Hacker News Reader

Comment by mrfusion | Hacker News Reader

The gloom and doom posts on HN seem to be increasing lately. I can go to CNN if I want this kind of content.

That being said I would be ok with posts talking about fixing climate change especially if it preserves human rights and dignity.

View on HN

Of all the gibberish conspiracy theories about the downfall of society, this is the one thing that's definitely happening and needs to be addressed urgently.

Don't worry about it. All this "doom and gloom" stuff will only affect the poor in far away countries. It'll be decades before it seriously impacts your way of life.

I hope it does impact rich countries soon though. That's the only way they'll take the problem seriously without pushing vague ideals like "human rights and dignity"

Strangely enough, there seems to be a correlation between governments and people ignoring the effects of their actions on the climate, and the doom and gloom posts.

I wonder why.

How is that "gloom and doom"?

He doesn't want to sacrifice anything or changes that will affect him personally.

In your book, what counts as fixing climate while preserving human rights and dignity?

Good question. I could do some examples.

Good: carbon tax or cap and trade (ideally revenue neutral). Electric car subsidies.

Bad: climate lockdowns. Restricting travel. Travel credits. Social credit score tied to climate behavior. (This stuff keeps me up at night)

So bottom line:

Following this https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma... and this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights and you’re fine in my book.

But that’s not an assumption I make these days.

What about just nationalizing the entire energy industry and everything related, instead of trying to work within the parameters of a free market for something with so many externalities?

Interesting. It’s possible the government could run it well but I would worry without a profit motive they might not adjust to supply and demand quickly and might not pursue new technologies like fusion.

fission and fusion did not begin with private interest at heart. Not everything should be profit motivated, especially with public goods.[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics)

energy research is typically publicly funded, no? With a profit motive, why would you even do anything besides the easiest and cheapest option of burning fossil fuels?

Fusion research, especially, is so pie-in-the-sky right now that I doubt any profit-motivated company would even touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com