deleted
reply[flagged]
reply100k satellites is kind of insane, why not a smaller number of satellites which are more powerful, like the satellites from AST Spacemobile? It should be possible to launch smaller number of satellites without sacrificing progress
replyPopulations are far below replacement. Degrowth is assured.
replyPopulations may drop, but why would you want quality of life to remain constant?
replyYou'd rather lower quality of land life to enable growth?
replyOr were you not responding to the argument that avoiding pollution is typical degrowth talk?
No. I'm saying that if the population is set to fall, we can crank resource spend per person all the way up, and enable growth that way. With a little side benefit of QoL improvements.
replyWhich requires a massive jump in labor productivity, mind. But if the optimistic takes on AI are right, such a thing is not impossible.
I guess the Montreal Protocol was "degrowth talk" for you too, huh?
replyAbsolutely. Degrowith is the guilt-fueled poverty mind virus.
replyAbundance, friends. Nothing stops us.