TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Ask HN: How do you propose to rebuild industry in a post-apocalypse world?

20 pointsby hnthrowaway0315about 2 months ago
Context:<p>https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Solarpunk<p>https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=43236520<p>I love the concept of Solarpunk or anything similar. However, I fail to understand how to reboot modern industry in a post-apocalypse world.<p>Scenario: I think a deadly virus outbreak is far more likely and devastating than a thermal nuclear war. Let&#x27;s assume that such an outbreak took out most of the governments and the population, and only local communities start to show up afterwards.<p>How do you reboot modern industry? I&#x27;m sure we can scavenge stores and storehouses for a while, but eventually we need to rebuild a very large portion of modern technologies, if not all of them.<p>For a start, how do we produce steel, aluminum and other common metal from raw materials? How do we actually mine them? How do we product antibiotics, needles and everything we need in a hospital? How do we build roads (I think this is actually not too hard)? How do we build transportation tools -- for sure we don&#x27;t want to rely on animals? How do we build water processing factories, or at least, build water processing tools and pills? As a SWE I feel I know nothing about modern industries.<p>Modern industries are too complex for any small community to even start to think about them. Someone gotta at least preserve some detailed documents for everything so that our future generations have a chance to rebuild them. Take steel production as an example, assuming mining is not a problem (it is), future generations need to know how such a factory is planned, built and operated. I never worked in such a factory but I bet there are tons of papers for just one of them. Encyclopedias won&#x27;t cut. They don&#x27;t teach you the 10,000 checks you need to check for all those pipelines and machines. Only factories and industry associations keep such documents, I think.<p>How do we build such a knowledge preservation project? They gotta be so detailed that even laymen can start learning. How do we store them? If we store them electronically, we need to make sure that future generations have the tools to access them. We also need copies of such a project everywhere in the world, because post-apocalypse communities are small and far from each other.<p>I also think such documentations should include smaller scale projects so that communities can actually start using it. If the community only has 1,000 people, a project that needs 10,000 doesn&#x27;t make any sense.<p>What do you think? Do you think your country already has it covered?

12 comments

cratermoonabout 2 months ago
Tom Murphy over at Do The Math[1] argues that we would not be able to reboot modernity after an apocalypse. The short version of his argument is that we long ago mined&#x2F;drilled&#x2F;farmed&#x2F;harvested the easy resources that can be gotten with pre-industrial technology. The raw materials we are extracting today require modern methods and materials. We can&#x27;t bootstrap ourselves from human and animal muscle power back to industrial capacity because it is inadequate to the task.<p>We might have the theoretical knowledge to do it, but we&#x27;d be unable to build out the infrastructure.<p>And no, scavenging won&#x27;t solve it because the energy and technology required to recover the raw materials again requires industrial processes and materials we won&#x27;t have the ability to harness.<p>1 <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dothemath.ucsd.edu&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dothemath.ucsd.edu&#x2F;</a>
评论 #43467928 未加载
评论 #43467896 未加载
评论 #43467875 未加载
评论 #43467910 未加载
评论 #43467944 未加载
AdieuToLogicabout 2 months ago
<p><pre><code> Scenario: I think a deadly virus outbreak is far more likely and devastating than a thermal nuclear war. Let&#x27;s assume that such an outbreak took out most of the governments and the population, and only local communities start to show up afterwards. How do you reboot modern industry? I&#x27;m sure we can scavenge stores and storehouses for a while, but eventually we need to rebuild a very large portion of modern technologies, if not all of them. </code></pre> Considering the events leading to and resulting in the Dark Ages[0], history would suggest it would take centuries (if not millennia) for societies to rediscover an industrial revolution and get back to where we are now.<p>0 - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Dark_Ages_(historiography)" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Dark_Ages_(historiography)</a>
评论 #43468009 未加载
评论 #43467935 未加载
cjameskellerabout 2 months ago
I&#x27;d suggest looking in the direction of the Global Village Construction Set being worked on by Open Source Ecology: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wiki.opensourceecology.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Global_Village_Construction_Set" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wiki.opensourceecology.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Global_Village_Const...</a>
评论 #43470194 未加载
stevefan1999about 2 months ago
Here&#x27;s how one Chinese RPG game think of it: they save as much knowledge as possible, and then send it to the outer space, hoping to find a right planet to settle down again and rebuild civilization first, and then one day make a call back home and return earth to its former glory. (That&#x27;s Genshin Impact&#x2F;Honkai Impact 2&amp;3)<p>Here&#x27;s how one Japanese RPG game think of it: they separated human body and soul and send it to outer space as well, and the &quot;people&quot; who lived in the earth will now be humanoid androids instead to prevent themselves from being &quot;corrupted&quot;, in other word, your soul could remote control the robot from outer space, and achieved &quot;immortality&quot;. (That&#x27;s Nier Replicant&#x2F;Gestalt&#x2F;Automata)<p>But after all, the only problem is: how do we prevent the entropy&#x2F;information we human build over thousands of year from being annihilated from a single black swan, disastrous event. That&#x27;s one of the reason I liked informatics so much.
评论 #43468683 未加载
tptacekabout 2 months ago
There&#x27;s a book about this! Lewis Dartnell&#x27;s &quot;The Knowledge&quot;. I&#x27;m not saying it&#x27;s actually a real answer, but it&#x27;s fun in a sort of mental Dwarf Fortress kind of way.
评论 #43468060 未加载
评论 #43474680 未加载
duchenneabout 2 months ago
There is a manga&#x2F;anime about this: doctor stone.<p>For the knowledge preservation, I guess that a copy of deepseek has most of the required information. But, it would be hard to run it in a primitive world.
评论 #43482526 未加载
dgrin91about 2 months ago
I actually think that in a virus scenario humanity would be able to bounce back fairly quickly (meaning 100 years instead of 10,000), presuming there is a solution for the virus<p>Why? Because the virus doesn&#x27;t actually kill infrastructure. Many roads and bridges will be ok-ish sitting around with no load for a while. Many factories and tools will be mostly in tact. Most importantly though, it infra will be fine. A laptop with a backup of Wikipedia can sit around for a few decades, and generating some electricity locally is not that big of an issue.<p>That would kickstart humanity&#x27;s recovery. We don&#x27;t need to reinvent the wheel, just read how someone else did it
评论 #43468536 未加载
评论 #43478463 未加载
评论 #43470221 未加载
__dabout 2 months ago
I think it’s unlikely that a reboot gets us to iPhones again (within hundreds of years anyway) because of the easy resources all gone issue.<p>Can we get back to imperial Roman quality of life? Or 1600s Europe? Maybe, but different.<p>For the first few generations we’d have some people with useful knowledge. After that, interpreting the artifacts will become harder.<p>There also the question of whether the remnant population would want to rebuild the society that had collapsed.<p>I think it’s much more productive to focus on not wiping out most of humanity in the first place.
评论 #43470256 未加载
评论 #43472071 未加载
dredmorbiusabout 2 months ago
It&#x27;s probably more useful to look both at how our modern technological society did evolve, and at groups which are seriously considering existential risk, complexity, and potential paths to a reboot.<p>Among the latter is the Long Now Foundation, which has proposed a Manual for Civilization (02010):<p>&lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;longnow.org&#x2F;ideas&#x2F;manual-for-civilization&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;longnow.org&#x2F;ideas&#x2F;manual-for-civilization&#x2F;</a>&gt;<p>I&#x27;ve my own disagreements with LNF, but the concept is worth consideration and the effort to compile useful knowlege worth studying for both points of agreement and difference.<p>The question of how, why, where, and when the Industrial Revolution (writ broadly, ~1700 to present) emerged has filled books. The so-called Needham Question asks why it was the British Isles and not China which saw the IR take off. Needham&#x27;s exploration of this topic, begun in 1954, has produced 27 books to date <i>and remains underway</i>. Wikipedia&#x27;s article gives a good overview, as well as the general organisation of the work and its contents to date:<p>&lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Science_and_Civilisation_in_China#Volumes" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Science_and_Civilisation_in_Ch...</a>&gt;<p>I&#x27;ve been partial to histories of the world through the lens of history, most notably Vaclav Smil&#x27;s <i>Energy and Civilization: A History</i> (2017) and <i>Energy in World History</i> (1994), and Manfred Weissenbacher&#x27;s <i>Sources of Power</i> (2009).<p>&lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Vaclav_Smil#Books" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Vaclav_Smil#Books</a>&gt;<p>&lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bloomsbury.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;sources-of-power-9780313356278&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bloomsbury.com&#x2F;us&#x2F;sources-of-power-9780313356278...</a>&gt;<p>Smil has also looked at many other elements of technological history, material usage, and energy transitions, see the publications section of his Wikipedia bio above.<p>What&#x27;s notable is that most of the material and energy ingredients of the modern world <i>have been known since antiquity</i>, but were not, or could not be, usefully employed, for various reasons. There&#x27;s endless speculation as to why, with theological, technical, scientific, social, political, geographical, and other justifications given. I suspect it&#x27;s many of these inter-operating, and that the bootstrapping process is a sensitive and delicate one.<p>Many of these elements are covered in the series the Princeton Economic History of the Western World:<p>&lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;press.princeton.edu&#x2F;series&#x2F;the-princeton-economic-history-of-the-western-world" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;press.princeton.edu&#x2F;series&#x2F;the-princeton-economic-hi...</a>&gt;<p>There are of course other books which touch on this topic (and I&#x27;d strongly recommend Polanyi&#x27;s <i>The Great Transformation</i>), but if you want one-stop shopping over many dimensions of the question, this is an excellent place to start.<p>My own thinking leads me to believe that there are nine fundamental dynamics to technological mechanisms:<p>- Fuels<p>- Materials<p>- Power transmission and transformation (simple machines, electromagnetic, etc.)<p>- Process knowledge (technical)<p>- Causal knowledge (scientific)<p>- Networks (nodes and links, physical or logical, experience &quot;network effects&quot; <i>and</i> network contagion)<p>- Systems (feedback)<p>- Information (input, parsing, storage&#x2F;retrieval, logic, transmission)<p>- Hygiene (addressing unintended &#x2F; unanticipated consequences)<p>In particular, the availability or discovery of new fuels and materials has typically resulted in widespread societal changes and progress, though also in other areas (e.g., information technologies, from speech to writing to maths to printing to digital IT). At the same time, each mechanism has limitations and consequences which also affect capabilities and impose limits.<p>By way of outlining a specific answer: the <i>shape</i> of a solution or reboot will depend tremendously on what materials and fuels are available, how they&#x27;re accessed (our own waste dumps are likely to be major sources moving forward), and the consequences of past and present industrialisation on that landscape. Fundamental requirements of food, housing, and basic production capital will establish general capabilities. Transportation, over land and sea, possibly air, will determine requirements for self-sufficiency or possibilities of trade. Our ability to address basic production and distribution (whether through market or other means) general living conditions within and between specific societies and polities.<p>I&#x27;d additionally strongly recommend the work of William Ophuls and Thomas Homer-Dixon.
评论 #43472594 未加载
cyberge99about 2 months ago
Check out the Phil Gingery series of books. He discusses how to build a lathe using scrap metal and sand (starting with a foundry). From there it’s all magnitude.
评论 #43467953 未加载
defrostabout 2 months ago
<i>Kartiya are like Toyotas. When they break down we get another one.</i><p>– remark by a Western Desert woman about westerners who work in Indigenous communities
dsqabout 2 months ago
One problem is lack of law and order. You can build something and have it stolen by the local warlord or just randomly burned out of spite.