|
|
|
|
|
by stevenAthompson
449 days ago
|
|
It still seems pretty crazy to me. In the wired article the author says he thinks climate change will disrupt trade routes, but obviously society would route around the damage as long as it remained profitable to do so. The only scenario in which this hypothetical makes sense would be mass causality events like pandemics or wars that prevent travel and trade. So we're talking about a hypothetical situation in which global trade has halted almost completely for some reason, and has been stopped for a very, very long time. This means that the majority of the worlds population are either dead or dying, which means that YOU will be either dead or dying as well. Even if we accept the premise (a tall ask) AND we assume you will happen to be one of the survivors because you're "special", wouldn't it make more sense to prep by building a cargo ship so trade can resume sooner than it does to build apocalypse proof micro-controller code? |
|