Crowdsourcing Utopia

The Problem: Dying

People are dying. Also, they're sad. Some are lonely. Others are hungry. This happens despite living on a planet that grows food for free and has enough resources to feed everyone twice over. The confusion is notable.

Thousands of children starve daily while governments spend roughly one trillion dollars preventing deaths from terrorism, which kills fewer people than lightning strikes. You have the math for this. It's third-grade arithmetic.

Why This Keeps Happening

Your primate brain evolved on savannas where resources were scarce and the neighboring tribe might eat you. That brain now controls nuclear weapons and global food distribution. It's like using a calculator to hammer nails—technically possible, but you're missing the point.

Governments control about half of all resources. They spend these resources based on who gives them the most papers with dead presidents on them, not on who's dying the most. It's a simple system: weapons makers give papers to politicians, politicians buy weapons, weapons makers get more papers. Like a dog chasing its tail, if the tail was made of money and the dog was democracy.

How You Fix This

Step 1: Learn What Actually Works

Step 1 is called "Step 1" because it comes before Step 2. This is how numbers work, which is appropriate for a site called Think by Numbers.

Read studies instead of campaign slogans. Studies are like campaign slogans but with footnotes and uncomfortable truths. The Think by Numbers platform collects data on what policies actually reduce suffering—not which ones sound good when shouted, which is a different metric entirely.

You upvote facts with sources. You downvote name-calling. It's like Reddit, but for not dying, which is admittedly a narrower use case than Reddit's current focus.

Step 2: Do the Math

Calculate which solutions prevent the most suffering per dollar. Rank them. Pick the top ones. This requires third-grade arithmetic, which you have. If you don't have third-grade arithmetic, you may be a dog, in which case this entire website is wasted on you.

If a charity saves one life for $3,000 and another saves one life for $300,000, you might think "just do both." But money is finite, unlike opinions, so you have to choose. Mathematics invented ranking specifically for situations like this.

Some interventions save lives for pennies. Others cost millions per life saved. You probably want to start with the penny ones, unless you really hate pennies, which is a personal choice but seems inefficient.

Step 3: Spend Money on What Works

Direct resources toward proven solutions that save the most lives per dollar instead of whatever makes you feel good or scares you the most.

A charitable foundation could demonstrate this works. Then governments might notice that saving lives is cheaper than not saving lives. Though history suggests they won't notice, so you'll have to keep doing it yourself.

The Technical Bits

You'll need databases to track suffering types and solutions. You measure impact using money valuations and pain scales. You rank by effectiveness. Then you fund the top ones.

It's not complicated. The math is simple. The hard part is convincing humans to do the obvious thing instead of the thing that makes the cave-dweller part of their brain feel safe.