[flagged]
> The only solution to those people starving to death is to kill the people that benefit from them starving to death.
There are solutions other than "to kill the people that benefit", such as what have existed for many years, including but not limited to:
- Efforts such as the recently emasculated USAID[0].
- Humanitarian NGO's[1] such as the World Central Kitchen[2]
and the Red Cross[3].
- The will of those who could help to help those in need[4].
0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agency_for_Inter...
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization
2 - https://wck.org/
3 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Red_Cross_and_Re...
This is a political will, empathy, and leadership problem. Not an engineering problem.
>> This is a political will, empathy, and leadership problem. Not an engineering problem.
> Those problems might be more tractable if all of our best and brightest were working on them.
The ability to produce enough food for those in need already exists, so that problem is theoretically solved. Granted, logistics engineering[0] is a real thing and would benefit from "our best and brightest."
What is lacking most recently, based on empirical observation, is a commitment to benefiting those in need without expectation of remuneration. Or, in other words, empathetic acts of kindness.
Which is a "people problem" (a.k.a. the trio I previously identified).
This sort of "there are bad things in the world, therefore focusing on anything else is bad" thinking is generally misguided.
> Engineers have basically nothing to do with either of those.
The logic here is “If A is actively working to develop capabilities for B, which B offers up to C who then uses it to do D, then A cannot claim to have nothing to do with D.”