C# already had all the advantages of Go (more or less) and more, yet Go is still growing. This has nothing to do with the technical capabilities of the languages.
> We DO NOT have to "continue as we are for another 50 years". In 50 years there will be desperation to increase fertility rates.
If the population size goes down but consumption per person goes up by an equivalent amount (easy to imagine when US citizen emits 5x carbon of average citizen of many other countries) we have the same problem.
If things are so rosy environmentally, why are so many species going extinct due to habitat loss?
A good example is river health. We can provide more meat with high density grazing. But the waste products have to go somewhere, so the farmers spread them across their fields. Now when it rains, these run into the rivers and we get algae bloom. Majority of rivers in UK are now dying, for example.
Have we discovered a sustainable way of producing more meat in less space? I hope so. But perhaps we are destroying natural systems whose benefit to us has not been properly quantified, in a way that will be extremely difficult to reverse.
Modern agriculture has enabled us to support a larger world population with less labour and less space, but can we continue as we are for another 50 years?
However, I wish our culture considered it rude to just walk up to someone in the middle of deep work and ask them something - unless it’s really important and time critical. It could be a simple as sending a message first “free for a quick chat?”
Not a Malthusian, but I’m very worried about the amount of resources we are using. We already lack the carbon budget and farming capacity for the world’s population to live to the standard of an average US citizen. There might be enough space and enough atoms, but we don’t yet have the capability to direct it into sustainable quality of life for all.
See smart TVs