holomorphically

Write it down and don't share it. Come back to it a day later and see if it still makes sense. This is a very common trick in cognitive behavioral therapy for teaching people basic metacognition. The fundamental goal is to allow for reflection on your own intentions and actions by delaying actions and then leveraging those skills to close the gap between intentions and actions without getting lost in negative emotions.

There is no easy shortcut or royal road. You'll have to do the work to develop the required metacognitve skills.

If the assumption is that the major world powers don't cooperate enough to tackle a global existential crisis then we're fucked even without someone bombing a nuclear power plant.

Nuclear is currently the only viable option for buying enough time to address all the other negative consequence of 2C+ of warming. All the other plans currently on the table are accelerating us towards 3C of warming and that essentially means human civilization as we now know it is over.

Consumption habits will need to change, people will need to start eating less meat. Factory farming of cattle and other animals is a large contributor of global emissions. So less consumption is definitely part of the answer.

How is this good?

Most developed nations are not growing anymore in terms of population so this is essentially already happening without any government intervention.

Can I send a hash of some content and then get a signed response from the ntp server with a timestamp?

> Using the coast of Peru as a case study, the team calculate that depositing 50,000 tonnes of tephra – a bulk carrier vessel’s worth – offshore could sequester 2750 tonnes of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Current global CO2 output is 51 gigatons. Their solution is not viable. It won't even put a dent in the current output. [1]

1: https://mobile.twitter.com/BillGates/status/1453367874848837...

There is nothing wrong with markets. The issue is with an economic model that assumes continued growth of GDP by ignoring all negative externalities.

Through a synchronization protocol but it's obviously impossible to have perfectly synchronized clocks so the safest thing to do would be to use several timestamps from several clocks.

Blockchains in a way are such clocks where the ordering of the blocks on the chain provide an implicit counter. But blockchains have too much overhead so by assuming some trust it would be possible to get rid of the proof of work mechanism and just use a signed timestamp from a trusted source.

An economic system whose main premise is infinite growth is unsustainable.

Cryptographic identity verification and trusted clocks. As in, cryptography would be built-in and everyone would have a set of keys that they could use to verify ownership of digital content by using cryptographic signatures and timestamps.