The "things I hate" thread

Like a friend once told me. It would be far easier to name the things you like over the things you don't.


any how, I hate you DRM(inspired by a conversation with Petty). Yes, I can and do go around you but I shouldn't HAVE to go around you. It makes it hard to buy games online because of you. It should be like the old days where I buy the game with that many string attachments. It is like the game is mines but it isn't because they can decide at any time when I can and can not play. If I want to play the game on the moon with no Internet service then by god I should be able to.

The point of this thread is to name things that you don't like. avoid names and people.

 

I hate that we're officially seven billion on this resource stretched planet. Nature will correct this situation eventually.

 

I don't know if nature would be able to perform the task at hand.

 

It won't and we have plenty resources. We simply don't have the will to use it. I keep hearing we might run out of water. I always go really?

Have you seen the pacific ocean yet?

just remember necessity is the mother of invention. It isn't needed to make salt water into fresh water right now. When it is, You'll see all the companies working on it for their precious money.

 

Let me remind you that we're simply not talking about water. But consider that 30% of the planet is land based and 70% is made of water. With human beings basically robbing the planet of its resources, polluting the waters continuously so that big businesses can sustain their worth and profit, I find your answer to be completely misguided and too short-sighted.

With seven billion, it'll be problematic. With ten billion inhabitants, it'll be disastrous since we can't sustain that much. So unless the Earth can self-expand itself, then there's no guarantee that either the human race or nature itself can survive.

 

It's true, but the Earth has the marvelous ability to self-regulate. Things like the Bubonic Plague appeared at a time when the population was massive, and more than what the regions at the time could stand safely. I think we're very close to something going very wrong.

 

I believe we have the resources, but they're distributed in such a lopsided way that people are starving to death. This COULD be addressed, but we haven't the will to do so.

Meanwhile Congress, instead of paying attention to crumbling infrastructure, hungry and unemployed citizens, etc. spends most of it's time contemplating how to force women to have more children against their will.

Honestly, there are no jobs in my womb, but as it stands there's too many politicians in there for a fetus to fit anyway

 

Massive in the millions, sure. But compare millions to billions and you can still assure the same self-regulating outcome? That's impossible. It's really unfair to compare the past to the present especially when dealing with technology and how it relies too much on the precious natural resources and materials. Back then, it wasn't quite the same.

 

Hence why I do feel that there has to be some form of population control in the near future. Want to prolong the inevitable? Then at least curb the numbers. It's a win-lose situation anyway, but it's the "best".

 

It is actually not so short sighted. It is very very far sighted. Everything thing is composed of atoms for the most part. You simply reconstruct what you want to get what you want. You need water from salt water. remove the salt. need energy to power your car get it from the energy that holds the atoms together. Need food, a burger,? reconstruct it from say rocks.

now having the knowledge to do this is where we are lacking. We right now have no want or will. Of course, this is very very far out there. hence why it is far sighted. The universe provides more than enough. The question is does humanity have the will to gather the information over just settling for a good time now.

 

Nice catch on identifying atoms as the building blocks of matter. Moving from that truism to Star Trek style food replicators should be easy now.

Second, this is about more than food and water but a variety of non-renewable resources that we're tearing through like kids on Christmas morning. Land and fossil fuels are just two on that list.

Third, there is an inherent value in having less people that cannot be reduced to innovating our way out of poverty, famine, and disease.

 

We have a big universe to play in. I don't think humanity is going to stay in this section when there is the rest of the universe to run through. It is like staying in africa when you have the rest of the world to explore or a baby staying in one room when it is free to go to other rooms.

The energy again can be pulled from the energy that holds atoms together.

The problem still remains that we have no actual will to perform the acts. too busy fighting it out.

I really don't see an inherent value. You could apply such an inherent value to not having anything at all. no strain on the resources if there is nothing.

 

You need to relieve yourself from all the crappy science fiction nonsense and stick with actual science. I understood your position on salt water - feasible. But again, you're ignoring that not a lot of the water on this earth is really drinkable and we're not talking natural resources either.

We're talking chemical resources and other sources which pollutes the waters. If your logic had any merit, then there would be an abundance of drinkable water in many of the poor African regions today.

And what's this nonsense with reconstructing rocks to make burgers? That makes as much sense as thinking a big turd can serve as a nutritious edible item to replace meat, when they are very different sources of material.

You're "correct" in your thought that eventually, human beings will eventually expand beyond the planet earth. But you'd have to factor whether or not humans will not grow extinct. Besides, by 2050, we're going to hit that 10 billion milestone and that would serve to be problematic.

And lessening the population isn't a far-fetched idea. Again, the planet cannot expand, therefore overpopulation would be the outcome. The ultimate value by decreasing the numbers would keep the earth in a healthy and more so sustainable condition.

 

as horrific as a natural disaster is to metropolitan area i am certain that having many parish during an occurance is part of the circle of life...i don't mean that to sound flip or uncaring just a matter of fact...

 

Agreed. Totally, Lippy. I said something like that yesterday and BBW tried to tell me it wouldn't happen. The earth is capable of hitting reset if and when it needs to, of that I am absolutely sure.

 

I also wonder quite often, not about human population, but about how we intend to continue to power the earth. Is it really sustainable?

I shuttle quite often on an airplane from the wilderness into the city. And the last time, as the plane made its descent, something struck me, as I caught the shifting perspectives of the city, at different altitudes. The idea of the city as a motherboard, and its buildings as microchips and its roads as tracks of circuits.

I think it is easier to have this sense of the city when you foray into it at night at a certain altitude.The lights highlight the feature of the microchips buried, or soldered onto a motherboard on various legs, or pins.

In this sense of perception, I wonder about the economic concept of national accounting in GDP. I wonder about western concepts of prosperity, and its aesthetics. The idea

In this context, evidence suggests a fewer population consumes a higher percentage of the earth's resources, probably ninety percent. Methinks, in this case, the indiscriminate use of energy should be one of the major issues of concern, not this often repeated "humanitarian" crisis waiting to happen.

The present is too precious to ignore.

If I was a bird flying over the city from the wilderness, I wonder how it would be to imagine how humans, western, have reshaped the world we all inhabit.

 

That's actual science not science fiction. We do have machines that do remove salt from water.

We have oceans full of water. That's enough.

I have said this for the past two posts. Necessity. There isn't much money in making machines that purify water for people who have little to no money. It is far easier to sell it from a fresh source to a rich nation. capitalism is still in full effect. I have clearly said that necessity is the mother of invention. There is no need.

What's the rock made out of proton, neutrons, and electons. What is water made out of? what is food made of? proton, neurton and electrons. It is an easy concept to understand on reconstructing them. However, having the knowledge to do this is ridiculous hard and would take a lot of time to figure out. Not to mention at this point, there is no necessity. We have a lot of cows and chickens and cloning being perfected to be healthy for human consumption.

I don't understand how it is nonsense to you? Do you honestly think that matter is not made up of proton neutron and electrons?

We reconstruct molecules often(through genetic engineering and various of other ways) For god sakes, we created a living organism from a computer by reconstructing molecules. We have made new atoms. Do you honestly think we will simply stop at reconstructing molecules and making new atoms?

While I don't think it will happen soon(no need we can clone chicken fish and cows), we do have enough food to push to the 10 billion(look at the average "poor" american that is usually fat. :mrgreen. Water may be a problem.

 

it most certainly will happen...if not a natural disaster...famine...plague...disease...there is a number of things that could happen...

 

I'm not disputing salt from water extractions. I thought we were clear on that in the last paragraph.

That is true, but that only reinforces the reality that anyone who thinks there is an abundance of materials in an overpopulated environment are either too deluded or certainly stuck in Trekkie Land.

I have said this for the past two posts. Necessity. There isn't much money in making machines that purify water for people who have little to no money. It is far easier to sell it from a fresh source to a rich nation. capitalism is still in full effect. I have clearly said that necessity is the mother of invention. There is no need. ​

Okay, first of all...who in here is disputing the molecular structure of life? No one, so you can stop that irrelevancy. I'm addressing the silliness of someone believing that you can turn rocks into meat by breaking their substances down. This is science fiction here at its finest. There are a lot of things that can be possible (time-travel, going beyond 4D space), but there are limits in the laws of nature.

Secondly, you're still holding a silly assumption that we can feed a population. There's more to it than simply feeding and keeping nourished. The planet, again, isn't expandable and won't do it for a growing population. Here's a little hint of modern day events. Sixty years ago, when the population was significantly less, with all the convoluted forms of governments, wars, etc...there were higher levels of sustainability for the average person in terms of life.

Fast forward to today, we have made great technological strides, but this also serves as a crux because humans have an over-reliance on everything other than ourselves. We value great comfort, but we lose a lot of our self-sufficiency compared to even people during the earlier ages. Dependency is much higher this generation than it was a long time ago.

There are a lot of matters which contribute to the overall problem of overpopulation.

 

I hate the way the English language is going to hell in a fucking handbag thanks in part to technology and the dumbing down of each new generation.

I am going to be one cranky bitch of an eighty year old lady looking at all of the little cretins the idiots before them have spewed from their loins. I probably won't even be able to understand them.

Hopefully I won't have to - I'll be a hermitess with a gun, a cat, and will have my groceries delivered to the house. I will only sneak out of the house for yard sales to rescue old books and to talk to other old people who still speak the original Queen's English, learned how to read by phonics, still write in cursive, can do long division by hand (NOT a calculator), and know how to get somewhere without using a fucking GPS.

I will also only talk to people who say "ES-presso", not "EX-presso",
"LiBRARy", not "Li-Berry"
"LaundROmat", not "LaundRYmat"
"JeWELry" not "JOOLery"
"ES-cape", not "EX-cape"
"ASK", not "AKS"
and
"Mine", not "Mines"