Very well put and also very true. Most people are absolutely unaware how fast big shifts happen. The invention of national-socialism with the foundation of the NSDAP happened 1920. A few years later a highly weaponized and aggressive Germany invaded Poland in 1939. 19 years from zero to war.
We have very little military spending. The ukraine invasion was a very successfull testrun for Putin.
We in Europe we keep ourselve weak and defenseless. Why?
As a European I hope we find the courage and the strength to allow ourselves to be militarized as we where at the beginning of the 20th century. I think to a certain degree a military conflict with China would not be a bad thing. Here we have achived quite a few things of which each of his own would be worth dying for.
Typical western values are seriously underrated and are not taken seriously.
> Turning things around would require changes of a pace and scale that we have no idea how to motivate and coordinate
Yes everything leads to that question: How can a problem of global scaled be solved, if it seems to be almost impossible to make some progress domestically?
I think I begin to see what the "solution" is going to be like.
The good news is: The planet is not going to die. The bad news: I guess you not gonna like the solution.
I'm convinced that in 10-20 we are going to live much more eco friendly. It will become much more expensive to waste natural resources. But as a downside of this we will loose a lot of personal freedom. Our highly individualized society will come to an end and we will live in a much more controlled environment.
Harmfull behaviour will either be punished with legal sanctions (like corruption) or in some form of social disaproval.
TLDR: In the next 20 we will see a greener but also more unfree world.
Somehow I can understand his frustration, but I do wonder if he actually draw the right conclusion from this failure. Because there is only one reason this couldn't work: He was under capitalized. Maybe initialy he had an intuition that there wasn't enough capital around but in the end convinced himself into this miserable situation.
So the question is why didn't he invested more time and effort into raising capital? He weakened his negotiation position right from start. The notion that you can substitute the lack of money with skill is naive.
I just watched the video and here is what I think could be approved. As someone who knows nothing about your project the first thing I’d like to know how it runs.
So I think you could get out more from your demonstration and place it before the API usage tutorial part.
Right now the demonstration feels a bit hasty and nervous. It would be nice to have more detail on whats going on in the demo.
It was surprisingly hard to figure out the problem with these two articles.I mean it all makes sense, I couldn't stop nodding. And dont get me started with the picture from the stairs where the fighting couple stands below the lamentable single person. I mean: yes! And if that is not enough, our reading efforts are rewarded with a handy checklist for choosing the right partner.
I know the author might not happy about this, but I have an odd feeling (ha, shoot me). And the intensions they where, as they always are , the intentions where good. Nobody was hurt, no potential was spoiled, no time was lost. Everyone is happy. Sure there are conflicts and stumbling blocks, but with solid work and communication you disolve them into harmless bumps while sailing away on your Loveboat. Ready for the next chapture. Buying a house. Having kids. Growing older together. Die with a smile on your face surrounded by caring people.
If anything is overly romantic, than this. Completely ignoring the context you live in and reduce everything to a handfull of personal traits and skills is overly simplicistic (stupid) and naive, because:
- you cannot create love by communication, or transform friendship or nice feeling into love
- It is reasonable if you seek for true love and believe in fate (But only until you're 30)
- If you have been hurt, betrayed, used and left, take it as a sign to loath yourself less (and not others more)
- Life can be bitter. Love can vanish. Dreams can be shattered.
There is this song "Hello" from Adele, which is fairly popular. It describes somehow a state of love and connection after it is long gone. Something I'm not sure this author would even understand.
I don't think it's the states problem. You find this kind of alarming situations all over the planet. The development pattern is always the same: Use it to the end as fast as possible. The poorer or weaker the state the faster it goes. But the development and the direction takes place with or without state.
But isn't that the case with ALL finite/natural resources? In this case it's might be the state, in the case of oil it might be other actor(s), in case of rare minerals the causes are again different.
Could our world even work without these discount prices? Probabely not. Thats why this is all so terrifying. There is no data about how much oil or silicon or aluminium or uranium we have. We dig this things out and throw them on the marked and then act as if those prices reflect the value of this things.
Even if I don't live in the US and being not particularly interested I've heard about California’s water problem more then 10 ago. That means the problems and dangers are well know a relatively long time ago. There is a ton of publications and research on various levels and domains.
It seems to me that we are completely incapable to handle the challenges that come with (finite) natural resources. Our system works as long as it works and then it halts full stop. Like a massive train, there is no change of course.