Hacker News Reader

Comment by eric__cartman | Hacker News Reader

It's a sad situation not only for us, but for anyone interested in preserving marine life. These ships are destroying the ecosystems in that whole maritime area and all we can do is watch and ask them to stop. If we continue to be powerless to stop that (which sadly we are unless some country steps up and helps by financing the navy) all wildlife in the ocean will be permanently and irreversibly affected.

I sometimes hate humanity as a species. How can a living thing be purposefully so destructive towards it's own planet? The only one it has and will ever have (at least for now we haven't infested any other planet). This is one of the many things that makes me angry knowing there is nothing that will realistically be done to stop it. We will suffer the consequences and these people will then go and fuck up some other sea area until there is nothing left anywhere in the world.

View on HN

> I sometimes hate humanity as a species

All of it? I mean hate towards globalization that helped China and other hegemonic dictators with no regards for rule of law continue to do what it does is one thing. Blatant hate for humanity is another.

Humanity has always lead to other, at possibly every point in history.

Yes but all of humanity? All? It’s like looking at murder rates and hating Humanity because it murders despite the majority of the global population having not even touch a Gun before.

Well that statement may have been a little too aggressive and come off the wrong way. I was quite pissed when wrote that comment. I believe humans can do great things, we really do. I wouldn't have chosen to be born as any other living thing (not that I had a choice anyways lol). It's just the selfishness of some people that results in massive damages that ruins it for the rest of us.

That said we have to realize as a whole that our current way of living is not sustainable and will result is us screwing over future generations that will have to live in an incredibly polluted, and ecologically damaged planet. We have to use our intellect and capacity of achieving anything we put our mind towards and take real, meaningful steps to solve this problem. Before it's too late. There are also many other important global issues that need our attention as a society but that's past the scope of this comment.

> That said we have to realize as a whole that our current way of living is not sustainable and will result is us screwing over future generations that will have to live in an incredibly polluted, and ecologically damaged planet. We have to use our intellect and capacity of achieving anything we put our mind towards and take real, meaningful steps to solve this problem. Before it's too late.

This is what humans have been doing for a long time. The problems were just much more acute for the next generations. Until very recently, most humans were born into scenarios without good shelter, solid water supplies, solid food supplies, general safety, or any medical protection from trivial things like infection let alone anything more complicated.

What’s happening here is this poor Chinese fisherman are still dealing with the acute issues (feeding existing family, etc) so the trade of returning home empty handed vs breaking boundaries is too difficult for them to come out on the right side of.

It's not only globalization though. It's mankind's inability to both understand and prioritize long term consequences and to govern the commons properly. The same thing manifests on local levels as well.

Blaming this on inability to understand is a mistake. Many people, perhaps even most, just don't care that they are doing something collectively long term destructive. In the short term, they are benefiting, and they can move on to the next country incapable of defending its territory when they are done with Argentina's fish.

Without humanity there would be nobody to witness the fish. The earth doesn't care which species live or die or go extinct. No matter how bad humanity is, the world is a more beautiful place with us in it, because "beauty" as a concept would not exist if we were not here. Mass extinction events happen without human contribution. Is it bad when we make it happen? Yes. But humans are also the only thing around that can help stop extinction events from happening in a universe which doesn't give a shit about any of us.

Yeah, the planet will exist without humans but i think preserving the planet’s beauty for future generations is a worthy goal, no?

Or do you prefer the idea of future environmental dystopia?

I definitely want to preserve the beauty for our offspring, but that isn't really in keeping with the statement "I sometimes hate humanity as a species."

If you hate humanity then beauty is pointless, because humans are the only ones who appreciate beauty for beauty, rather than "beauty" just being an evolutionary signal to fuck.

Honestly I don't think many here subscribe to that extreme viewpoint you posted - it seems like a straw-man argument.

Given that I was responding directly to a comment that explicitly said "sometimes I hate humanity as a species", I obviously disagree with the straw-man characterization.

> "beauty" as a concept would not exist if we were not here.

This is incorrect - see e.g. http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150511-why-are-animals-so-b... or https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/09/magazine/beauty-evolution...

One of the unattractive human attributes is our self-centered arrogance. And unfortunately, combine with our other traits this results in some pretty bad behaviors that have a terrible impact on other species. The question of whether the planet would be better off without humans is not so obviously answered in the negative.

But arrogance lifted to these levels would probably not exist if we weren't here.

You just proved his/her point, there is no beauty without humans.

You'd have to explain that. I specifically provided a couple of sources as counterexamples. It seems to me you're underscoring the point about arrogance, though.

I'm talking about the concept of beauty. Yes animals and various natural things are "beautiful", but what does that mean without humans to define/identify/catalogue/etc that beauty. Animals don't appreciate beauty for beauty, they see something that we call beautiful and say to themselves "wow those colors are bright I want to have sex with that" – that's it.

The universe doesn't care about us. The universe doesn't care about the things you think are "beautiful". Tomorrow a planet-busting asteroid could collide with the earth and destroy every last bit of life on it (except maybe Tardigrades). The only thing that could possibly ameliorate that is humanity continuing to expand and grow, being a space-faring species, etc. That way some life (and therefore beauty) could be saved when we take those things with us into the stars.

Unless and until we find other intelligent species that are better stewards than us, we're all the universe has got, no matter how shit we are at the job.

> How can a living thing be purposefully so destructive towards it's own planet?

After you are born, you need to eat.

What solution can you think of?

Every person didn't author themselves. They're all driven by innate greed and desire and suffering. The fishermen, the Chinese oligarchs, the Chinese communist party - they're all the center of their own consciousness, each person trying from moment to moment. I pity people, I don't hate them. I may dislike the capitalist system that leads to environmental destruction, but no individual authored our global society.

So, I do see your viewpoint, but looking at individuals is one small slice of the problem, not the whole by any means. We can't count on individual goodness, not when greed or desire is allowed to motivate our leaders so heavily.

It’s weird that the Chinese Communist Party manifests the destruction you attribute to the capitalist system. Not wrong — just weird.

They're more state controlled capitalism than communism these days as I understand it. The name is just a name.

it’s weird because it is wrong: the capitalism vs communism narrative you are referring to doesn’t exist in this globalized world, is just an oversimplification for the masses - of you prefer just propaganda.

I'm confused about this part: "the capitalist system that leads to environmental destruction". Are you aware of the Aral Sea environmental disaster?

To quote Wiki: <<Formerly the fourth largest lake in the world with an area of 68,000 km2 (26,300 sq mi), the Aral Sea began shrinking in the 1960s after the rivers that fed it were diverted by Soviet irrigation projects.>>

As I understand, most of the diverted water was used to grow cotton.

That harm was done during the Soviet Union. Most would agree, the Soviet system was less capitalistic than the current Mainland Chinese system.

All types of governments can cause environmental ruin, and all types of governments can clean it up. Also, not all environmental ruin is permanent. The United States, UK, and Japan had extensive, wide-spread industrial pollution in the 1960s and 1970s. They spent the next 30 years cleaning up, and did a pretty good job.

It's greed and unfettered capitalism dude.

Do keep in mind that there is no other species on the planet that is capable of protecting the ecosystem from the eventual and inevitable asteroid impact.

We might not be there yet but we are going to be the first species in the history of the planet capable of protecting the biosphere from the inevitable assault from the cosmos.

This is nonsensical extrapolation probably hundreds of years into an ideal future. We aren't there yet and we won't be there for a long time at the current rate of things. Diverting an asteroid of any significant mass is functionally impossible even given years notice today.

Who said anything about diverting it? Or destroying it, if that’s the next point your mind is going to.

Huh? Radiation pressure alone is enough to divert an asteroid if you spot it in time. You don't need nukes, just a rocket and enough paint to change the albedo on one side.

“Someday we might do something meaningful so bear that in mind when observing the reckless, sadistic and destructive present day behavior” is comic book movie reasoning.

Some of us are doing meaningful things to push towards the future. If you feel that there is only reckless, sadistic, and destructive behavior going on, that says more about what you and the people who surround you are doing to help.

And here I was thinking it was just optimistic.

Everyone that talks about how horrific a cancer the human race is on the planet is a hypocrite because they are still alive themselves. If they really meant it they would take action by ending their own lives. They don't because what they really mean is everyone else is a cancer on the planet except for them. It's a selfish and narcissistic attitude.

Careful, you're pointing out the hypocrisy on display. People don't like that. They prefer to wallow in their virtue signaling about how bad the rest of mankind is for surviving and thriving.

The cognitive dissonance they feel turns into downvotes rather than deeper thoughts on why they aren't an integral part of the "problem" they complain about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com