Parts of this are fascinating and other parts are deeply dystopian. You discuss the Anthropocene but fail to mention the Indigenous practices of living in harmony and learning from nature. Instead jumping to “harnessing” the capability of plants to provide for humans once again. There’s a significant body work in Science and Technology studies and Philosophy of Science noting how destructive anthropomorphic interpretations of nature have been. Survival of the fittest emerged as the nature metaphor of the 20th century instead of symbiosis. You sort of seem to get it but then turn away to focus on the technological potential of the knowledge of plants.
The plant-forward projects you point to in the Middle East are paid for by authoritarian rulers who regularly trample on the rights of women and use indentured workers to make their projects come alive. These are the antithesis of Solarpunk.
By coupling Andreessen and Thiel with solarpunk you undermine an ethos of social punk which is to move beyond social and economic hierarchies. By stripping out the DIY component of solarpunk, the picture you paint is simply a playground for the affluent driven you hope by benign AI engines coupled with the knowledge of plants.
This reads like the green component of Balajee’s Networked States.
Which is honestly depressing because there is some interesting technology here that could be incorporated into building a better world for everyone. On the plus side you shared it so perhaps you are seeking a wider set of feedback or are simply interested in broader reach of the technology.
What I meant in referring to indigenous societies was that their existence depended on a deep communication and respect of the rest of the natural world ... this was key to their survival.
I'm not sure there's a future for humans as the dominant species ... this idea is what is causing the demise of our current western civilisation. What you're pointing to is important though - there's a potential for humans working together with the plant world. I think it's essential though to recognise that we are part of nature and try to come at the relationship as equals- what do plants want and need from us? I'm.also not sure that we need technology as an intermediatry. Have you tried talking with plants? The most sustainable human societies have lived in harmony with nature for 10s of thousands of years. Communication between us and the natural world is something to be rediscovered rather than engineered. You're welcome to check out my substack @talkingwithatree ... just an old granny with a simple approach :)
Dude this is so cool!! Massively creative and important work. You’ve gotta get this into popular mechanics next!
Parts of this are fascinating and other parts are deeply dystopian. You discuss the Anthropocene but fail to mention the Indigenous practices of living in harmony and learning from nature. Instead jumping to “harnessing” the capability of plants to provide for humans once again. There’s a significant body work in Science and Technology studies and Philosophy of Science noting how destructive anthropomorphic interpretations of nature have been. Survival of the fittest emerged as the nature metaphor of the 20th century instead of symbiosis. You sort of seem to get it but then turn away to focus on the technological potential of the knowledge of plants.
The plant-forward projects you point to in the Middle East are paid for by authoritarian rulers who regularly trample on the rights of women and use indentured workers to make their projects come alive. These are the antithesis of Solarpunk.
By coupling Andreessen and Thiel with solarpunk you undermine an ethos of social punk which is to move beyond social and economic hierarchies. By stripping out the DIY component of solarpunk, the picture you paint is simply a playground for the affluent driven you hope by benign AI engines coupled with the knowledge of plants.
This reads like the green component of Balajee’s Networked States.
Which is honestly depressing because there is some interesting technology here that could be incorporated into building a better world for everyone. On the plus side you shared it so perhaps you are seeking a wider set of feedback or are simply interested in broader reach of the technology.
What I meant in referring to indigenous societies was that their existence depended on a deep communication and respect of the rest of the natural world ... this was key to their survival.
I'm not sure there's a future for humans as the dominant species ... this idea is what is causing the demise of our current western civilisation. What you're pointing to is important though - there's a potential for humans working together with the plant world. I think it's essential though to recognise that we are part of nature and try to come at the relationship as equals- what do plants want and need from us? I'm.also not sure that we need technology as an intermediatry. Have you tried talking with plants? The most sustainable human societies have lived in harmony with nature for 10s of thousands of years. Communication between us and the natural world is something to be rediscovered rather than engineered. You're welcome to check out my substack @talkingwithatree ... just an old granny with a simple approach :)