be the coolest one we have left.
> The next time someone says “science says…”, society may not listen.
We're already there. Turns out it has nothing to do with science at all, but rather propaganda and political messaging. If you just tell people science is wrong and bad then they internalize that, regardless of the state of science.
This confirms what many of us know to be true - what people believe has only a very loose tie to reality. Populist messaging is the future.
If people think "scientists can never be wrong," we have fundamentally and deeply failed to explain how science actually works. And sadly, that does seem to be the case.
When people say science is wrong, it often comes from a place where they forgot that the rest of the world exists, each with their own institutions, each with their own responsibility to thrive.
There is a third option that it's real but not as bad as people make out. Like in my case the fallout is more that I'm thinking of installing aircon rather than general doom.
The ecosystem, that you and I and we depend on, outside your apartment can't install an air conditioner. Instead it simply dies. Then we begin to suffer just in new and unexpected ways.
Climate change doesn't just make it a bit hotter at home - it corrodes the entire environment. Floods, fires, storms, drought, crop yields, etc.
It will make us all poorer and then it will start to kill many of us directly with heat or indirectly through secondary effects (including war). And we'll discover too late that our prosperity depends on the prosperity of each other and the environment.
It's incredible to me that apparently educated people on a forum such as this are still misunderstanding the basic dangers of climate change in 2025. It makes me feel so hopeless.
Housing prices have almost nothing to do with space programs. In most places, they’re an artifact of laws and policies which create scarcity for the benefit of rich property owners, and cutting scientific research entirely won’t change that except in a few cases where you’d be able to bid on a house which some unemployed scientist or engineer is forced out of - but the private equity guys will probably outbid you.
There was this post on HN that life can't be given to mars for 99.99% and even if it could, it would be the most miserable life with only 1-2 decades. It isn't self sustainable as people imagine it to be.
So all we have is, is this Earth & our fellow human beings & instead of treating each other with basic necessities like housing, education , healthcare.
Also these things, in my opinion of researching the space and giving housing, they aren't mutual. They can both be done but even if they are mutual,I would personally pick housing any day, because what point is of space, what point is of going to outer space some day and living shit there if humans are currently living shit here as well.
Regarding Housing, I think it can easily be fixed and so much more like how we say tax the rich, if we could just tax lands.
Because people think of land as some "asset" and that they "own it" ,when in actuality, I might argue that land is the only thing that I personally think the govt. has any right over. So I personally believe that we are better off taxing land so that these pesty landlords who get rich off of the housing crisis can really just suffer so much that the lands would just be productive and not speculative , reducing the price of lands down and even rents down till the point housing is way more favourable.
Its a net win to everybody except those pesty landlords & maybe "investors" or people who bought housing pre-georgism because they might now believe that its unfair to them?
Still I think that georgism is pretty flexible and this could be sorted out in such a way that it would have been less controversial and more net positive to the Society than the latest tariffs fiasco, though people didn't vote for housing, they voted for tariffs.
Your concern about losing the dominant culture status is useless. Recent geopolitical situation clearly shows soft power is useless. Hardpower is where everything is at.
Maybe becoming full stack? Maybe understanding the industry a little deeper? Maybe analyzing your company's competitors better? That would increase your value for the business (a bit of overlap with product management though). Assuming you can now deliver the expected tech part more easily, that's what I'd do.
As for me, I've moved to a permanent product management position.