h a l f b a k e r yA riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a rich, flaky crust
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
So you'd draw a circle around Tokyo or New York for instance. That circle is red because survivability of that population requires many support networks outside that boundary you drew, food, fuel, water, electricity etc.
Then you go to for instance, an area in Mongolia and draw an arbitrary circle,
that's green because in a scenario where there was a wall put up around them, that population could survive having the food, water etc.
This would be for survival, not counting cars and cellphones that probably nobody would have. Areas in the example of Mongolia, despite having cars and cellphones now, could feed their people in various areas with the nomadic tribal pastoralism they use now, free ranging their livestock moving from place to place as necessary and drinking water from the natural streams and rivers.
Could have the practical application of being used to improve supply chains and support systems or at least to show how interconnected we are.
Could also have a little preface stating such facts as "No place would even have pencils. That pencil factory doesn't harvest the wood, mine the graphite or petroleum based pencil lead.... etc."
Be kind of interesting.
Interactive survivability map.
https://www.dropbox...j0&st=dpn38dj6&dl=0
Or just one coded with green to red spectrum of survivability. [doctorremulac3, Apr 12 2025]
Great look into this question.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=XetplHcM7aQ
[doctorremulac3, Apr 12 2025]
[link]
|
| |
Please wait while I carve my answer on bark with a shark tooth. |
|
| |
Could also just have the map shown in shades indicating their independent survivability. Green for most survivable to red for least. (link) |
|
| |
And by they way, looks like this already exists in crude form because I asked AI to do its best to create a map using its own research. Got Southern California compared to the Central Valley and Northern California pretty good. |
|
| |
There's a theory that Humans cannot survive in the wild on their own, they are evolutionarily adapted to live within groups which interact using the dual technologies of language and tools. |
|
| |
And human groups have never been bounded and static, but are multiple networks extending across large areas of land with connections to other networks in far away places (theres some technical graph theory term for this but I don't know it) |
|
| |
There's also a theory to do with maximum complexity and resource use, that beings in general expand to occupy every ecological niche that they are adapted to. So you could argue that the whole of humanity as a single species has expanded to fill every space it can - and that if there was any "slack" in the system (by being a self-sufficient group rejecting outside assistance) then the slack would quickly be taken up by incomers. |
|
| |
In other words I am thinking that by default, every human on earth is there because of the support network of every other human on earth collectively contributing to the Human project to take over exploit and ultimately denude the planet. |
|
| |
However the colour coded idea has some potential. Perhaps you could define the colours as the average distance of relationships, so greener colours show mostly extremely local connections and red areas show places where most connections in or out are world-scale. Or density of connections, or something. But it all gets very complicated very quickly. |
|
| |
Exactly, I think that's why this stuff is so fascinating. |
|
| |
If you've got a second to check this out, it's my favorite documentary series "Connections" and the first episode addresses these questions. |
|
| |
Let me see if I can find a link. |
|
| |