[HN Gopher] The scarcity of the long term
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The scarcity of the long term
        
       Author : galfarragem
       Score  : 108 points
       Date   : 2024-02-09 10:41 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (kk.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (kk.org)
        
       | nonrandomstring wrote:
       | Scarcity of attention is one thing. It is complemented by
       | scarcity of commitment. The digital world gives the illusion that
       | everything is possible and easy. In such a world, why bother to
       | do anything?
       | 
       | Over the years I also noticed students getting ever more
       | abstracted into wishful thinking. They hugely underestimate
       | research and development. Proposals are filled with the word
       | "just... ". On realising that something is difficult, they recoil
       | and abandon the whole project.
       | 
       | Although the article talks about the hubris of planning over
       | multiple lifetimes, we have more serious and immediate problems
       | of getting people to plan over mere weeks or days. Everything
       | seems to be making that worse, "AI" in particular.
        
         | graemep wrote:
         | Take a look at would be start up founders and software
         | projects. "I have a great idea, I just need it implemented", "I
         | have a design done, I just need someone to make it work".
        
       | roenxi wrote:
       | This is almost a solved problem; institutions are capable of
       | sustaining intentions for insane periods of time. The major
       | organised religious institutes have been pushing some basic
       | standards for ethical living for millennia. There aren't a lot of
       | projects that humans have considered worth a millenium of effort.
       | Due to the limited abilities of humans that long ago they are all
       | philosophical projects. But we can do it.
       | 
       | And on a smaller scale, institutions can keep grinding away far
       | longer than makes any sense. A grant and a trust fund can last
       | centuries. Look at the educational institutions like Oxford for
       | interesting examples of maintaining a culture. It is pretty easy
       | to imagine a group like that sustaining long term technical
       | projects.
       | 
       | I don't think a millenium of sustained technological effort is
       | actually that hard to achieve. We've obviously never done it
       | before because industrial society is less than 1,000 years old.
       | But assuming we don't self-immolate as seems likely then setting
       | up ultra-long-term-projects isn't that hard to see.
        
         | 5y345ywy wrote:
         | Doesn't this really only hold true if you handwave away the
         | emergence of new denominations within those religions over
         | time?
        
           | graemep wrote:
           | Not really, many old denominations have persisted for a very
           | long time. Catholic and Orthodox churches, for example.
        
         | lifeisstillgood wrote:
         | Institutions sustain _themselves_ or rather the jobs of the
         | controlling minds of the institution. Today's Catholic Church
         | would be viewed by its founders as some kind of uber-hippy
         | bunch of democratic maniacs out to destroy civilisation.
         | 
         | I think the difference here is we can view a company /
         | institution as a machine to do a job, and between a company
         | that has a controlling mind able to change its own machine
         | "code" hence chnage its job.
         | 
         | Without software the two things are needed - but with software
         | we can concieve of a programmable company that just does its
         | tasks as assigned for as long as inputs occur. If those tasks
         | involve say sending jobs out to gig workers the idea kind of
         | works
         | 
         | It does mean you could build a Death Star using robots in place
         | of gig workers (which is the obvious multi-generational
         | solution)
         | 
         | But it does imply something about our companies - that once the
         | whole company can be specified in code, splitting off the
         | "controlling minds" bit (ie management, plus developers) into
         | seperate location seems interesting
         | 
         | It also explicitly makes the issue of who decides what chnages
         | and how come to the fore
        
           | js8 wrote:
           | > Today's Catholic Church would be viewed by its founders as
           | some kind of uber-hippy bunch of democratic maniacs out to
           | destroy civilisation.
           | 
           | Are you sure? It seems to me that Jesus would be dismayed by
           | how establishment they've become and not nearly radical
           | enough.
        
             | Filligree wrote:
             | These can both be true.
        
             | Loughla wrote:
             | And the money in the temple thing, too.
        
             | lukas099 wrote:
             | I don't think they were thinking of Jesus as the founder of
             | the Catholic Church. Although I think that is what the
             | Vatican itself would say (?)
        
               | JackFr wrote:
               | I think the Vatican's perspective would be that it's a
               | theologically meaningless and mostly ill-formed question.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | If we go with Constantine, I guess his strong impression
               | would be how tame and uncommitted modern politics are.
        
         | graemep wrote:
         | Yes, but they believe in eternity, or reincarnation, of
         | something longer than a lifespan. They also often believe in a
         | defined obligation to future generations. Our contemporary
         | culture does not.
         | 
         | > Look at the educational institutions like Oxford for
         | interesting examples of maintaining a culture.
         | 
         | They have changed over the centuries though. The ethos and aims
         | of Oxford are hardly what they were when it got its royal
         | charter in the 13th century. True, it still values scholarship,
         | but it has also changed in a lot of ways.
        
           | denton-scratch wrote:
           | In the olden days, students at Oxford mainly studied
           | Divinity; nowadays there are schools of Business, Islamic
           | Studies, high-energy physics and so on. There is still a
           | number of Oxford "halls" devoted to Divinity, but the number
           | of students and fellows engaged in that kind of work is tiny.
           | 
           | So I agree: it's no longer the same institution at all.
        
             | graemep wrote:
             | > Islamic Studies
             | 
             | Not that different a subject. A different focus
             | traditionally, but still related to a monotheistic
             | religion.
             | 
             | > Business
             | 
             | Definitely very different, especially in ethos.
             | 
             | > There is still a number of Oxford "halls" devoted to
             | Divinity, but the number of students and fellows engaged in
             | that kind of work is tiny.
             | 
             | and I believe the powers that be at the university would
             | like to get rid of them?
        
         | lukas099 wrote:
         | Seems like survivorship bias. A lot of projects fizzle out.
         | Vietnam War comes to mind.
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | Now I'm not exactly sure what the Vietnam war was supposed to
           | achieve, and insofar as it fizzled out we need to define
           | what, exactly, the aim was. I suspect it was pointless and
           | fizzled out due to pointlessness eventually overwhelming the
           | ability of the Americans to fight.
           | 
           | However, if it was to combat communism/the USSR, which is my
           | hazy understanding of the official justification, note
           | communism has largely been expunged as a political ideology.
           | All the communist states failed. The majors (USSR & China)
           | have moved to capitalism. Well, China did. The USSR was
           | removed from the map.
        
             | lukas099 wrote:
             | > Those who argue that the United States' opponents won the
             | war cite the United States' overall objectives and
             | outcomes. The United States entered Vietnam with the
             | principal purpose of preventing a communist takeover of the
             | region. In that respect, it failed: the two Vietnams were
             | united under a communist banner in July 1976. Neighbouring
             | Laos and Cambodia similarly fell to communists.
             | Furthermore, domestic unrest and the financial cost of war
             | made peace--and troop withdrawals--a necessity, not a
             | choice.
             | 
             | From https://www.britannica.com/event/Vietnam-War
             | 
             | In fairness, it also says that some people think the US won
             | because it won the major battles and inflicted more
             | casualties. That sounds like winning the battle but losing
             | the war, to me.
        
       | keep320909 wrote:
       | > The chief hurdle in constructing a Death Star is not the
       | energy, materials, or even knowledge needed.
       | 
       | Any proof for that? Death Star is big as a Moon, it has energy of
       | several millions of Suns (it can blow up entire planet to pieces
       | in seconds, just calculate energy needed to overcome gravity
       | well). The only thing we know that could even remotely
       | theoretically approach it, are impacts with asteroids at almost
       | light speed.
       | 
       | Saying the only thing preventing us from building it, is unstable
       | political system, is just delusional! We really need to get away
       | from this "technology will solve anything" mentality!
        
         | lukas099 wrote:
         | They go hand in hand. The materiel and personnel cost make the
         | project less popular as time passes, and the shrinking
         | political will makes obtaining those less viable.
        
       | dobin wrote:
       | Many cathedrals took hundreds of years to build. The following
       | around 500 years: Cologne Cathedral, St. Vitus Cathedral and
       | Milan Cathedral. Sagrada Familia was started in 1882, and Gaudi
       | is dead for 98 years. If the emperor demands, it will be built.
        
         | kibwen wrote:
         | Cathedrals were public works projects that guaranteed
         | generations of employment for local craftsmen. Plenty of
         | cathedrals were left half-finished after funding dried up.
         | 
         |  _> If the emperor demands, it will be built._
         | 
         | The emperor rules for 50 years at best. His descendants may
         | have different demands.
        
         | admp wrote:
         | Cologne cathedral didn't actually take 500 years to build --
         | construction was restarted after a 250+ year halt.
         | 
         | "Construction of Cologne Cathedral began in 1248 but was halted
         | in the years around 1560, unfinished. Attempts to complete the
         | construction began around 1814 but the project was not properly
         | funded until the 1840s."
        
           | Timwi wrote:
           | That seems to me irrelevant to the point being made.
        
           | samatman wrote:
           | So it took 500 years to build.
           | 
           | If a building took one year to build, but they didn't work on
           | the weekends, would you object and say no, it only took 260
           | days?
        
             | zokier wrote:
             | Lets take an example closer to home. Babbage famously
             | started working on his Analytical Engine 1837. He never got
             | it very far though, and the project remained dead for
             | 150ish years. Until jgc and friends got the idea to
             | complete the project and construct the Engine.
             | 
             | So would you say it took 200 years to build Analytical
             | Engine, or would you consider the Babbages original attempt
             | and the current day attempt two separate projects?
        
         | Xelbair wrote:
         | >Sagrada Familia was started in 1882, and Gaudi is dead for 98
         | years.
         | 
         | and you can clearly see which part was done by which architect,
         | as it's style, and structure shifts. Is the same vision of
         | Gaudi still present in more modern parts of it?
         | 
         | (personally i think no, after seeing on vacation)
        
       | darepublic wrote:
       | > I am asking myself what would I need to hear and get from a
       | past generation to convince me to complete a project they began?
       | 
       | For me a language, culture, sexual arousal.
        
         | DiggyJohnson wrote:
         | For many others, especially with regards to cathedrals and
         | religious institutions more generally: religiosity / God.
        
       | denton-scratch wrote:
       | > The only real scarcity would be of a long attention span.
       | 
       | I get the author's drift, and broadly agree. But I don't think
       | it's really a long attention span that would get in the way of
       | (e.g.) a Mars colony, or interstellar travel; it's that people's
       | views change from one generation to the next. My kids have been
       | imbued with _some_ of my attitudes, sure; but I 've not had much
       | of a hand in the raising of my grandchildren. And kids rebel
       | against their parents' views, even if they're objectively less
       | sensible than the latest kids' fashion.
       | 
       | The Death Star, to take the author's example, is the product of a
       | particular hypothetical society that looks a lot like fascist
       | authoritarianism: a Glorious Leader, militarization, and
       | oppression. But how many societies like that have lasted 500
       | years? The Golden Horde lasted about 250 years; the Roman Empire
       | lasted about 200 years. Chinese imperial rule lasted much longer,
       | maybe 1,500 years? Egyptian pharoahs about the same, if you treat
       | the Early, Middle and Late as distinct empires. But these empires
       | changed their character as the centuries passed, and were not
       | characterized by any particular continuity of social outlook or
       | collective goals.
       | 
       | I have only a vague knowledge of what the attitudes of my
       | grandparents and their generation were - too vague for me to
       | either support them or to rebel against them. So I think it's not
       | so much a matter of attention-span, and more a question of plain
       | old memory; history lessons and books are no substitute for
       | talking to the people who were there, and after 200 years there's
       | nobody left who "was there".
        
         | lloeki wrote:
         | So essentially the problem is one of being able to foster a
         | meme+ that outlives the scale of an individual's life.
         | 
         | + the original meaning, not the internets one, which is only an
         | extremely short-lived subset.
        
           | denton-scratch wrote:
           | > to foster a meme+
           | 
           | So, I guess, pyramid-building; that's a collective project
           | spanning a few centuries. I struggle to think of any
           | collective project that spans centuries, that isn't
           | fundamentally a religious enterprise.
        
             | NeoTar wrote:
             | > I struggle to think of any collective project that spans
             | centuries, that isn't fundamentally a religious enterprise.
             | 
             | Certain parts of mathematics and science may qualify.
             | 
             | Yes they have practical outcomes (as do certain religious
             | projects - building a cathedral will employ craftsmen), but
             | isn't the pursuit of 'pure' mathematics a collective
             | project which serves no purpose apart from intellectual
             | satisfaction.
        
               | lloeki wrote:
               | Maths has a constant "next step" which makes it very
               | iterative though whereas a pyramid or a cathedral is only
               | complete or not-complete, and it's not-complete over
               | these decades/centuries.
               | 
               | > religious
               | 
               | Probably the most enduring meme.
        
               | NeoTar wrote:
               | I think I respectfully disagree almost entirely.
               | 
               | Maths requires a huge amount of creative effort and there
               | often is no logical next step. There was a reason that it
               | took three hundred years to go from an idea that a^x +
               | b^x = c^x has no integer solutions when x is greater than
               | two, to a proof of that, and it involved some crazy
               | twists and turns of thinking.
               | 
               | However, while a pyramid may have a definite endpoint,
               | cathedrals have historically been in a near constant
               | state of flux - a bishop wants to show his influence and
               | rebuilds a tower higher, a burgher of the town want to
               | show his power by adding a side chapel. New windows are
               | installed, a porch is demolished and replaced with
               | something more beautiful. For the cathedrals which took
               | five hundred years to complete, it wasn't that they were
               | abandoned building sites during that time - they just
               | took that long to reach the state that we see as final
               | today. Maybe in-between there was a wooden roof instead
               | of a stone roof, or a tower was capped at thirty meters
               | tall rather than fifty!
        
             | pm215 wrote:
             | It depends a bit, I think, on how much drift you accept
             | without considering the project to have changed so much
             | it's not the same thing. But for instance some of the older
             | universities in Europe are pretty much the same
             | institutions working on the same goal (educating people) in
             | the same buildings for many hundreds of years. The details
             | of what the education provided ought to be, the balance
             | between education and research, and the administrative
             | details have changed quite a bit, but I think you can still
             | make a case for this being the same non-religious
             | collective project.
        
             | 082349872349872 wrote:
             | https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ewd11xx/EWD1175.PDF
             | 
             | > _In the Western world, 66 institutions have enjoyed a
             | continuously visible identity since 1530. Among those 66
             | are the Roman Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church and the
             | Parliaments of Iceland and the Isle of Man. What makes
             | these 66 so interesting --and I owe the knowledge of this
             | fact to our President Dr. Berdahl-- is that the remaining
             | 62 are all universities!_
        
         | AndrewKemendo wrote:
         | This nails it I think
         | 
         | The basic unit of humanity, the human, does not have consistent
         | long term desires or goals.
         | 
         | In fact within the span of a lifetime the same individual is
         | expected to have completely divergent goals and conception of
         | reality when they are 20 versus 50 versus 80.
         | 
         | In effect this means that a consistent, coherent goal state for
         | human action is not possible to define that would satisfy the
         | self-reported desires of any individual.
        
           | psychoslave wrote:
           | I don't know, look at how Knuth is still at work on TAOCP.
           | Sure not everyone is Knuth (I am definitely not at least).
           | 
           | Having a life long goal require a conjunction of passion for
           | a topic that requires that much attention span and relevant
           | available resources to explore it. I dare to say that having
           | enough resources at hand including not being interrupted too
           | often with other hassles and hazards from life is the biggest
           | source of scarcity.
        
             | AndrewKemendo wrote:
             | I'd argue that is something different than I'm suggesting,
             | though I certainly agree that having a consistent project
             | across a lifetime is rare but not that rare.
             | 
             | The difference is that Knuth is providing something of
             | value to others, while your grandmother's fully complete
             | American Girl doll collection she started at age 5 is of
             | limited value.
             | 
             | Your last point is really the key takeaway: How do we
             | create a global society that gives every single human the
             | freedom, opportunity and resources to produce their version
             | of the computing bible? We have more than enough natural
             | resources to make that happen
        
               | WillAdams wrote:
               | I would settle for a society which:
               | 
               | - afforded every citizen access to whatever education
               | which they might choose/be interested in
               | 
               | - the chance to become the best version of themselves
               | which is possible
               | 
               | - the leisure time to apply their talents to a project
               | which makes the world a better place
               | 
               | It's kind of hard though, when the best school I ever
               | attended, one which separated academics from social
               | classes and allowed students to work at their ability
               | level (up to 4 grade levels ahead through 4th grade, but
               | after, one could work as far ahead and as fast as one's
               | abilities allowed, and faculty members were dual-
               | credentialed as high school teachers and professors at a
               | local college, so students could easily graduate high
               | school _and_ be conferred a 4 year degree, some students
               | received multiple college degrees when graduating at age
               | 18) which excelled at education was deemed an illegal
               | arrangement by the Mississippi Supreme Court because it
               | conferred an unfair advantage to those students who were
               | able to apply themselves and take advantage of it, with
               | no commensurate compensation for those who were unable to
               | do so.
        
         | lukas099 wrote:
         | > the Roman Empire lasted about 200 years
         | 
         | I thought it lasted much longer than that in the East?
        
           | denton-scratch wrote:
           | I guess about 500 years, if you include Byzantium? But
           | Byzantium was a very different creature from Rome.
        
             | NeoTar wrote:
             | According to the popular conciousness, the Roman Empire
             | lasted from 27 BCE to 476 CE in the west (i.e. 503 years),
             | and from 27 BCE to 1453 CE including Byzantium (i.e. 1480
             | years).
             | 
             | But that's a _really_ bad way to think about it. A Roman in
             | 30 BCE and 20 BC probably wouldn 't notice much difference.
             | There was still a Senate, still elections, still powerful
             | men exerting massive influence over the lives of ordinary
             | people. Essentially someone had just written 'Augustus' in
             | chalk at the top of all the organization charts.
             | 
             | Similarly, in the west a Roman in 470 CE and 480 CE
             | wouldn't have noticed much difference. There was still a
             | Senate, and powerful 'barbarian' generals were still
             | exerting massive influence over the lives of ordinary
             | people. There even was still an Emperor who was nominally
             | in charge - he was in Constantinople, but the Emperors
             | hadn't lived in Rome for decades.
             | 
             | The fall of Constantinople was probably a bit different
             | since a whole new political regieme was imposed, but even
             | there I believe the Ottomans actually claimed to be the
             | inheritors of Rome and the rightful emperors (Rome was
             | Pagan, then Christian, why couldn't it now be Muslim?)
             | 
             | Realistically, there were a series of political regimes
             | which evolved into each other time:
             | 
             | * Aristocratic Republic,
             | 
             | * 'Constitutional' Monarchy,
             | 
             | * Absolute Monarchy,
             | 
             | * Military Dictatorship,
             | 
             | * Theocratic Dictatorship.
        
         | robinzfc wrote:
         | > the Roman Empire lasted about 200 years.
         | 
         | The Roman Empire lasted about 500 years - from 31 BC to the
         | fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476. If we include the
         | period of existence of the Eastern Roman Empire it would be
         | almost 1500 years - until the fall of Constantinople in 1453.
        
           | JackFr wrote:
           | And that ignores the five centuries of the Roman Republic,
           | before the empire.
        
         | crabbone wrote:
         | One of the unexpected effects of learning Hebrew for me, was
         | something I didn't realize at first. Only almost thirty years
         | since I could confidently use the language I accidentally
         | watched a video where someone was researching the phonetics of
         | the language (it's more or less generally agreed that nobody
         | really knows how ancient Hebrew sounded). So, the researcher
         | asked people from different communities (eg. Yemenite Jews,
         | Samaritans, etc.) to read aloud a passage from Genesis.
         | 
         | It was very surprising to me that I could, more or less,
         | understand what they were saying, despite the accent. Then came
         | the realization that I could actually understand something
         | written thousands of years ago by someone whose mind worked in
         | a very different way, and yet I could, sort-of, communicate
         | with that person.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | I had to move a lot in my life. So, I don't have any childhood
         | photos, nor do I keep in touch with my classmates from wherever
         | I studied, I had to switch the language I use in my everyday
         | life at least twice. I always "traveled light", so, I almost
         | don't have any objects that are more than some ten years old.
         | Except for the razor my grandfather brought from Germany in
         | 1945 (now, I realize that it was probably looted, but many
         | years back I was kind-of proud to inherit that). It says on it
         | that it was manufactured in 1939.
         | 
         | I've never really met my grandfather -- he died when I was one
         | y.o. I don't know what kind of person he was in his everyday
         | life, in fact, I've ever only seen a single photograph of him.
         | And yet I know that in many ways, subconsciously, I continue
         | things he was doing. We have very different perspectives on
         | life: he was a member of the Communist party, and I'm strongly
         | in the Humanist camp. He liked gardening, and I hate being in
         | the country etc. But, in a more broad sense, I keep a lot of
         | the same culture he was part of: I'm pretty sure we learned the
         | same multiplication table, or that we both had to read War and
         | Peace at school, we both have the same idea about alphabet or
         | using a dinner table for, well, dinner. And in that sense, I'm
         | distinctly farther away from someone who sits down on a mat to
         | eat their dinner, or, like ancient Greeks, who semi-lied down
         | on a bench for their dinner.
         | 
         | In fact, it's very easy to trace my and my grandfather's
         | differences to a common ancestor. It's not hard for me to
         | understand why would he think the way he did, even though he's
         | in the opposite camp. It's much harder to understand those who
         | cannot disagree with me because they don't even know what they
         | can possibly disagree about.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | We don't have an obvious structure for projects that take
         | multiple generations to complete. Not like the cathedrals that
         | used to be built for hundred years or more, or even the books
         | that used to be written by generations of scribes. But we still
         | carry out such multi-generational projects by following
         | conventions. We read books written by the previous generation,
         | reinterpret them and embed their discoveries in our own.
         | 
         | It would've been nicer if we could organize this inheritance
         | better, but it's not fair to say that it doesn't exist.
        
           | denton-scratch wrote:
           | > Except for the razor my grandfather brought from Germany in
           | 1945
           | 
           | Hah - I also have an old razor. I inherited it from my Dad.
           | He seems to have bought it in about 1935, from a cutler in
           | Cambridge, where he went to University. It was made in
           | Sheffield, but is engraved with the name of that Cambridge
           | shop. He would have been about 20 when he bought it - perhaps
           | his first razor.
           | 
           | I've tried to sharpen and use it; but it was pretty rough. I
           | find that modern razors from the likes of Dovo are much
           | better.
           | 
           | > I've never really met my grandfather
           | 
           | My paternal grandfather died before I was born. My father
           | says he was sitting in his chair; then he just coughed and
           | died. I hope I am lucky enough to die like that.
           | 
           | I knew my maternal grandfather quite well; I used to visit
           | him when I was 13 - 15, most Sunday afternoons. He was a
           | pacifist, an atheist, and a hero: he was head of education in
           | Hong Kong, when the Japanese took over. The story is that he
           | stole a truck, and drove around the rich neighbourhoods
           | collecting mattresses, medicines and - whisky. He liked a wee
           | dram. He drove the truck to the concentration camp, blagged
           | his way past the guards, and delivered the truck to the camp
           | medical centre (minus the whisky, I imagine).
           | 
           | I'm also an atheist, and spent most of my life as a pacifist.
           | I'm no hero, though.
        
             | samatman wrote:
             | You might consider having a professional take a crack at
             | sharpening that razor, the result may surprise you. I
             | sharpen my own knives, with enough practice I can put a
             | keen edge on a kitchen knife or pocketknife, but putting a
             | razor's edge on a straight razor is about as difficult as
             | sharpening gets, I'm fairly sure I wouldn't do as good a
             | job at that as a professional would. You'll want someone
             | who specifically sharpens straight razors.
        
               | denton-scratch wrote:
               | I specifically sharpen straight razors! (Or I used to -
               | I'm a beardie-weirdie now). I'm not up to grinding out a
               | nick, but I have a coticule and I can use it. I used to
               | know a barber who could do a good job of razor-repair.
               | 
               | You're right, sharpening kitchen knives is much easier.
        
         | KineticLensman wrote:
         | > the Roman Empire lasted about 200 years. Chinese imperial
         | rule lasted much longer, maybe 1,500 years?
         | 
         | The Roman empire lasted considerably longer than 200 years -
         | perhaps 500 years in its best understood form going from
         | Octavian becoming emperor in ~30BCE to the fall of the Western
         | Roman Empire in approx 470CE. The eastern end of the empire
         | lasted in various forms for another 1000 years (!) until the
         | fall of Constantinople.
        
           | denton-scratch wrote:
           | Thanks for the correction.
           | 
           | The upshot, however, is that few empires last as long as 500
           | years, and only a couple lasted as long as 1,500 years. And
           | those empires change a lot over the course of their
           | existence; they weren't effective vehicles for a collective
           | effort at, say, colonising Mars.
        
             | KineticLensman wrote:
             | > And those empires change a lot over the course of their
             | existence; they weren't effective vehicles for a collective
             | effort at, say, colonising Mars
             | 
             | Completely agree!
        
         | alanbernstein wrote:
         | > people's views change from one generation to the next
         | 
         | Or in other words, our society itself currently has a short
         | attention span.
        
         | pbw wrote:
         | > people's views change from one generation to the next
         | 
         | I think that's what Kevin Kelly means by attention in the
         | essay.
         | 
         | He writes:
         | 
         | > It is much easier to build a rocket that will sail 500 years
         | to the nearest star, then it is to ensure that the future
         | generations of people born on board that 500-year rocket
         | maintain the mission
         | 
         | So he doesn't mean we'll flake out and flit our attention to
         | something else on a whim. He's saying if we drop a project due
         | to changing beliefs, opinions, and goals, that's "not having a
         | long attention span".
         | 
         | I don't love his use of the word "attention" to mean that, but
         | I think it's pretty clear what he means by the word from the
         | essay.
        
         | kjkjadksj wrote:
         | Take a peasant in italy in the year 600 bc, 600 ad, and 1600ad.
         | Does life look any different really? Probably not. Multiple
         | different rulers in this time but life had been basically
         | continuous with respect to how the majority of people lived
         | through these ages. I'd wager you could go up to the early
         | 1900s in some Italian villages and still see an overwhelming
         | amount of similarity in how daily life played out.
        
           | lainga wrote:
           | There is an apocryphal story from the Greek War of
           | Independence in 1821 - when it was won, messengers were sent
           | out to the various Aegean islands to tell them that Greece
           | had won its independence from the Ottomans. On one small
           | island, the response of the villagers was "well, that's nice,
           | but why are you telling us? we aren't Greek, we're Romans
           | (Romaioi _Rhomaioi_ )"
        
         | NoraCodes wrote:
         | > Chinese imperial rule lasted much longer, maybe 1,500 years?
         | 
         | This is true only if you consider many dynastic orders with
         | significant periods of instability in between to constitute a
         | single uninterrupted period "Imperial China". No single
         | dynastic order lasted more than 500 years, arguably none more
         | than 300.
        
         | pfdietz wrote:
         | In my head canon, the authoritarianism of the Star Wars
         | imperium is there because they got a bee in their bonnet about
         | long term megaprojects, and decided the only way to make them
         | succeed was suppress freedom of thought and change in the
         | society as a whole. After the revolution the engineering
         | visionaries responsible are put up against the wall.
        
       | scotty79 wrote:
       | What's scary is that at time scales of one generation or longer
       | societies seem to forget even very important things. How pandemic
       | looks like. That war and militarization is not such a good idea.
        
         | XorNot wrote:
         | > That war and militarization is not such a good idea.
         | 
         | These are really not two sides of the same coin.
        
         | lukas099 wrote:
         | Conversely I think NATO and being the "world's policeman" was
         | more popular in the US after WWII when we realized we could be
         | pulled into European conflicts. After decades of relative peace
         | a lot of people are wondering why we're spending so much on
         | defense.
        
           | pfdietz wrote:
           | Another motivation was to inhibit nuclear proliferation.
           | Without a global policeman, everyone has a motivation to
           | acquire nuclear weapons.
        
       | Anotheroneagain wrote:
       | There is scarcity of scarcity, which leads to this madness.
       | People didn't use to have a particular problem thinking at least
       | a generation ahead, but there us no demand for such things. There
       | is no way to make too much money on any established product.
       | Anything that has existed for more than several years is
       | available in vast amount, and cheap. Anything that isn't
       | completely new is good enough to the point where only an
       | insignificant improvement can be made at monumenta costs.
       | 
       | What is desirable now are things like a fidget spinner, that
       | makes some quick cash, and gets forgotten soon after.
        
       | pfdietz wrote:
       | The Death Star illustrates a problem with long term thinking:
       | that goals become obsolete too fast. The thing in A New Hope was
       | a gigantic waste of resources.
       | 
       | Freeman Dyson famously commented that no project should be
       | planned that takes longer than five years. Anything beyond that
       | and the ground shifts out from under the foundations of the
       | effort. One ends up with efforts that persist not because they
       | are useful, but because they are established, because there is an
       | entrenched constituency for the consumption of resources the
       | project entails.
        
       | gmuslera wrote:
       | One problem with long term projects is advancement on technology
       | that would had made a faster, sturdier, cleaner or whatever the
       | original project if it started from zero using it.
       | 
       | We send a mission to Alpha centauri that would take, lets say,
       | 100 years to get there with the current propulsion technologies,
       | and in 30 years we discover a new one that would take 20 years to
       | get there. Or the same for big buildings (I don't know,
       | arcologies) where new materials and techniques would turn
       | obsolete how it started if it was long enough in the past.
       | 
       | And not only new ways to improve, but different priorities or
       | things that are out of our control that happen during its
       | development. What if the land where the The Line in Saudi Arabla
       | is being built gets permanently flooded because sea level rise or
       | the entire region becomes unlivabable because frequent high
       | enough temperatures in the region? Even social trends may turn
       | something built for the future obsolete, there are plenty of
       | ghost megacities in China.
       | 
       | Both acceleration in technologies, and acceleration in changes
       | outside what is the construction by itself (climate, society,
       | etc) can turn into (potentially hamrful) waste decades of effort.
        
         | blurrypepe wrote:
         | I agree but just wanted to point out that The Line probably
         | will never be built!
        
       | alexpotato wrote:
       | Seeing a lot of comments about human lifespan, projects shouldn't
       | take more than 5 years etc
       | 
       | The Florence Cathedral took over 140 years to build. There is
       | clear precedent that humans can design, plan and then execute a
       | project that spans multiple lifetimes.
       | 
       | Even better, they didn't have a final design when they started:
       | 
       | > While the main structure of the nave was completed by 1380, a
       | solution to constructing a dome to top it was not determined
       | until 1418. [0]
       | 
       | This also reminds me of a personal story when visiting Florence:
       | 
       | Florentine Tour Guide: "It took 140 years to build the Cathedral.
       | How do you think they were able to do this given that it took so
       | long?"
       | 
       | Me: "I would think they needed a committee since that can last
       | longer than a lifetime if the current members add in new people
       | as the old members die"
       | 
       | Tour Guide: "Yes! Exactly! So few people realize that is what
       | happened."
       | 
       | 0 -
       | https://editions.covecollective.org/chronologies/constructio...
        
         | badpun wrote:
         | > Me: "I would think they needed a committee since that can
         | last longer than a lifetime if the current members add in new
         | people as the old members die"
         | 
         | > Tour Guide: "Yes! Exactly! So few people realize that is what
         | happened."
         | 
         | This also implies that C++ will potentially live forever...
        
         | fritzo wrote:
         | That's a good example, but I wonder if people now have more
         | options and are more career-mobile. 700 years ago masonry was a
         | family profession. Now it would get brain drained by AI.
        
       | TedHerman wrote:
       | I once hosted a European researcher in my home (which is in
       | flyover country America). He saw the utility poles and wiring
       | stretching to houses in the neighborhood and remarked that his
       | father had said a hallmark of undeveloped countries is that power
       | lines are above ground. This was 20 years ago. Now, I do see that
       | new neighborhoods have buried power and fiber. But that quality
       | of fiber wasn't affordable decades ago. In retrospect, it might
       | have been wise to delay putting infrastructure underground in
       | urban settings because of high cost.
       | 
       | Who knows what advances in material science, computing, energy
       | and transport will bring in coming generations? Not to mention
       | climate changes. Therefore it can be presumptuous to think that
       | sticking to a long term plan is the best course. To the extent
       | that a long term plan depends on the supporting environment of
       | the plan staying the same, a plan might be judged foolish in
       | retrospect.
        
       | sotillan wrote:
       | I think the problem the author describes is a result of short-
       | term factors that are unlikely to affect humanity forever. Right
       | now, technology and culture are progressing extremely quickly,
       | relatively to any other point in human history. As a result, our
       | understanding and our capabilities are radically different from
       | generation to generation. Also, many problems remain unsolved and
       | present serious, short-term challenges to our survival.
       | Understandably therefore, our priorities frequently change,
       | reacting both to changes in our capabilities and the most
       | immediate threats.
       | 
       | However, this situation will not continue indefinitely. An
       | advanced, post-scarcity human civilisation will (hopefully) not
       | face constant danger of war, disease and famine, Technology will
       | still advance, but at a slower pace, and not in ways that
       | significantly transform day-to-day lives. Human lifespan will
       | probably also be significantly increased. The result will be a
       | more homogenous, stable and static society. There will still be
       | differences, bug huge disparities of economic and societal status
       | will no longer exist.
       | 
       | In this environment, having no longer to deal with a constant
       | background of threats to their survival, it's likely that
       | humanity will have the time and space to turn to far longer term
       | projects. Indeed, such projects will probably be the only way for
       | a person to imbue their life with a greater meaning in such a
       | future society.
        
         | Solvency wrote:
         | This is heavily reducing the human experience. Even better
         | technology and post-scarcity aren't magic solutions to all of
         | the insanely weird evolutionary quirks/pitfalls/problems built
         | into our monkey brains.
         | 
         | Having a planet of hyper long-lived people who never have to
         | work hard, who are constantly fed without concern, fully
         | dependent on advanced technology sounds like the context of a
         | YA novel. In reality, none of us are hardwired for that kind of
         | lifestyle. Hell, we're not even hardwired for this one. We're
         | just messily and sloppily trying to hang on as we stumble
         | forward. Core human conflicts and oppositions and disputes and
         | wars and existential meltdowns and all of the other things our
         | emergent survival consciousness deal with aren't going
         | anywhere.
        
       | m463 wrote:
       | "The wise man plants trees whose shade he will never enjoy"
        
       | Timwi wrote:
       | The article assumes, without evidence, that the human lifespan is
       | forever constant and unalterable. In my opinion that shows a lack
       | of long-term thinking... how ironic.
        
       | kaycebasques wrote:
       | _Remembrance Of Earth 's Past_ trilogy [1] is a good meditation
       | on the problem of keeping humans aligned/focused across
       | generations. (Trying not to spoil anything.)
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_of_Earth%27s_Pas...
        
       | webdoodle wrote:
       | There are so many real life projects that have been abandoned
       | part-way-through. One of the biggest that still irritates me is
       | the Superconducting Super Collider they were building in Texas.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider
        
       | syngrog66 wrote:
       | "long term oriented thinking" is an emphasis of the education
       | software I've been building. If anyone wants to encourage or
       | accel its dev contact me and toss cash at me/us
        
       | DennisL123 wrote:
       | > I am asking myself, what would I need to hear and get from a
       | past generation to convince me to complete a project they began?
       | 
       | ,,It's emitting lethal doses of radiation for the next 100k
       | years."
        
       | wonderwonder wrote:
       | Imagine being born and dying on a generation ship and when your
       | grand children reach the destination they find a thriving society
       | established a 100 years before by the children of the people that
       | launched your parents. They just created a new much faster means
       | of travel in the mean time while your ancestors were condemned to
       | a life on a ship with nothing to do but live, breed and die.
        
       | Duologic wrote:
       | This reminds me of the Danish Navy oak:
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visings%C3%B6#History
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | I worked for a Japanese corporation that had a ten-year planning
       | window.
       | 
       | The farther out, the more abstract and fuzzy, but they had a
       | long-term view.
       | 
       | Also, they kept employees _forever_.
       | 
       | The app I just released (for a small nonprofit -I no longer work
       | for that company) was three years in the making. I also was the
       | initial author of an infrastructure service that is doing quite
       | well, but it took ten years to get there.
        
       | r14c wrote:
       | I have trouble squaring "people can't do long term planning" and
       | the existence of megalithic structures like the pyramids in Egypt
       | and the Americas or even the Great Wall of China. All of which
       | took generations to build. Especially calling that lack of long-
       | term planning/executing ability "human nature".
       | 
       | I have to wonder if there's something about the current material
       | conditions that orients us towards short term thinking?
        
         | zokier wrote:
         | Wikipedia says that Great Pyramid of Giza took 27 years to
         | build. Long time, but I wouldn't call it generations. Smaller
         | pyramids presumably were faster to build.
         | 
         | Cathedrals might be more typical example of centuries long
         | projects, although for me its not clear how expansions and
         | renowations are delineated from initial construction
        
       | patrickmay wrote:
       | "There's an ethical dilemma around transmitting a mission into
       | the far future. We don't necessarily want to burden a future
       | generation with obligations they had no choice in; we don't want
       | to rob them of their free will to choose their own destinations."
       | 
       | This is why government deficits and long term debt are evil
       | (regardless of one's political views). Spending money today that
       | must be paid back by people not yet born is, at the very least, a
       | dick move.
        
         | zokier wrote:
         | That only holds if you think that goverment debt will ever be
         | paid off in full. With current economics, that seems unlikely.
        
       | yawboakye wrote:
       | because they haven't been mentioned: stewart brand's book, the
       | clock of the long now[0] and the long now foundation[1] tackle
       | the same problem. excellent exposition that doesn't necessarily
       | transmit despair amidst the shortening attention span. i think
       | the thrust of the message is towards the end of the book where he
       | talks about infinite games, and the finite games that can be
       | played interim. it appears we need to think like game designers,
       | after all.
       | 
       | [0]: https://longnow.org/store/clock-long-now-time-and-
       | responsibi...
       | 
       | [1]: https://longnow.org/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-02-12 23:01 UTC)