logoalt Hacker News

Anon1096today at 12:10 AM4 repliesview on HN

Calling #2 more sustainable has no basis in reality, it's just a feeling. It's like saying that clothing before the loom or farming before the tractor were "more sustainable". No, it isn't, it just appeals to yeoman farmer instincts that somehow technology=bad when it's what powers (and sustains) our modern world of 8 billion people.


Replies

tw04today at 12:29 AM

Given that #1 seems to be based almost entirely on stealing from #2, and never paying reparations, I’d say it’s pretty unsustainable.

It’s like saying robbing banks for a living isn’t sustainable and working at a bank is. That’s not exactly a stretch.

show 1 reply
andyfilms1today at 12:15 AM

It's sustainable in the literal sense, I.E. a tailor can simply tailor forever without needing to constantly worry about keeping up with new tools or technologies, or needing to upgrade or change their methodology constantly.

The tech world is obsessed with moving fast and breaking things, and you can't just do the same thing forever and expect it to always work.

show 1 reply
sonofhanstoday at 12:16 AM

“More sustainable” than burning hydrocarbons to produce chatbot tokens. Humanity could sustain itself on those resources much longer if we were more careful with them. The very definition of sustainability.

phoronixrlytoday at 12:16 AM

It allows for our modern unsustainable world of 8 billion people you mean?