Exponential Growth Arithmetic, Population and Energy, Dr. Albert A. Bartlett

The problem is that we cannot comprehend how fast things can shift. I just came across this video in another thread that I think illustrates the problem very well: [this video] Basically, we can’t see something growing exponentially for the disaster they it will unleash until the last minute (literally) For instance, if something doubles every hour, we don’t realize there is any problem until the very last moment: one hour before, half the resources were free, and the hour before, 3/4. But two hours later, it’s 0% and we never saw it coming. The point is well illustrated in the talk, I highly recommend it.

> Energy consumption in itself is not a problem My main point on that was that the exponential function grows quickly. If it's all of Sweden today, then it's just a couple of doublings before it's literally everything. If you graph the current use this is not the far away future. I don't have absolute proof, but you cannot hide the kind of electricity use without driving up demand noticeably, so actually people are already today paying more for electricity in order for someone to profiteer from hashing. We're all paying for this. > 1. The energy source is not renewable Or it displaces otherwise-renewable use into non-renewable. Which (at this scale) of course it has. > To sum it up, it's not as bad as the headlines say, and rapidly improving for the better. I disagree on both points. The waste graph (and that's just electricity. Where do you think non-economical mining rigs go?) is growing exponentially. Have you seen this guy talk about our inability to understand the exponential function? [this video] > Keeping devices powered on/plugged in costs more energy and serves no purpose, It's a problem, yes. But it's not true that it serves no function. "It's easier to keep it plugged in than not" is convenience. I'm not justifying it, but yes actually it does have a purpose. Just like idling a diesel car outside my window while I'm trying to sleep does have a purpose. > Bitcoin's supply is entirely predictable Not really since an unknown amount is lost forever every year due to crashe

Have you considered that maybe GP has a better intuition about the systems effects of advertising, that you haven't fully considered? - Advertising is a major driver of material consumption, much of which is unnecessary. - Material consumption drives economic growth. There's also intellectual property, and there's the service industry, but even those contribute indirectly to material consumption. - Economic growth and socioeconomic growth are unquestioned foundations of virtually every "civilized" society, but they make no sense. Growth works great... until at some point it doesn't. Obligatory Albert Bartlett video: [this video] Obligatory Eric Weinstein video segment, focusing more on what he calls "EGO"s... embedded [unacknowledged] growth obligations. (Ignore the other three people in the video... even Jordan Peterson is completely out of his league in this "discussion".) [link] The only criticism I'd make against GP's claim is that the advertising industry is just one spoke in the global wheel of impossible growth and consumption. GP's claim is not nutty, it's too narrow and limited . Ogilvy and Saatchi are only footsoldiers. The only way this game of musical chairs ends without tears is if we luck into some awesome technology that leads to post-scarcity economics. That doesn't seem very likely from my perspective, except if we create AGI and AGI figures it out, but then AGI is an existential risk while economic collapse is just at worst a 100-200 year setback.