At the risk of trivializing this… who knew Spaceballs was prophetic?
How the fuck do we get out of this trap we’ve built for ourselves?
This is a self solving problem. It will be solved when there are a lot fewer of us.
RFK Jr is trying as hard as he can to cull the herd. Salad?
Or, at least, his worm pilot is. Securing abundant food for future generations!
Stop and smell the roses while they’re still there. Accept they’ll be gone sooner rather than later.
If there’s any feasible solution to this mess, I think it’ll come either from extra-terrestrials or artificial intelligence, and only one of those two provably exist.
There has been evidence of extra terrestrial life? I don’t count infrared absorption bands of some small organic molecules strong enough to be counted as proof of life, if that is what you mean.
Nope, none exists and I don’t have high hopes given the expediency necessary.
Here’s to hoping the culmination of all human knowledge can devise a system of carbon capture that exceeds the efficiency of nature, i.e. trees, on an incredibly accelerated timeline. Otherwise, we’re boned.
Well there sure as hell hasn’t been proof of artificial intelligence.
We have machine learning and over hyped sentence completer.
Sure, buddy, whatever you say. It’s just a stochastic parrot? A glorified search engine, right? An overclocked Speak N’ Spell?
Well, regardless, if you have no faith in the paradigm-shifting technology of AI, then assume it’s not an option to consider - so we’re completely and utterly doomed. Happy? Enjoy the remainder of your life!
Delusional
You’ll get better, probably. Maybe. I’ll keep my fingers crossed for you, at least.
Intelligence requires understanding and comprehension, something a machine that can’t count the number of R’s in strawberry correctly obviously doesn’t have.
And after seeing how you misunderstand or misinterpret my comments here, it seems you lack it as well.
Yeah, because the technology is already at the apex of possibility. There’s no room for improvement, and we should give up now. You’re right again.
Here’s to hoping the culmination of all human knowledge can devise a system of carbon capture that exceeds the efficiency of nature, i.e. trees, on an incredibly accelerated timeline.
Even if the mass compilation of mostly scraped comments from social media networks could somehow produce useful guidance on addressing climate change, those systems are owned and operated by people who are making money from the way things are. Even if the stochastic text spewer did, for the sake of argument, actually give them the correct answer (which is to stop burning fossil fuels) they would ignore it and ask for a different answer.
Exactly!
WE KNOW THE ANSWER ALREADY! The people in power just don’t like it.
The people who vote don’t like that, and they put the people in power.
Chicken egg problem in my eyes: rich powerful people use mass media and economic hardships of their own making to manipulate people into voting right wing and anti science politicians, who then continue pushing that agenda.
Its not as we ever had elections really free of influence by the powerful elites.
Your democracy is and always has been a lie
This is like saying the solution to an ongoing house fire is to hide the matches.
Not at all. And honestly I don’t know how you came to that conclusion.
To stay with your metaphor: we know exactly how to extinguish the fire, but the home owner would need to allow his pool water to be used for it. Which he doesnt, even though he can’t use the pool at all when the house has burned down.
Sure, AI datacentres burning gigawatts of power and spewing hot water will be the solution. Great idea! Would you like me to write up a business plan for that?
Another person conflating AI with data centers. This species is doomed.
The headline here seems like a massive reach given
We analysed serum bicarbonate (HCO3−), calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) levels from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 1999 to 2020 as indirect proxies for atmospheric CO2 exposure
They took concentrations of three chemicals in the blood, took them as markers of CO2 concentration and then are extrapolating projected increases in CO2 concentration to increase those trends. That’s some pretty nasty mangling of independent and dependent variables. The correlation is interesting and likely warrants further study, but “toxic atmosphere in 50 years” is total clickbait.
