this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2026
1072 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

83150 readers
3557 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Using CRISPR-Cas9, scientists engineered a yeast to produce the nutrient feed. Farmers could have it in two years.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] motruck@lemmy.zip 78 points 1 day ago (29 children)

And so the house of cards grows by another level. We'll just modify this to add this missing thing. Never mind why it is missing. 10 years later we are 9 layers deep on plugging holes we've created that technological advancements got us out if until they don't and whoosh the cards come crashing down. The hardiness of nature replaced by the frivolity of man.

[–] Pringles@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Throughout history the human population has only been able to increase thanks to innovation. Irrigation, the wheel, alternating crops, crop distance, keeping disease in check, genetic engineering to increase resistance and crop yields, and this is another innovation in that line. If you want to go back to nature, by all means do.

I believe the only way forward is through science and innovation and if that means genetically altered food for the bees, then so be it. This with the in combination with limiting roundup should bring the global bee populations back from the brink.

[–] racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (4 children)

You're quickly glossing over all the issues.

"human population has only been able to increase thanks to innovation": and that's a good thing? What would be wrong with a more manageable human population?

"If you want to go back to nature, by all means do.": how? The world has advanced beyond that, it's clearly not an option.

"the only way forward is through science and innovation": if science & innovation is what you call forward, then obviously yes, but that's just a tautology. What is your measure of "forward"? If it's power over nature, advancements, ... then for sure. If it's respecting this earth and not long term ruining the entire planet... how sure are you about that?

"limiting roundup": ah, an innovation that should be limited. What went wrong that it was globally used before we were sure enough about its side effects? How sure are you about all the current innovations that they don't have similar issues? How sure are you about this bee superfood not having disastrous long term effects?

If you ignore all the issues with it though, innovation is incredible for sure!

[–] Domitian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I would argue the right direction to go forward in is the direction where Billions of People dont starve. Innovation and sustainabillity are not mutually exclusive.

[–] racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Current agricultural progress is mostly about needing as few people as possible for farming, not making enough food for everyone. It's widely known there is plenty of food, the issues are social as to why some are still hungry, not technological.

And in the end, we're on a finite planet, so whichever way you look at it, keeping increasing population numbers has to end somewhere, so the question is not does enough humans exist, but what is enough, and i think there are plenty of arguments thaht we're overpopulating the earth already.

[–] m532@lemmy.ml 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

"Overpopulation" is fascist dogshit

[–] racemaniac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 hours ago

Can you agree we can't put an infinite amount of people on a finite planet?

So that by default the discussion is not if overpopulation can exist, but when we reached it? If you don't feel we reached it yet, i can imagine that. It's a very tough topic. But just the very basic facts of existing on a planet of finite size means that there can only be so many of us before everything collapses.

And which fascist things do you associate with the "overpopulation" topic (i imagine for example the one child policy in china?). It's not because something has been used by fascism, that it's inherently fascist.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)