[ExI] nature's indifference to survival

[Adrian Tymes]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 5:25 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> On 27/10/2026 08:44, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > Many things are believed to be zero-sum games, that are not in fact
> > zero-sum games.  Most things of importance to large governments are
> > not zero-sum games, whether or not they are believed to be.
>
> Can you give us some examples?

"We can either fund this factory, or this statue.  We don't have the
budget for both.  It's a zero-sum game: one proposal will win and one
will lose."

Except that the factory will generate a significant financial return
on investment, making more budget (that could perhaps eventually pay
for the statue), while the statue will not.

> > As to security: they're just pushing the problem outward.  The people
> > who are raised to kill them are still on their borders.  Education,
> > providing those people actual security, et al would change it so their
> > neighbors don't want to kill them nearly as much.
>
> Yes, and as you pointed out, this is not going to happen while easier solutions exist, like the one that is currently being implemented.

Recent Israeli elections suggest that a large number of people may be
realizing that the "easier solutions" do not in fact work.

> > This is the core disconnect.  We're not mostly talking about zero-sum situations.
>
> I think we are. Can you demonstrate how we're not?
>
> A lot of things are about money, which is clearly zero-sum.

The mere fact that some investments reliably generate a return on
investment - in other words, more money - argues otherwise.