Positive news from 2023
gapminder.org
gapminder.org
I wish there was a way to find positive stories like this without having to wade through the increasingly negative swamp that is news today.
I can recommend installing the App.
I chuckled to myself about the article on frogs with fangs [1]. I like the focus on discovery of a new species, but not exactly thrilled about fanged frogs’ existence.
1: https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/new-species-of-fanged-frog-h...
Well, we had wisened up to them appearing as bats so…
I want to know just how corrupt, vial and inhumane people can be so I can do everything in my power to not be that way and do what I can to improve this world how ever minute that may be.
Instead, I would like an occasional, easy-to-consume method to get stories like this
You are already doing what you can to improve the world. How reading news will help? Would you do more than you can?
And vice-versa, when I learn about uplifting things — selfless people doing things to help others, people striving to invent new technologies and medicines that keep our world going one more day, preventing us from tipping over into some apocalypse or another — I find myself more motivated to help others as well, because I can imagine that I am helping those good people. And also, I don't have to imagine — those people are on my side! If I have a goal for positive change related to one of these issues, news about progress with those issues tells me that I wouldn't be alone in solving these problems; that there will be people there to work with, people to ally with and collaborate with, people that massively increase the chance of changing the world!
Besides the motivational angle, though: "the world is burning" news is basically information-free. For almost all adults who haven't been living in a cave, such news causes no Bayesian update. Growing up, you learn about a few of the worst atrocities ever committed — the dictators, the serial killers, etc. Once you know these, you can derive the pattern of thinking behind them, an understanding of the base impulses of humanity at its darkest. You don't need constant new examples of the pattern to remind you that it continues to happen. You can assume that it continues to happen. (If you know this and you still feel obsessively compelled to expose yourself to such information — well, there's a name for that.)
Whereas, "good news" is frequently useful news. A new medicine? You or a family member might live longer taking it! Solar panels are cheaper now? Hey, maybe you can afford them yourself now! There's currently a big grassroots push to treat tuberculosis in developing nations? Sounds like something still small enough that a retweet could actually help it happen! And also sounds like you should slightly update in favor of those nations becoming more developed and being a place you should take a vacation to one day!
I'm not advocating for burying one's head in the sand. I think it's better to focus one's information diet on things that happened months or years ago, where there will be higher quality books and articles on the subject. You'll come away more informed and less outraged than the people debating about the latest headline trending on Twitter.
That's actually the point of positive over negative news. It focuses on people doing constructive things, and the positive results happening, which makes it easier to have a constructive mindset yourself, to befriend those people, to participate in solutions, etc. The endless stream of negativity in the news, which is _artificially_ amplified, serves mostly to hide that stuff, because its lower effort to read and produces a kind of doom scrolling effect in people (i.e. to mindlessly search for and share the worst things in the world). That doesn't generally lead anyone to do anything positive.
Certainly there are downsides too, but for me this has been beneficial. I just don't need my news to be scary TikTok (which I also refuse to use) and having my attention running on high at all times. It's too much for me to handle. YMMV
https://www.positive.news/society/what-went-right-in-2023-th...
Not sure if they're framing it this way to exaggerate the improvement or because the data reported on isn't collected annually.
Limiting the list to things improving only since 2022 seems unnecessarily restrictive and we'd miss a lot of positive and interesting news.
Or stop people from abusing each other?
Or decrease tensions between religion groups?
> How technology can stop the war?
Better technology can help countries to be more productive and less dependent on other countries. This would reduce tensions between countries and consequently reduce armed conflicts.
> Or decrease tensions between religion groups?
Tension between groups can be reduced by making people more aware about how people in the other group are really. For example, a Christian can change his mind about Muslims after spending time talking with a Muslim. With technology you can help people in different groups to understand better people in the other group.
Of course these are speculative answers, and technology has been proven to be highly unpredictable (people predicting that in 2020 there would be flying cars) so I know my predictions are probably false. But they are useful to understand how technology can help. On the other hand, history shows us that technology has helped consistently the (read the article posted here for an extensive list of example).
Unfortunately technology was already used for the opposite purpose.
More productive in producing weapons for invasion. If country will be more dependent - they will consider opportunity costs of going into the war. But here we are, with biggest war in Europe since ww2.
Looks like technology can only help people to create a more sophisticated ways to kill each other.
If technology can help to create more sophisticated way to kill each other, it can also be used to create the defense against the same. Laser can be a killing weapon, or can also be used to shoot down drones.
And this is saying nothing about civilian application that save instead of killing each other.
I’m laughing harder than when the blockchain lunatics claimed they were going to solve political corruption. Well at least they had some contrived “how” instead of just making a completely unexplained speculation.
Naive. Russia started a war once they became less dependent on other countries. Now they are using modern tech like cryptocurrency to circumvent sanctions.
It is the application of technology that needs to be improved. After all, technology does not give us anxieties, it's our own FOMO that causes us anxieties.
Renewables investments exceeding fossil ones by 1.80 USD for every fossil dollar and many countries seeing strong renewable energy growth are my highlights from the list.
That world happiness is back to more than pre-pandemic levels was also a big surprise to me.
This seems crazy. Were this to be enacted in the US, I would expect businesses to find legal loopholes in order to not hire women.
I totally respect the idea, but I would have so much trouble with that pressure.
Based on the linked article, South Africa was already ahead of the US.
this is the big one that affects many people, about half the population. We need answers more than ever. Obesity out control. Nothing seems to work, but these drugs offer a glimmer of hope, but I don't think they will solve the obesity epidemic completely.
At this point I have helped 4 adults (3 being 60+ yrs old) and myself try the diet. Even my own father.
Most can't do all 90 days for whatever reason. Every single person that has tried it for 30 days has lost about 25 lbs. The ones that tried it for 60 days lost 35-40 lbs.
Two of the seniors had blood tests done before and after the juice diet, both showed improved markers on EVERY single thing tracked, including blood sugar and A1C levels, even though they basically lived off the sugar in vegetables for 60 days.
Every single person agrees that vegetable juice plus meat would be the ideal diet for them long term after trying it.
Even with all that said, new people that year it says it doesn't sound healthy. If you told them your diet is 2-3 lbs of salad plus meat a day, they'd say ya that sounds healthy. If you tell them, hey, have 10 lbs of salad a day for 90 days, they'd say that sounds healthy but sounds too hard to eat that much. If you tell them, sure, why don't you juice it instead and make a gallon of juice, they'll say that doesn't sound healthy.
I think weight loss is very simple. It's just not easy. And it's not easy to decide to try. I begged my dad for 3 years to try 90 days of juice, after I tried. Finally he tries it, and is now a believer. My mom though, seeing his great blood test results, and seeing him lose 35 lbs and feel great, still isn't convinced she could give up pastries and bread and just live off salad (juice) for 90 days.
Heck, people will try hormone altering drugs before they try celary, carrot, beet, cucumber juice.
Crash diets like this don't work. Sure you may lose pounds the week or two that you try it. But what happens in 6 months? A year? Highly unlikely to keep those pounds off.
Sounds like such a diet could have adverse affects on TSH, T3/T4 and Test. Were those tracked? If so, what was the effect?
Can I ask what inspired you to go down the route of vegetable juice, vs other dietary changes? Rapid weight loss to the tune of 20lb+/month is rarely a good sign, except in the morbidly obese. Gradual, sustainable lifestyle changes tend to show good, healthy results in the short and long term.
Once done, you've broken a lot of habits. If you can stay away from processed snacks and huge carb heavy meals, you keep the weight off.
Losing 35 lbs in 60 days is life changing for most people I think. After that it's easier to maintain a healthy diet imo. Keeping a healthy diet while watching yourself lose 4 lbs a month for a year is a lot harder for people... As we can see from everyone constantly expanding.
But that is true, it is unhealthy.
To get better people need a healthy food lifestyle. To cut calories, cut extra sugars, eat more complex and less processed foods.
The good proposal is to not jump on whatever-style 90-days diet, but to embrace healthy balanced diet for all year round. For example, DASH diet.
Ps: why to drink juice if you can eat veggies unfiltered, in one piece with all their nutrients?
You can compare obesity with depression: both are psychological issues in most cases. It is easy to fight obesity - the person simply need to cut on calories, to get a healthy diet. However, it is really hard to do that on practice.
> unhealthy food habits
Fixing this will require systemic change, like 1) moving away from ultra-processed foods derived from cheap crops, 2) a ban on eye catching advertising for obviously unhealthy food, and 3) making well balanced and healthy food as cheap and assessable as unhealthy food.
Right now the debate is framed as an individual choice problem, but in my view it's a systemic public health problem like cigarettes. There needs to be regulation, from TV ads for Burger King to eye catching breakfast cereal boxes. If you manipulate human psychology with advertising and then hijack their biological mechanisms for sensing when they're full they don't really have a choice.
The issue is that ultra processed foods are engineered to be as addictive as possible. Fast sugars and starches with spices give fast response and provoke binge eating.
Chips are created and marketed so person will select them instead of bunch of carrots as snack. There are no sexy commercials starring raw veggies, unfortunately.
Here in France, you may ride an electric assistance bike that cuts off at 25 kmph as if it were a normal bike. No license, helmet, or insurance required. You may also ride on bike paths. Just like a regular old-fashioned bike.
For bikes with assistance above that, you need a license, the "light motorcycle" or whatever it's called. Also, insurance, helmet, and gloves, just for any "real" motorbike. These things cost as much as a full-on motorcycle, so I don't know who buys them.
Anyway, I haven't heard of any increase in injuries or fatalities related to the uptake of electrical bikes that doesn't seem linked to the overall increase in cycling since covid.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-us...
In reply to your other comment, I'm not surprised riders of e-scooters have more injuries. Those things are extremely unstable and have next to no brakes. Quite different from bikes, which have better handling characteristics.
Also, the kinds of e-bikes that don't require a license in France only go faster then a regular bike when going uphill. On flat terrain, they're similar. So I don't see why there would be more injuries per mile traveled. The ones that have assistance to a higher speed are a different thing, and expect to see the same kind of injuries as for mopeds.
Increases. And many more to come. Accident damage caused to riders of motorbikes is overwhelmingly more severe than car drivers. We can confidently presume similar ratio of e-scooters, especially as more often than not helmets and body protection is rarely worn. Nothing out of the ordinary saying or seeing this.
The negativity you continually read about them is just the equivalent of "windmills kill birds", propaganda promoted by some of the worst people in the world, in order to maintain the level of death and destruction that they profit from.
Even separate from cars, the battery revolution driven by cars will likely be the second most important part of a carbon free grid after solar PV.
This is referring to the Colorado River, and it is WAY too little, and far too late. Real changes won't be made until the situation is dire.
Why do you think AI is hugely positive?
Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I see no good outcomes from the excessive automation that will result from advances in AI.
It can make the world better to the very few that are in a position to leverage it, but will result in jobs disappearing for most of humanity.
So far pretty much all the economic upside has gone to the masses. The wealthy have much higher nominal wealth and no way to use it for themselves that hasn't existed in all of history. In fact, the lack of modern pyramids like what was built in Egypt suggests they're using resources even more consistently for the common good instead of monumental waste (heh).
Hugely positive for whom? A big mega corporation? The average human being stands to benefit minimally, but in the long run things don't like too good if everything is up for automation.
It's the short term pain, or individual lost that needs to be addressed.
Reducing barriers so that anyone can pursue their dreams seems like a worthwhile and humanistic goal.
I do, however, question the use of the label "ethnic background" because everyone is of some ethnic group.
That's why he wrote "ethnic background X". The X is a relevant part of the quote.
Sure, and what you treat as a positive reward signal towards this goal is important. If you treat having 10% more of X in field Y, as a positive, then why not 20% or better yet 50%? It leads to artificial results.
(Ignore the Saudi case, since this is almost certainly a cynical gesture to foreigners so we can be more accepting of MBS as being actually a really great guy after all considering what he's doing for women)
You don’t think it’s noteworthy and “positive news” that a woman from a country that wouldn’t let women drive just a little while ago is sending a female astronaut to the ISS? I get being irritated by weird and hyperbolic culture war nonsense, but this is pretty freaking amazing IMO.
While KSA has a great many problems - especially in regards to human rights <cough MBS having people murdered, cough cough>, this is a positive sign that maybe those sorts of attitudes aren’t permissible in polite company on a global stage anymore.
This is good news.
Tell me exactly how this is encouraging efforts that have “zero value?” You don’t think Saudi Arabia entering (albeit hesitantly) the 21st century is an achievement unto itself? You don’t think it’s noteworthy or admirable just because it’s not “boots in moon dust” or whatever technical achievement you think is more important? Please. Take your 1930s mentality back to where it came from.
The future isn’t only for men of European ancestry.
"Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."
https://english.alarabiya.net/News/saudi-arabia/2023/05/25/S...
You might counter that she was selected by the wealthy Saudi authorities as a PR stunt.
That's probably also true to some extent, but how is that different than the than how space travel was used for PR/patriotic purposes in the US and Russia for in the past?
A lot of space travel throughout it's history is openly about selling aspiration.
Never said that. Just pointing out what you treat as a positive reward signal matters if you want to optimize for the goal that's actually intended here.
What is this singular goal that you are implying should be intended here? The absolutely pure pursuit of science? That's never been the goal of space travel, even from it's inception.
While geopolitics creates the strangest bedfellows, this is probably an attempt to play China off against the USA/Japan as well as shake a few geopolitical trees. I doubt some handshakes are going to resolve centuries of mutual hatred and Sunni/Shia supremacy between Saudi and Iran. Saudi has mountains of cash but needs a security guarantor. The USA has played that role for some decades but is losing interest so Saudi is maneuvering to regain American interest or gain another guarantor. They may be betting that diplomatic excursions with Iran ostensibly brokered by China will lead to the USA or Japan stepping in to prevent China gaining greater influence in the region, and if not maybe China would work out for them.
It is bad news for the West. Iran will stop after restoring Muslim control of Israel in much the same way that Germany stopped after restoring German control of the Sudetenland.
We should have it down to basically zero by now. This so many resources poured into it.
The same with all the better malaria treatment - great but shouldn't we have fixed this problem by now?
2023 could have been a great year with advances in AI solving protein folding, but it turned out to be the same usual shit: dictators who get other people to kill so they can get rich.
That's explained by cancers being a family of decease and not a single decease. So it's always going to be a moving target.
How can you claim to know a priori how many resources need to be thrown at a problem to solve it?
Cancer is one of the most complex diseases in existence. Eliminating it requires sci-fi levels of technology in areas like molecular biology, gene editing, immunology, and pharmacology. I would say we have made a remarkable amount of progress given that we didn't know what DNA was 70 years ago.
We already know how to eliminate malaria, which we have successfully done in many developed countries. The underlying problem is poverty and lack of infrastructure in developing countries, which isn't trivial to solve either.
Perfectionism is the wrong attitude to take here. All progress happens through incremental improvement.