• Tanis Nikana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    And in order to fight climate change, we gotta end about four hundred dudes. It’s doable, there’s billions of us.

    • Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It’s a lot more complicated than just getting rid of a couple hundred people.

      Getting rid of the people won’t get rid of the systemic structures that put them there. If we don’t dismantle those, new people will just take the place of the old and nothing will fundamentally change.

      • PoopingCough@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Interesting thought experiment though: How many new people taking the place of the old ones would have to face lethal consequences before people stopped taking control of those systemic structures?

        • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Let us assume that it is a constant percentage. That is, that for each new person who takes up the mantle, there is a specific and defined chance that they will abuse their position. In that case, then we might imagine that, with a starting count of x and a chance of c, the next “generation” will have x×c number of people who abuse their position. Then, in the generation after that, x×c².

          We can notice that this is a simple sum of a geometric sequence, where the total sum is defined as S = a / (1-r), where a is the initial value and r is the rate of change.

          If we assume that a is 400 people and r is 50 percent (0.5), then you will need to displace 800 people in total