I like people who make good things for the sake of knowing the value of a good thing, i think its a net positive

It was good. Because we were able to mass produce a lot of things we weren’t able to do before. Imagine trying to write a newspaper but you can to write it one at a time.

Lol. I think the population has become overdependent on high technology, and it has become too invasive to the point where some people rely on it—or otherwise, rely on it too much—to function within today's society (e.g. cars are needed to travel to certain {anti-pedestrial} destinations, smartphones are required for work purposes and appointments, etc).

There are many more examples that I can pick from to build a convincing argument against how society has opted to utilise industrial technology; first of all, it has become a massive use of surveillance (incl. data-collecting) and a new necessary substitute for escapism (to remain sane—within a society as expensive and miserably oversocialised as ours). High technology is mostly a double-edged sword.

In my humble opinion (if we lived in a small-scale society), I would downscale everything, and its production would be at a home-scale level that reflects a practical use of Earth's rare materials. We, however, no longer have such choices available to us; civilisation is overpopulated, underhoused, and too reliant on such technology to adapt a more low-technological method on such a massive scale. I think it has pretty much sealed its fate with the steps that it has taken up to this point.

The Industrial Revolution led to mass production.

Mass production eventually produced cheap, easily-available keyboards.

Cheap, easily-available keyboards are used to produce the brain droppings that proliferate in OT.

...so...bad?

It created pollution and overpopulation, but also fast cars and video games eventually.

It was pretty industrial.

I think Industrial Revolution is a pretty cool guy. He revolutionized industrially and doesn't afraid of anything.

When the drill is “literally” a ground breaking invention.

Originally posted by Wiᛊard:

Lol. I think we've become overdependent on high-technology.

I think we should revert back to agriculture, although I don't believe in full regression, just non-industrialn

It allows us to sustain current population, without it we would quickly go back to only a couple billion people. If the A.I. ever takes over, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't go back to that number of people anyways, since no one will want to feed an unproductive person.

Originally posted by steven1mac:

It allows us to sustain current population, without it we would quickly go back to only a couple billion people. If the A.I. ever takes over, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't go back to that number of people anyways, since no one will want to feed an unproductive person.

Lol, thats only because current markets are only made to enrich a small group of people.

We dont need huge farms mostly operated by large machines.

We could all have community gardens, personal gardens, actually pay people a living wage for bigger farms.

The system we have now may be able to create a large amount of food for a even larger amount of profit, but it aint gonna be good if the power ever goes out or some cataclysm breaks down logistical chains. There will be a very large subset of the population who wont know how to grow their own food and starve.

Originally posted by steven1mac:

It allows us to sustain current population, without it we would quickly go back to only a couple billion people. If the A.I. ever takes over, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't go back to that number of people anyways, since no one will want to feed an unproductive person.

industrial revolution happened before earth population reach one billion people

Originally posted by peon:

Originally posted by steven1mac:

It allows us to sustain current population, without it we would quickly go back to only a couple billion people. If the A.I. ever takes over, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't go back to that number of people anyways, since no one will want to feed an unproductive person.

Lol, thats only because current markets are only made to enrich a small group of people.

We dont need huge farms mostly operated by large machines.

We could all have community gardens, personal gardens, actually pay people a living wage for bigger farms.

The system we have now may be able to create a large amount of food for a even larger amount of profit, but it aint gonna be good if the power ever goes out or some cataclysm breaks down logistical chains. There will be a very large subset of the population who wont know how to grow their own food and starve.

If you have read ISAIF before, you would know that an essential component of the system is dependence on machines and corporations, which leads to a lost of the knowledge essential to pre-industrial society.

Originally posted by vkobe:

Originally posted by steven1mac:

It allows us to sustain current population, without it we would quickly go back to only a couple billion people. If the A.I. ever takes over, I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't go back to that number of people anyways, since no one will want to feed an unproductive person.

industrial revolution happened before earth population reach one billion people

A couple means more than one. What was the worlds population in 1800 anyways, 2 1/2 perhaps 3 billion at most. I doubt the new world had more than 500 million people in that time period (most likely less than half of that), Most of the population was in Europe and Asia during that period of time, and the population didn't explode until Europe exported industrialization to the rest of the world.

Originally posted by Fuki:

I think we should revert back to agriculture, although I don't believe in full regression, just non-industrialn

Agriculture is already a product of civilisation, as without it the masses would've starved—that's why all first-world countries heavily rely on food imports. The point of agriculture is to speed up the food production as opposed to using more traditional and organic-based methods like permaculture.

I think you meant agrarianism?