How can we benefit everybody as much as possible? I really don't know. But this is a very important topic (to me) that I love to discuss. The answer might depend on how we define the word "benefit". Well being? in a long-term view or short-sighted monetary/comfort sense? Shouldn't our aim in society to benefit everybody? I'm with you. 100%. But in order for something to last, it shouldn't be the main focus but something that comes as a side-effect (emergence?). And, this is just my opinion. Some questions can't be answered easily. And, some can't be, at all (not from a defeatist mindset, but seeing right in the eyes of something that seems unanswerable, gives me pure joy!). To me, keeping these questions in mind while going through our life is the key. One can always find a reason to do/not-do. If you ask me, it's the question of well being and intelligence. Well being of an individual or everyone? If you see deep enough, there exists no individual without others and vice versa. To be more direct: we're embedded in our environment and focusing on one's own (depends on how greedy (in RL/CS sense) you are) life is just being short-sighted.

Two points: We can start rolling out the lightest part of it - the tip - right now! The strength required by the tether is not the same across its length - to minimize weight, it has to be tapering off towards the Earth's end, with very light tip. So, let's find a suitable geostationary sattelite in orbit already, and bring some tape (tether) to it. Space junk that's already in orbit, is great for the counterweight construction. It requires much less fuel to lift the junk into the geostationary orbit, than to lift it up from Earth surface.

I think this might be a bad aim for individuals. For example, suppose I have a child. If I were to aim to benefit everybody, then I would have to neglect my child. I think that maximizing (benefiting everybody as much as possible) also might not be a good aim: we need rest and leisure, time to ourselves, in order not to burn out.

I think this might be more complicated than keeping a diary or even than monitoring the body’s response to a given food using technology. There are at least two reasons why I think this is more complicated than either of those processes suggest: (1) such a process presupposes that the body’s needs are static. But, this is not the case. If I go for a run one day, my body’s needs that day will be different from what they are on another day when I do not go for a run. Likewise if I am sick. And, as our bodies age, of course, our needs change, too. (2) such a process presupposes that the body’s way of processing food remains static. But, this is also not the case. The micro biome, for example, changes through time, and this has an effect on the kinds and amounts of nutrients that are available to the body after eating. Likewise regarding the age of cells/organs. So, I think using a diary or technology can be very useful and informative—but, it also can be misleading if we do not keep the above in mind.

When I realize that the incessant cleaning of surfaces in Japan is a homeostatic fight against proliferation of bacteria in humid air, rather than just an aesthetic preference, it makes me realize another problem that these hive capsules would solve: making the air continental-climate-dry inside the capsules would automatically increase the public hyghiene.