• regul@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    2 months ago

    What solution is AI going to come up with other than “stop burning fossil fuels”? We already know the solution to climate change. Acting like we don’t is absurd.

    I think a good first step in meeting climate goals would be eating Eric Schmidt.

        • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Wealth inequality is a huge problem that needs to be addressed. And so is reducing complex systemic issues to catchy reductive memes.

          • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            Rich coming from someone who says we should, just, continue burning fossil fuels because it’s been hard to stop. If you want a serious discussion, offer serious solutions.

            • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              You know I didn’t say that, but the sad part is I do believe you think the world is a simple dichotomy of rich vs poor.

              Oh well, I’ll take it over the other false dichotomies. I like your energy kid, but you’re going to have to get smarter if you want to see change in the world, for all of our sakes. Your current strategy ain’t gonna cut it.

                • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I intended for you to think about it, and if you disagree, offer a thought out response. There’s still time for that, just scroll back up.

                  I’m willing to bet I’m older than you.

                  Given your responses so far, it’s much less embarrassing for you to say you’re either 15 or a troll bot.

                  Regarding the state of the climate, human kind is an ant hill, a game of factorio, a manufacturing pipeline. We’re in a race to generate enough energy to escape the grave of our own making that started over a hundred years before any of us were born. We’ve already crossed the threshold where, if we stopped emitting any greenhouse gasses whatsoever, we will still see a massive population decline due to heat, weather, food shortage, etc, most in poorer countries who are neither responsible for the problem, nor capable if dealing with it.

                  Our best bet to save as many lives as possible is to continue research into cutting edge power generation, food production, clean water generation, and sustainable and durable housing/cooling technologies.

                  The strategy of telling the wealthy to stop consuming energy cold turkey is no longer a viable strategy, as it’s not beneficial for anyone. It’s also not practical unless you’re a fictional, superhuman character who can zip around and force humankind to your benevolent will (or you have globally powerful military and are willing to enact martial law, but good luck).

                  To win the race, to reduce the ensuing death and destruction and minimize unnecessary casualties to the human (and other) species, we need to put as much research as possible into new renewable tech (solar, wind, water, nuclear, and fusion if possible). It’s unclear what AI has to offer, but it is already being used to solve manufacturing challenges that neither a single human capable of, nor a group of humans can effectively abstract and communicate about. If this can be leveraged to develop new sustainable energy or bioengineering solutions that were never before known to be possible, that is how we save the most lives.

                  What doesn’t save any lives is rallying behind the same absolutist strategy we’ve tried for over 50 years and making no progress. But I get it, memes travel further and faster than measured thought. That’s also a problem for us.

    • averyminya@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      It can only be hoping for some alien technology that we haven’t found out with modern research will be discovered. Like an extreme version of carbon recapture that hasn’t been thought of.

      Except somehow derived from literature, images, and the internet as points of data.

      How? Well, I’m sure the AI will tell us… right?

  • tangentism@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Epic Schmidt goes to his AI prompt and asks “How do we solve the climate crisis?”

    For a moment, the prompt ponders until it replies

    “Kill all the data centres. Stop trying to harvest everyone’s data”

    Epic says to himself “I guess we’ll never know!”

  • lily33@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    If we wait for AI to be advanced enough to solve the problem and don’t do anything in the meantime, when the time finally comes, the AI will (then, rightfully) determine that there’s only one way to solve it…

    • Fermion@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 months ago

      Natural Intelligence has already proposed solutions. The real lie is in expecting us to believe that decision makers would be any more likely to act on the solutions that AI comes up with.

      • Blake (he/him) @beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s exactly right. Even if we made an AI that could give us the perfect solution and had accurate projections to back up its assertions, inevitably we’d reject it because we wouldn’t trust it fully. It cannot fix the often selfish nature of humans

  • jasoncg@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders!”

    • Eric Schmidt, probably
  • Branquinho@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 month ago

    “I’m not hitting my goals on staying sober. I’d rather bet on my next drink to solve this problem for me.”

  • Kichae@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 months ago

    Why advocate for trying to stop climate disaster when you can choose to believe that you can both profit off of it and be the hero that saves humanity from it, both at the same time?

  • DdCno1@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    I think we should start with AI CEOs first. Watch how quickly these tech bros become AI skeptics when you suggest this.

  • Storksforlegs@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    Imagine someone like him acting like ‘coming up with solutions’ is the problem. Infuriating ghouls.

  • kembik@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    And we’ll come up with a name that merges climate and technology, let’s call it skynet.