157 karma · joined November 13, 2013
Certainly there are investors who might want to build, say, a wind farm on a coral reef because it's cheap. That's worth resisting?
was talking about this with a friend who knows more. He did point out we need to replace old housing stock, which we also don't do, so just have cold, mouldy old houses. But that's not what's being talked about here.
I also had a twitter conv with a housing charity once, who agreed but pointed out that the financialization of property is hard to overturn, and it's easier to just advocate for more building. Problem I see here is that the new buildings will just be more stock for existing portfolios, and actual prices don't seem to reduce.
Back in the day there was a smaller consultancy with awesome developers called LShift (mentioned here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_London_Tech_City). They worked out that an open source messaging thing would be useful, and created RabbitMQ (there were details about who, how it was funded internally, etc). That got sold to VMWare, and a bunch of people went with it, but LShift went on as before, happy, but always looking for another Rabbit. Didn't find one, was aquihired in the end.
Meanwhile, some of the Rabbit people formed Weave, looking for the killer business around the early container ecosystem (https://www.weave.works/oss/net/ was interesting, eksctl, flux, CNCF, lots of good things). But I guess they took a bite of the VC apple and sustainable technical contributions was no longer the goal.
I've huge respect for everyone I knew from Weave. Great people all. Best wishes and I know you'll land on your feet.
So yes, if we don't stop producing industrial quantities of CO2, we'd need to plant about 1 USA sized forest/year to compensate (and keep it away from fire etc). Obviously Complete Nonsense.
Also a strawman argument. We need to stop producing industrial quantities of CO2. Then reforestation can help (a bit, perhaps).
Right-wing "English Constitution Party" were going to demonstrate with rape alarms (https://twitter.com/ProfColinDavis/status/165555531421578035...) and that got 'confused' in the more rabid press as 'eco-zealots' plot' sort of stuff.
The Met decided they needed to be seen to act to remove the "dangerous" rape alarms, but the easiest way to do that was to arrest these poor folks (https://twitter.com/ProfColinDavis/status/165561644937587509...). The police knew they knew were around and had rape alarms because that's their job and the police gave them the alarms.
Anyhoo, the rabid press, the deeply populist government, and the disgraced met police (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65164489) are quite a mix.
I mean, have you been on HN for long?
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Birmingham * https://www.oodihelsinki.fi/en/ * https://wellcomecollection.org/pages/Wuw19yIAAK1Z3Smm * https://www.gladstoneslibrary.org/
others?
But we're definitely going to have to adapt because even if we stop it we've already changed things somewhat. The question is who, where, how much. And how much the adaptation will cost, and whether people can afford it, and and and.
Don't be so quick to disempower yourself. Everyone has something they can do (you're already doing a lot). Even just talking about it is extremely important (https://www.ted.com/talks/katharine_hayhoe_the_most_importan...)
FWIW there was a good comment piece in nature recently about activism. Summary thread: https://twitter.com/ThierryAaron/status/1564276454904430596 . There was another study - can't find it now :( that showed that actions from Insulate Britain (blocking roads) were effective.
I don't get the <throws hands in the air>It's just a done deal, back to netflix</> attitude, and prefer the 'Hey, our generation(s) have a task, let's get it done' one.