Slashdot Mirror

Here ya go

i don't think the parent-post was ruling out simply reducing population by changing the first derivative ...

VHEMT.ORG

i'd really rather people not had kids. i'm hoping not to. and just think -- your neat, show-off-to-the-coworkers kid might wind up rejecting your religion of choice ... better not to have one, right? (damn, i wish that had worked on some families i know ...)

sadly, i've found that the less-free-thinking families tend to have the most kids. they may not even be idiots ... they just -must- have the traditional family (2.x kids, etc.) ... even worse, they seem to think they have to do this each time they get married, if that's several times (a marriage just isn't right if you don't have kids to prove it's working out) ...

(btw, the part about killing the jews ... that's just a straw-man argument. it's funny, sorta, yes ... but not necessary. after all, we could just -sterilize- ... )

If there were only 1 person in this world, he could not damage the earth regardless of how stupid his decisions might be.

And if there were no people, the Earth could retain its natural, pristine whatevers for all eternity. What a paradise it would be!

Let me guess: you're a card-carrying member of The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, right?

Voluntary Human Extinction MovemenT

Getting a Darwin award and not having kids are not the same thing. The people doing dumb crap and getting a darwin award could have already had children. **patches hole**

RU486?

Why, yes! Yes I am, best drug on the market.

VHEMT

Like these guys?

The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Yes, it is a ridiculous idea, but the site is entertaining and occasionally informative.

On a different note, I noticed a few people taking about how things will settle down after there is a scramble for resources. Sure, billions might die, but in the end, homeostasis will be achieved, right? The problem with that line of reasoning is the assumption that there will be something left after we are done fighting. We aren't ants, folks. We use big scary bombs to fight for resources. And those bombs have the capability to destroy all of the resources.

Just remember, radioactive wheat isn't so appetizing.

Or, we could try to decrease our numbers.

She should consider having NO children and helping humanity voluntarily make itself extinct. We have done far too much damage to this planet already.

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement

All about extinction.

A lot of the time, I think I prefer the latter more than the former.

well, it looks like the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement are going to win out this one...
eh.
i'm not too worried... i never liked people much to begin with

Someone whose sig points to vhemt is bitching about a clause in the license that tells spammers to fuck off? It's not like bero-rh expects to collect the $100G (I can just see a court ordering that - yeah right). It's a statement, dude, kinda like vhemt....

Do yourself a favor and go look at the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement webpage.

Breathe!

bort

Now that would be a good start.

______________

There is plenty wrong with procreation, see Voluntary Human Extinction Movement for a start.

______________

I would of course, be extremely happy if these people choose not to have kids of their own when they grow up. A great victory indeed.

I have to add, though, that oftentimes people in working-class situations can't do all this stuff. They just don't have the time.

Well I'll get beaten down for this but... if you don't have time to be a parent you shouldn't have kids. I know I'm a selfish person and would be a horrible mother, so I've chosen to let my gene pool stagnate. Half in jest, I offer this link: www.vhemt.org.


"Smear'd with gumms of glutenous heat, I touch..." - Comus, John Milton

Stopping the reproduction completely for few decades would be another good step as well, though.

And to comment the electric cars quote and bring some good ol' flamefest back: cars are a stupid idea, period.

______________

RMS should be a member of The Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, if he is not already. Those of you posting knee-jerk reactions to this kabuki-west citation would do well to take a deep breath, read over the VHEMT site, and think before you submit.

For example, after having built a few small hydro-electric plants, you notice that you can get loads of electricity out of them for almost no ongoing costs, and you don't end up with horribly polluted cities like you did when you were burning coal. So you say, "Great! Let's go build hydro-dams", and you set off round the country looking for good spots on large rivers to start erecting dams.

Fast forward a few decades. Suddenly hydro isn't looking so exciting. You've dammed up all your large rivers at massive public cost -- it turns out building dams is really difficult. Most of the dams you've built came in over-budget and aren't generating as much electricity as they were supposed to. The eco-systems down river of the dams are trashed because they aren't getting enough water. The eco-systems up river are trashed because they're flooded. When the dam was closed you flooded a bunch of great farm land, and now all the vegetation on that land is rotting under water and releasing tons of greenhouse gasses. But you've still got lots of electricity for the future, right? Wrong. It turns out all your dams are filling up with sediment, and are going to be useless in a few years anyway.

That's when you turn to nuclear ... same deal. Supposed to be cheap, clean and renewable. Turns out to be expensive, dangerous and polluting. The people who told us to pay them to build nuclear plants and who said they'd be safe and cheap don't seem to be home when the plants need to be decomissioned, or when it comes to being legally liable for meltdown risk.

So what above wave power? Well it sounds like there's a pretty good chance that it's going to be a lot less damaging than coal, nuclear or hydro, and we should certainly start using it in wider deployments. We sure could use better alternatives to what we're doing now. But lets not just assume that building wave barriers entirely around every coastal country isn't going to have some environmental impact -- to figure that out you'll need ecologists paid by industry independent organizations, whose opinions will be listened to and not just swept under the carpet (as in the case of Nuclear or Hydro).

Final point -- the real win optimizations here are to decrease our needs for energy by looking for less energy intensive technologies and by reducing the uses that we do have. Anyone still using incandescent light bulbs? And what the hell happened to Green PCs? Those high power PIII and Athlon processors burning up more juice than ever before. What do you think those fans and heat sinks are for?

The incentive for invention of better low-power technologies will be commercial. That means that electricity costs should reflect actual production costs, and that means we have to stop subsidising (non-renewable) electricity generation with taxes.

We also need to stop the growth of world population.

We'll need to figure something before the human race goes extinct, but these guys would probably like that!

Well, yes. And for starters, you shouldn't have children anyway. Breeding is extremely irresponsible ecologically.

______________

This is typical of the poor reasoning skills of the "pro-choice" movement. If I have an apartment for rent and I want to start storing my own stuff in there, can I kill the inhabitants because "it isn't anybody else's right to force me to rent"? No, because that's irrelevant. I don't want to get into the process of insulting ones reasoning skills. However, your logic is flawed. If you have 'an apartment for rent' you make a decision on what to do with it. A) you rent it out and reap the rewards of the income or B) you store your stuff there. The decision being made before hand as to which you action you will take. Killing your tenants to store your stuff is not an option (although at times it doesn't sound like a bad idea :P ) and you have to either wait until the lease expires or you find some legal grounds for eviction. A womb is not an apartment and its tenant (your implication) does not have the rights a real tenant would have by contract. My whole point is this: Your beliefs should not be able to prevent someone else who thinks otherwise from doing what they envision as thier own righteous legal actions in a free society. You have your point of view to which there is merit. This does not negate my right to have a different view. I already stated my personal view on late term abortion: no it should not happen unless there is a serious medical need for it. Other people feel different and think that late term abortion is ok. More power to them. I applaud them and you for sharing your views and hope that more people will develop at the very least an informed opinion. There are too many people who don't even have an opinion to begin with. What an absolute tragedy. Maybe that in and of itself is a case for abortion right there... I digress. When its all said and done I think that abortion should be legal and free. I am tired of my tax dollars funding welfare, prisons, public housing, food, and social security for society's unwanted and unintentional additional populous. If you want to have children fine. If you don't want to have them that is fine to. Make a choice and move along that path. When you pull the lever on election day remember the real, long lasting implications of your decision and the people that will be empowered by it. If you want to end up in a society where abortion is illegal then go ahead and vote for Bush and be happy when that happens. I'd rather not see that as the outcome because the mentaility of the RTL crowd is that what they believe I should believe and that is not right. In fact, it is very disrespectful to the tenets of freedom. This will only continue to foster intollerance of opposing views and lead to censorship on levels far beyond the scope of what the RTL agenda would have you think they are about.de cadir - to make a choice and eliminate or cut off all other scenarios.

The only solution would be to colonize the space and find another planet to live on.

Either that or we just let the human race die out.

For fuck's sake, why?

Repeat after me: humans are not important, the ecosystem is. The latter will win, and that's ok. In fact, we should speed the development by not breeding anymore. Or to be more extreme, hastening the end voluntarily.

Click to learn.

______________

sorry, that link should have taken you here I appologize for any inconvenience.

Decrease the surplus population

These guys seem to agree with you.

his point does stand. but the mac os (unfortunately) sucks for everything but user interface (where i use it exclusively). serving on a mac is just stupid because of the instability and *lack* of proper remote administration on the mac os. I use macs (running macos) and PCs running various flavours of unix, and i've come to this conclusion over and over again. also, your arrogance *does* make it look like you want to be flamed back to the pit from whence you came. http://www.vhemt.org comes to mind. later.

You Americans just don't get it. Producing non-disposable goods (read: toxic or slowly decomposing waste like diapers or plutonium) or generally products from non-regenerating sources (like oil) or food from animal by-products is just making things worse for the environment. In addition, by UN sources, 75% of the consumption of natural resources on earth is done by US citizens. Even with that highly materialistic doctrine of yours you don't produce that much.

Read more cold facts.

In addition, your number of 95% looks made up.

Sure it is, it could have been 100% as well. Precise numbers are for humour impaired.

______________

if you didnt understand the article or what he was saying take a step back. try dropping all the prejudices and ideas that have been embedded in your brain and really take in what he is saying. killing deformed and retarded babies? it may not sound good but it is an idea that people should talk about. after hitting the 6 billion point we need to look at the way we are reproducing because soon enough there won't be enough room for all of us. if you really want to understand and dont see the ideals embedded in your brain maybe you should read ishmael by daniel quinn.

another good place to go and read that deals with over population and gets lots of the shunning i talked about visit the voluntary human extinction movement.

want to write me about this post? click here.

Yes, my apathy for my fellow humans is appalling.

But why should society as a whole expend the energy required to maintain an additional life, especially when there are already so damn many human beings, and when these individuals aren't going to be making positive contributions to the world around them?

People who get upset by views like mine and the professors have to realize that no one (except maybe some officials in China) is in any position to act on them.

-- VHEMT

Shouting out an accusation is an action, not an idea (much ink has been spilt on getting this distinction straight).

But to address your general point: Yes, all evil actions begin as evil ideas. But it's a general principle of good government (more than that, a general moral principle) that if you're going to ban something for the good of us all, you should do it in a way which reduces freedom as little as possible. This would clearly mean taking steps against the action, not the idea.

And, I think that the idea that the group to which I belong (human beings) should be exterminated is not one that should be censored. I personally think it's loony, but the people who believe it serve a useful purpose, increasing the diversity of ideas. Maybe they're right -- maybe human beings are a bad idea for the world and we should all die out. Or maybe they're mad. Either way, we don't do ourselves any favours by ruling things out other than on their merits.

jsm

For all of you ready to stop having children, go to the great website for Voluntary Human Extinction. Its the ultimate solution.