Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bayindirh 7 days ago
There are so many things I can write about this, but I’ll keep it short:

Technological solutions to societal problems is one of the shortest paths to hell.

So, no, thanks.

2 comments

> Technological solutions to societal problems is one of the shortest paths to hell.

This is an unjustified blanket opinion. Sometimes, societal problems can be solved by technological progress. I think you simply lack imagination if you cannot think of any societal problem that would be solved by better technology.

Thanks for your comment. Can you provide me some examples so we can discuss on it further?
For example: the current societal problem of not doing enough against climate change would disappear if we developed cheap fusion power and/or very cheap grid-scale batteries that would remove the intermittency issue from renewables. Such power sources would quickly replace fossil fuels simply due to better economics, no need to change society to care about climate change anymore.
May I interest you in Jevon's paradox: if a thing becomes cheaper or more efficient, usage tends to go up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

How will increased energy use from *carbon-neutral sources* cause climate change?
You know, the laws of thermodynamics. Every machine generates heat. For example datacenters generate megawatts of it.

Even though you do have less greenhouse gases to trap the heat, you will be pumping more of that heat into the atmosphere, seas and oceans, warming everything up.

You're removing one aspect of climate change but not all aspects of it, still affecting the climate and ecosystems.

Also, for example, we still can't fly passenger and cargo planes with electricity for now, so you won't be able to remove all greenhouse gases, yet.

Look at the data [0]. Yes, energy production and heating is the biggest contributor, and even if you manage to remove it completely with the transportation sector via electrification, half of the emissions are still there.

[0]: https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector

Sure, so then what does society do with all of the cheap energy? Human nature is still there. Among other things, leads directly to discarding even more plastic junk wherever it’s convenient and no one complains too much.
Recently Animats replied to one of my comments and brought "Megawatt Racks" to my attention.

I work at a datacenter. We provide compute resources to researchers, and while our datacenter is not small or low energy, one of our systems have Green500 certification and we try to do things as efficient as possible.

When I look at our racks, some of them are DLC BTW, and imagine each of them can pack a MW system now, I shudder. Not because of us, but what AI datacenters gonna do with that energy density and how much heat will these systems put out.

Like money? Or agriculture?

Sincerely though, can you explain?

"We need most of our population working full time to keep ourselves fed because running a farm is really hard" is a technical problem, not a societal one. You can solve it with fertilizer and the cotton gin or whatever.

"There's a bunch of us now and barter isn't cutting it anymore" is a technical problem, not a societal one. You can solve it with coinage and banks or whatever.

"The internet used to be fun and useful but now it sucks" is a societal problem, not a technical one. You can't solve it with a federated twitter clone or yet another secure messaging protocol or whatever.

What? Why? Why would those first two be "technical problems" that we can "solve" with innovation, but that last example isn't? What makes something a technical problem vs. a societal problem?
Generally, if you're targeting behavior of the people or the masses, you're targeting a societal problem.

People bullying other people is not a technical problem. People driving dangerously is not a technical problem. People shoplifting is not a technical problem. All of them have different reasons deep down, and preventing the symptom doesn't solve the problem.

When you effectively prevent bullying, the bully might damage something else or may do self-harm to soothe their demons. Same for people driving dangerously or have to shoplift to survive.

When you cure the root problem, which is generally harder BTW, the problem you're technically trying to prevent disappears, too.

Hope this helps.

Not even a little bit. Every example given has immediate first order causes and effects that are both technical and societal. And the second order effects are even more entangled. The example of a societal problem given (online bullying) is itself enabled by technology! And there are online spaces where technology solves it.

We are highly adoptable, highly social creatures whose behavior is greatly impacted by our environment, which includes the people around us, the culture in which we live, and the things that technology enables (or prevents) in that environment.

I just think there’s no bright line at all between societal and technical problems, they’re just labels we apply based on our internal views of how they should be solved.

> I just think there’s no bright line at all between societal and technical problems, they’re just labels we apply based on our internal views of how they should be solved.

A great event has happened a couple of days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49045159 (Google may soon restrict on-device ADB).

So, people rushed to propose technical solutions to this. I noted that on-device ADB was the primary vector for sideloading applications and touted as the "ultimate solution" to Google's tightening of Android ecosystem.

Now, the ADB door is closing, yet people are proposing technical solutions, but the problem is not technical in nature. Google's mindset and agenda is restricting Android step by step, and the trend will continue.

At every step, Android power users adapt, will find new technical workarounds and comfort themselves, but the problem is not technical in nature. No technical solution can stop Google from closing this doors because decisions are managerial and rooting from human-nature.

So this is a great example to what I pointed out. Technical solutions can't solve societal problems. The problem is not restricting ADB. The problem is Google's desire to restrict and close-down Android ecosystem. You can't solve it with a patch, but maybe relieve symptoms for a short amount of time.

If one considers this solving, then it's just deluding yourself.

Taxing the bots for UBI would help more people than it would harm.
> People driving dangerously is not a technical problem.

Complete bullshit. This problem can be completely solved by a technical, not societal solution: actually working self-driving cars. Once they are available, all your imperfect societal solutions to the problem are not needed anymore.

Yeah, that future is certainly here: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-FXvRHHjXSU

I don't believe many understands the complexity of a self-driving car. It's not like programming a couple of agents with simulated sensors on a computer.

Yes like money and agriculture. We produce enough food for everyone and then throw it away because some dont have money for it. Very good example!