this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2025
157 points (99.4% liked)

chapotraphouse

13787 readers
738 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dirt_Owl@hexbear.net 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Hmm I'll take your word for it, but I still don't think it's unreasonable to consider that the resources of a planet can dictate a civilisations technology.

[–] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Of course resources are a limitation. But instead of investigating a supposed limitation and seeing what can be overcome and what is truly fundamental, you have people either giving up and calling the issue intractable or not putting in the work while expecting it to be resolved. Example: liquid fuels. Inside of America there are two wolves—one correctly notes the high carbon cost of liquid hydrocarbons and the high money cost of synthesizing them and concludes there is no future for liquid fuels, while the other hears "synthetic fuels" and assumes the problem is already solved and so electrification need not be hurried. In reality, the high money cost can be overcome with sufficient buildup of renewables, as is beginning to be seen in China and will become obvious in the 2030s.

[–] Dirt_Owl@hexbear.net 3 points 4 days ago

I see your point.