The Law Of Diminishing Returns

I came across an article that started with this:

The law of diminishing returns is a concept from economics that indicates after a certain point, increasing only one input starts producing fewer returns.

I didn’t get to read the rest of the article because it was for paying subscribers only. But it’s enough of a hook to get me where I want to go, which is here:

The law of diminishing returns applies to every kind of satisfaction in this world, with the exception of the experience of nature.

That should be prompting a question. Why is it a law? On what does it depend?

Take a meal – any meal that you like. Eat it. Now the host brings you the same meal again – and you just don’t have the appetite any more. It’s the same with everything you can imagine, as long as your direction is to satisfy yourself.

If, on the other hand, you shift your desire outside of yourself, to others and their needs – then the picture changes. Now you can forget about being full because you are never thinking about yourself.

Now the only question is whether you can do it. Can you actually think of others and to what is to the benefit of others (and not to self-benefit) at all? It’s a big task. There are many pitfalls, such as the desire for recognition for one’s efforts. But the direction is invigorating. And in this world today, or at least in Western Europe and North America where the satisfaction of every desire surrounds us and ceases to satisfy, changing the course of your desires is exactly on point.

Again, that should be prompting a question. Why is it a law? On what does it depend? Well first of all, most discussions would say that it’s not so much a law based on theoretical premises, as it is a fact based upon experience.

If it is a law, then its origin has to come from something above sensory experience, that controls human experience. Answering that is a deeper question.

Update to The Ticking Ecological Bomb In The Red Sea

Here’s my article from August 10, 2020 Over A Million Barrels Of Oil In A Rusting Hulk In The Red Sea Since 1988

Now the ship to replace the FSO Safer has been bought by the UN, and it is on its way from China to where the FSO Safer is moored.

However, there is a catch. There isn’t enough money to complete the job. Here is the statement by Ambassador Woodward at the Security Council meeting on Yemen published by the UK Government on 17 April.

We are at a critical moment to address the threat posed by the FSO Safer.
The replacement vessel has begun its journey to Yemen but there is not enough funding for the salvage operation to take place.
The costs of inaction are severe. This would devastate marine life and coastal livelihoods, disrupt life-saving humanitarian assistance for 17 million people, and cost the global economy billions in lost trade every day.
On 4th May, the UK is co-hosting a Pledging Conference with the Netherlands and in partnership with the UN.
This event aims to fill the shortfall and provide a long-term solution for Yemen.
It is on all of us, states, private sector and individuals, to step up and help. The time to act is now. We all have a stake in averting this catastrophe.

Nofence Grazing

The Yorkshire Wildlife Trust uses a method of keeping cattle in a location without fencing them in. I asked what no fence grazing is and got this reply. Before I start, I want to say that I am very aware that criticism is easy and it may be that the experience of herds with nofence is entirely positive. But I worry that it is otherwise.

The explanation of nofence is on the website at nofence. A cow is pictured with a collar with a box hanging from its neck.

Nofence trains the animals to turn around on audio. When the animal crosses the Nofence boundary, the collar starts playing an audio warning. The audio warning is a scale of tones, which starts at a low pitch and rises gradually as the animal moves through the boundary zone. If the whole scale has been played, a mild, but effective electric pulse will be given.

So there is it – a shock is delivered to an animal if it ignores the boundary. I prefer the idea of a fence, and I wonder what cows prefer. A fence you can see. It requires no translation from rising tones to a shock that comes from around its neck. How is it to make sense of anything other than that a rising tone spells an unpleasant experience?

One of the advantages touted by the system is that the boundaries can be moved easily. And if they are then a cow cannot reliably relate the rising tone to specific landmarks or its position in the landscape. Imagine being in a field and someone switches the no-go zone. I don’t know.