If every extant human didn’t need to worry about survival, we’d have 10,000 Mozarts. We could get there if we had zero billionaires.
Even if these two just swallowed their pride and funded free music education for all ages we’d at least have thousands of Mozarts…
…do these guys even listen to contemporary composers anyway? Could they even identify a modern Mozart? My bet is no. They just have so much ego they believe they’d know about it instantly despite their lack of any intimate knowledge of the subject.
Those delusional fucks think they’re the current Mozarts.
A thousand times this.
If you look at the history of scientific discovery, you’ll find that a great many of those making discoveries were born into wealth, or at least some degree of stability.
I wonder how many Mozarts are living paycheck to paycheck working multiple jobs and don’t have time to compose or play because these chucklefucks denied them a living wage by going to war on unions.
deleted by creator
It’ll be quite a few Mozarts sacrificed because we’re busy funding the thousands of wanna-be Hitlers that were also created.
Slave drivers wish for more slaves to drive: news at 11
Do you know what would happen in a world where there are 1000 Mozart’s? Nobody would give a shit about Mozart anymore. That’s it. Most of them would probably starve to death anyway if the world now has to support one trillion people
But now bezos can exploit Mozart, because “there’s a thousand Mozart’s ready to take your place”.
Truly how can you not see the benefits.
Would we even know if that were the current situation? How many extremely talented composers are making music right now?
At least 2
why do we need a thousand mozarts ?
why would we look to those that can never get enough to understand what it means to be satisfied ?
The more highly intelligent people you have, the faster the rate of breakthroughs, provided they have access to tools and education.
prove it
or rather prove to me that you are not laying the tracks to supporting eugenics
prove that it won’t make a thousand Hitlers
You arent wrong, but neither is the other guy.
Their premise isnt wrong, with a Trillion people the statistical likelihood of more geniuses to solve our problems is almost certain. So yes there’s one in the “pro” column.
The “cons” column however is thousands of lines long and would pretty much guarantee humanities extinction.
I would like to point out that the Renaissance started and saw a huge generational explosion of “mozarts” within a single city of Venice with roughly the population of most small podunk towns. Saying that more people are needed is disengenuous, you need the right environment raising people to the level of geniuses.
Its not needed, but its also almost a mathematical certainty. If we had 692 Billion more people, we would almost definitely at least have a few more people of natural genetic inclination towards being geniuses.
We wouldnt be able to feed everyone or breathe but thats my point, they arent wrong but they are idiots.
You just have to track global progress as a function of global population.
These two are delusional.
We are looking at tens to hundreds of millions of people fleeing where they live /this decade/ due to climate change.
The tensions caused by immigrants moving to more developed western countries to escape the many wars going on in Africa and the Middle East, and now in Ukraine and Palestine are just a teeny tiny sampling of this.
Also, it is likely we will hit peak oil this decade. Modern agriculture is reliant on petrochemical fertilizers which will become more expensive as oil does.
Half the world lives in poverty, and America is the most economically unequal society in all of known human history, in terms of income disparity.
There is absolutely no way to get to a trillion humans under our current economic and political paradigms, and no one knows or agrees on a framework that would.
We will be lucky to make it to the end of this century with half the current world population.
We are not going to be colonizing space anytime soon. The economics of building systems that can get enough humans and materiel to make a self sustaining colony on Mars are still many orders of magnitude away from being feasible, and life there would be hellish. Humans growing up on Mars would suffer horribly from the low gravity, even if they lived underground their whole lives to avoid radiation. Terraforming is still a pipe dream.
Building a giant space rotating space cylinder for us all to live in is even more economically, scientifically and sociologically dubious. We cannot even figure out how to ecologically maintain the viability if our own homeworld, a self sustaining gigantic orbiting or interplanetary ship carrying even hundreds of humans is barely even realistically conceivable, to say nothing of what it would take to get to trillions.
To say the things they are saying, they must be literally delusional, as in /should be locked away in mental institutions as dangers to society/.
They should know these basic facts. We already know many wealthy elites are just literally building bunkers to escape the collapse of human civilization, which they have basically caused.
Madness.
The only way we can have a trillion humans is if we massively colonize the solar system.
Which I think is also a good idea, but we spend too much on our military to do it.
Let me know when humanity manages to construct a self sustaining interplanetary vessel with artificial gravity that can house 100 people on an ongoing basis.
A ballpark estimate for that most basic of first steps would be costing something like a trillion dollars. We would have to assemble it in orbit, you cannot launch such a large craft with rockets.
Basically, this will never happen unless the US military declassifies the supposed gravity negating field generator that is rumored to be essential to the TR 3B, which is itself rumored to exist.
You have to go all in on conspiracy theory tech like that, or magically world peace happens, we invent affordable greater than parity fusion generators, oh and entirely magically figure out how to stop climate change, and replace petrochemicals at every single stage of production in the world economy.
I would call that delusional magical thinking.
I didn’t say it would be easy or fast, just that we should expand into the solar system and that’s the only way we get to a trillion people.
Jeez, folks are really argumentative tonight.
And then they could put those Mozarts to work in their slave shacks while complaining about the lack of Mozarts!
I think we’re good on Mozarts.
He just wants more people to exploit
Elon and Bezoz think civilization=steadily rising profits and they see that they won’t have enough workers or consumers to enable that if birthrates aren’t also above replacement. Or, as Marx en co. would say, they are running into a classic crisis of capitalism. Profits must grow.
What we should really be considering are plans for economies that aren’t reliant on continuous growth for stability.
Fuck that, they only say that because more people = more profit
Ahh, yes, the “We need more monkeys on more typewriters so we can get more Shakespeare.” argument.
They are so dumb, how did they get so rich?
Exploitation
And approximately a trillion people to whom even a chocolate bar would be pretty much an once-in-a-lifetime luxury
I can say stupid shit too. Can I get on yahoo finance?
