SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the create-the-world-you-would-want-to-survive-in dept.
Douglas Rushkoff has a thought-provoking article on Medium, Survival of the Richest -- The wealthy are plotting to leave us behind; here are some excerpts:
Last year, I got invited to a super-deluxe private resort to deliver a keynote speech to what I assumed would be a hundred or so investment bankers. It was by far the largest fee I had ever been offered for a talk — about half my annual professor’s salary — all to deliver some insight on the subject of “the future of technology.”
[...] I just sat there at a plain round table as my audience was brought to me: five super-wealthy guys — yes, all men — from the upper echelon of the hedge fund world. After a bit of small talk, I realized they had no interest in the information I had prepared about the future of technology. They had come with questions of their own.
They started out innocuously enough. Ethereum or bitcoin? Is quantum computing a real thing? Slowly but surely, however, they edged into their real topics of concern.
Which region will be less impacted by the coming climate crisis: New Zealand or Alaska? Is Google really building Ray Kurzweil a home for his brain, and will his consciousness live through the transition, or will it die and be reborn as a whole new one? Finally, the CEO of a brokerage house explained that he had nearly completed building his own underground bunker system and asked, “How do I maintain authority over my security force after the event?”
[...] The Event. That was their euphemism for the environmental collapse, social unrest, nuclear explosion, unstoppable virus, or Mr Robot hack that takes everything down.
This single question occupied us for the rest of the hour. They knew armed guards would be required to protect their compounds from the angry mobs. But how would they pay the guards once money was worthless? What would stop the guards from choosing their own leader? The billionaires considered using special combination locks on the food supply that only they knew. Or making guards wear disciplinary collars of some kind in return for their survival. Or maybe building robots to serve as guards and workers — if that technology could be developed in time.
[...] The future became less a thing we create through our present-day choices or hopes for humankind than a predestined scenario we bet on with our venture capital but arrive at passively.
[...] When the hedge funders asked me the best way to maintain authority over their security forces after “the event,” I suggested that their best bet would be to treat those people really well, right now. They should be engaging with their security staffs as if they were members of their own family. And the more they can expand this ethos of inclusivity to the rest of their business practices, supply chain management, sustainability efforts, and wealth distribution, the less chance there will be of an “event” in the first place. All this technological wizardry could be applied toward less romantic but entirely more collective interests right now.
They were amused by my optimism, but they didn’t really buy it. They were not interested in how to avoid a calamity; they’re convinced we are too far gone. For all their wealth and power, they don’t believe they can affect the future. They are simply accepting the darkest of all scenarios and then bringing whatever money and technology they can employ to insulate themselves — especially if they can’t get a seat on the rocket to Mars.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jelizondo on Tuesday July 24 2018, @10:58PM (14 children)
If you assume that civilization crashes, then your options are few and perhaps death is not so bad. We would be in the bottom of Maslow’s pyramid, every effort meant only for survival.
Say one stores lots and lots of food, well it will go bad in a few months or years. What’s the use? You’ll be left without food in little time, even if it would last your personal life, what becomes of your children?
You need to learn to raise food, either plants or animals, but other people might take them so you need protection and thus taxes appear again, you’ll have to share your food with those that protect you from others. Or you can take the opposite tack and become a protector of food raisers in exchange for food.
But you see, there is no middle man here. No use for brokers, bankers, investors or anyone who can’t grow food or battle others. You need to earn your keep, with your hands and perhaps risking your life. Frankly I don’t see this fancy guys lasting long “after the event.”
(Score: 2) by suburbanitemediocrity on Tuesday July 24 2018, @11:09PM (9 children)
Remember, you don't have to run faster than the bear. You need only to run faster than the guy next to you.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Tuesday July 24 2018, @11:15PM (1 child)
Replace the bear with an angry mob of billions of bears.
Still need to remember that saying?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Touché) by suburbanitemediocrity on Wednesday July 25 2018, @12:17AM
Yes. I was responding to the
part
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 24 2018, @11:15PM
If you have somewhere to run
(Score: 4, Touché) by legont on Tuesday July 24 2018, @11:16PM
Only when there are way more guys than bears. The real lessons of crashes teach otherwise.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by jelizondo on Wednesday July 25 2018, @12:26AM (4 children)
So if I ran out of food all I need is find a bear and run from it? :-)
With your logic, death should be your primary option.
(Score: 3, Informative) by suburbanitemediocrity on Wednesday July 25 2018, @01:48AM (3 children)
You can easilystore enough food to last 5-10 years which is enough time for the masses to starve to death.
I was researching desalination techniques and came across Branson's island. It's self contained and you can grow supplemental food.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STCqSXCbbcw [youtube.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jelizondo on Wednesday July 25 2018, @02:24AM (2 children)
Oh God! As I said death might not be so bad. So after ten years, what? The masses starved to death. Fine. What has that bought me?
After ten years things get much, much worse. Any technology you might had is probably gone or failing, a bad crop is enough to kill you, any sickness is serious and death is an insect bite away. Fuck even drinking water could kill you.
On an island you say? Well, after a while everyone is inbred and living on the Stone Age or worse. Anyone leaving the island (if possible *) would have to deal with some though bastards upon arriving anywhere where people are still alive, because anyone who survived is going to fire first and ask questions later.
Really think about it. No fertilizers, no insecticides, no vaccines, no medicine, none of the things that make life easy, entertaining and fulfilling are available (other than sex with your relatives, that is), so again, death might not be so bad.
It’s not a Hollywood movie, it is a civilization crash. It might take thousands of years to recover. Surviving ten years ain’t gonna cut it pal.
* Richy Rich is moving to New Zeland. Getting from there to Sidney (Australia) is about 1,200 miles (2000 km) so it is unlikely that a floating log will serve and it is about the shortest distance to any major landmass. Of course, landmasses are closer from Branson's Island [wikipedia.org] but then again it is only 30 ha (74 acres) of mostly unproductive soil. [fao.org]
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Wednesday July 25 2018, @09:10AM (1 child)
*Sydney
And some people kayak between Australia & NZ [theguardian.com]. Doable with less tech too, just look at Thor Heyerdahl's "Kontiki" journey.
Real risk is loss of "old" knowledge; that's what's really going to kill you in the longer run in an end-of-civilisation scenario.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday July 25 2018, @06:01PM
Every modern trip like that I've heard of has had "rescue options" available electronically. They might not be needed, and they might not have worked, but they were there, and significantly reduced the danger. This doesn't mean what you're proposing is impossible, just a lot less likely to succeed than you are hypothesizing. They also had all sorts of advance planning, and carefully chosen modern equipment. Thor Heyerdahl didn't advertise his radio, but it was there.
Additionally, you need to develop the skills *before* you set out if you want to have a reasonable chance of surviving. And you don't take an invading army that way without generations of developed skill...which is likely to tell you that what you're proposing is too dangerous for a major investment even with developed skill.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday July 25 2018, @02:25AM (3 children)
One merely needs to look at history to see a lot of options. We've been there before.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by jelizondo on Wednesday July 25 2018, @03:27AM (2 children)
Nope. We haven't. You don't give an example of previous civilization collapse so I'll give you two: the Mayan and the Roman.
The Mayan never attained anywhere close to their previous splendor, their cities abandoned by around 900 A.D. By the time the Spaniards arrived starting in 1511, no great Mayan city was inhabited. After that, well, the shit hit the fan and they never raised again.
After the fall of Rome, we had the great Dark Ages. Of course, Western Civilization arose from the ashes of Rome and here we are.
But think about it. We have mined most of the easily obtained mineral resources. Most of coal and oil are gone. Yes, there is still coal in Wyoming and Montana, but the ratios are about 3:1, that is you have to crush 3 tons of rock to get one ton of coal. And pray tell me, how are you going to crush 3 tons of rock? By hand? There is no electricity, no engines, no oil. Yes, there is a lot of copper and steel to be had by ripping it out of existing buildings, but it is all done by hand. And you have to melt it (good luck with structural steel) with bellows-blown fires, there are no electric-arc furnaces working. (And good luck finding enough timber to power a big fire.) Yes, there is still oil in the ground in Texas, but you're in New York, how the hell are going to get it there?
What is the death rate at this “event”? If most people are gone, who is going to be the workforce you will command? And how are going to command it? You are as bad as the fancy rich guys of TFA, no conception at all of what is being wrought. Anything you want done, you’ll have to do yourself, with your own little hands.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday July 25 2018, @04:31AM
Sun will continue to shine for at least half a billion years and we have huge trash heaps to mine. We're not hurting on that end.
Unless, of course, there is. End of civilization doesn't mean end of engines or electricity. The laws of physics didn't change.
So it sucks. Development of societies is "uneven" [soylentnews.org], remember? If we all give up when things get difficult then who will make the next civilization and help them avoid the mistakes of the last civilization?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 25 2018, @06:25AM
With (assumedly) many fewer people, raw and even heavily processed material will be laying on on the surface. Need some copper? No need to mine, strip that vacant housing development.