Which do we tackle first?

[Homunclus]

Ah, ok. It's just that mass extinctions usually refer to past events where more than 50% of the species in existence went extinct. We are not quite there....To refer to the current biodiversity loss as a "mass extinction" is a bit confusing.

At any rate I voted for that one.

[johnobrow]

I started wondering how I'd rank these, so I've given it a go.

1. Poverty.
2. Population
3. Technology.
4. Global warming.
5. Energy crisis.
6. Extinction.

[hazz]

Energy Crisis, without a doubt. Theres no way we can solve any of the others without energy.

[Avlana Kiarunto]

Population. It would also help out with several others too. Global warming, energy crisis etc

[Avlana Kiarunto]

BTW what do you mean by technology

[The B]

BTW what do you mean by technology

Just improving our technology so we can do better things, maybe tackle the other problems.

[Avlana Kiarunto]

Technology is not necessarily progress, no matter how much people are convinced it is. It is also a cause of several of these issues you talk about anyway

[Bob the terrorist]

Technology is not necessarily progress, no matter how much people are convinced it is. It is also a cause of several of these issues you talk about anyway

Technology is good, mkay. It's the means to acheive freedom.

[Steve Steinbeck]

Technology; rise of machines; judgement day; this ^

[70mD]

if we get technology that's good enough, we can solve all the other problems. Simples.

[Skillz88]

I just held the down arrow and let 'fate' decide

I'd rank these in the following order:
1. Poverty
2. Energy Crisis
3. Population
4. Technology
5. Mass Extinction

[Avlana Kiarunto]

Technology is not necessarily progress, no matter how much people are convinced it is. It is also a cause of several of these issues you talk about anyway

Technology is good, mkay. It's the means to acheive freedom.

I disagree

[johnobrow]

I don't think everyone in Europe owning an iPhone is the most useful technological advancement we could have, but it's what is currently being pursued.

[jack west jr]

Technology-
a] we could be able to reach new planets to colonize
b]we could make something to solve all problems
c]all of above

[Avlana Kiarunto]

b]we could make something to solve all problems

Technology caused most of the problems in the first place

[Bob the terrorist]

I don't think everyone in Europe owning an iPhone is the most useful technological advancement we could have, but it's what is currently being pursued.

Yes, johnobrow|iPlayering

[SteelAnvil]

Technology caused most of the problems in the first place

Poverty: better Tech will mean we can grow food in any environment.
Energy crisis: Better Tech will mean that we have cleaner more efficient energy
Population: Better Tech will mean we can support more people on less land.
Mass Extinction: Better Tech will mean all potential catastrophic events can be predicted and dealt with. (asteroids, global warming etc...)

If you want to solve the worlds problems you gonna need Tech to do it.

[The B]

Mass Extinction: Better Tech will mean all potential catastrophic events can be predicted and dealt with. (asteroids, global warming etc...)

The mass extinction. That's on now.

[Homunclus]

I think the faith some of you are putting in technology is misguided. Certainly I agree tech is a good thing, and we should do our best to improve it. However saying that technology is going to solve all the worlds problems is naive. Its a bit like the catholic church saying that it's ok for people in africa to have as much kids as they can cause "god will provide".

As Avlana Kiarunto points out, the misguided use of technology is what caused these problems in the first place.

Poverty: better Tech will mean we can grow food in any environment.

Sure, we could wait for technology to provide more food, something that may or may not happen. Or we could take the practical and realistic approach that is to distribute the food we currently have more evenly.

Energy crisis: Better Tech will mean that we have cleaner more efficient energy

I agree, but it's also important, that meanwhile, we take measures to decrease energy consumption

Population: Better Tech will mean we can support more people on less land.

No, this already happened, it was the green revolution. The consequences were reduced biodiversity, various types of environmental degradation and overpopulation.

Besides, what do you intend to do? Keep increasing the population and pray that technology manages to keep up? Without destroying the environment?

The solution to over-population is family planing, not technology.

[johnobrow]

Technology is very much a double edged sword. It provides massive capacity for both emancipation and enslavement. It depends wholey on who is in control. Who is currently in control, the ruling bourgeois class has only one universal interest and that is profit. Yes there has been some head way made for humanitarianism but I think in the majority of cases this was an unintentional side effect, an accident and the result of action by those other than the ruling class. Technology's capacity to help people is severely limited by those that own it. This of course brings us back to capitalism. If you want to use technology for something other than profit and exploitation, then you're going to have to change the system and create some form of common ownership over technology. I'll spare you the Marxist lecture and leave it at that, for now.

I don't think everyone in Europe owning an iPhone is the most useful technological advancement we could have, but it's what is currently being pursued.

Yes, johnobrow|iPlayering

Oh fuck off! iPlayer is a useful advancement. The BBC is the most independent source of mass media in the UK. That's important.