• 0 Posts
  • 368 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 10th, 2023

help-circle















  • This is one of many examples of a class of problem where the technology is the easy part. There’s room to improve the tech certainly, but the technology sufficient to solve the problem is already well understood.

    The hard part is how to get people to actually do the necessary changes. To consume less, get fewer gas cars on the road, increase the amount of nuclear, hydro, solar, geothermal, and wind in the grid, and minimize coal and gas use. To reduce land use by cows, and increase land use by trees and native plants.

    But maybe AI is the secret here. We have tools that are in the hype moment whose training data already contains several reasonable solutions to climate change. Maybe if AI “finds” the solution to climate change, people will finally listen



  • nfh@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonerule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m not defending commodity landownership. Rent seeking behavior shouldn’t be rewarded, and I think housing people by transferring ownership of vacant units to them without remuneration to prior landlords would promote the public good.

    My point was that as you change the perspective by which you look at a problem like homelessness, the casual factors change, as do the sorts of solutions that people consider. Yes, some of them are really bad at large scales, and I’d rather focus on smaller scales for that reason. At city/metro scales, it’s a lot easier to make meaningful change, and there’s something special about helping your neighbors like that. You’ve kind of made my point for me, there.


  • nfh@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonerule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    How you scope a problem is a choice. It’s possible to make bad choices, but most people make reasonable ones. How to solve homelessness in Philadelphia, in a specific neighborhood therein, in the state of Pennsylvania, in the Eastern US, in the US as a whole, etc, are all reasonable problems to think about.

    Different scopes of homelessness problem will have different extents to which supply, transportation, various policy choices, greedy investors, etc. influence the issue. Some places, reducing the value of places based on how long they’ve been empty might help, other places it may have little effect. It’s actually many related problems, rather than one big one, kind of like cancer.

    And I tend to agree with what you’re saying, at smaller scopes, it really is a simpler problem. People camping outside vacant units should just be housed. Offering someone on the streets of Pittsburgh an apartment in rural Indiana might not actually be very helpful.