Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Quinn Norton

The most maddening tech discourse these days is that we need AI to figure out how to solve climate change.

We've known how to completely solve climate change for more than a decade, thanks. We just don't want to.

34 comments | Expand all CWs
ErgonWolf

@quinn I remember the first push about climate change was in the early 1970s. So we've known for 50 years.

MarjorieR

@c_merriweather @ErgonWolf @quinn not quite correct. Limits to Growth largely didn't figure in climate change triggered by our production of green house gases.
It did demonstrate unlimited economic and population growth was impossible and would actual go into reverse as we exhausted resources, such as oil and minerals.
While some people had worked out that burning oil and coal produced GHGs and led warming temperatures back in the 19th century the wider appreciation (many of us still haven't got it) that we would soon be pushing the limits due to green house gases raising global temperatures to a degree that was environmentally significantly came a little later and after Limits to Growth was published.
Limits to Growth did discuss pollution, but it was concerned with a wide range of pollutants and in its BAU scenario it projected pollution and in particular CO2 as a solvable problem (the thinking was we would switch to nuclear energy for power) while at the same time foreseeing an exhaustion of non-renewable resources as being the main limiting factor.

@c_merriweather @ErgonWolf @quinn not quite correct. Limits to Growth largely didn't figure in climate change triggered by our production of green house gases.
It did demonstrate unlimited economic and population growth was impossible and would actual go into reverse as we exhausted resources, such as oil and minerals.
While some people had worked out that burning oil and coal produced GHGs and led warming temperatures back in the 19th century the wider appreciation (many of us still haven't got...

Quinn Norton

@ErgonWolf not really? we've known it was a problem since the 1800s, but the practical solutions are mostly in the last 20 years. solar/battery/wind etc hasn't been in a position to scale until very recently.

Parade du Grotesque 💀

@quinn

Replace the last 'we' by 'Rich as eff billionaires' and you might be onto something.

Michael Stanclift

@quinn we must destroy the planet to save it.

Dominik Grabiec

@vmstan @quinn
Funny thing is the planet will be here, it is us humans which will not.

Quinn Norton

@dominikg @vmstan i mean depending on nuclear proliferation... 😂

G0rb

@quinn sorry, I can't hear you over the noise, I have to build a nuclear power plant to get enough energy for my climate-fixing AI-Datacenter

Dan Milway

@quinn
I think that discourse could be useful, though

For instance, anyone who says we need AI to solve climate change is a prime target for expropriation

Thrillho

@quinn The part I find frustrating about climate discourse is that everyone talks about it as if it's the planet that's in danger. The planet doesn't care. The ecosystem will adapt. The thing at risk is our survival. We're not "fighting for the planet" we're fighting for our own survival.

Quinn Norton

@Mustardfacial we're fighting for the holocene, specifically, planet is fine, we know what we mean. don't be a pedant about it, we all know the geology is fine 😂

E. C. Bigribs

@quinn But if AI says it, then... well... the billionaires would probably outlaw AI completely, and I guess that would be a win, sort of.

Kevin Russell

@quinn

More than a hundred years. The amount of time we have known about burning carbon is longer than the amount of time, since we began the industrial revolution until we were warned.

co2 warning history, 1800's

daily.jstor.org/how-19th-centu

Quinn Norton

@kevinrns not that we knew about climate change, that we had the knowledge and tech to solve it is pretty recent.

Teknikal_Domain

@quinn No, no, no. They actually have a point. Because it seems that everybody is willing to blindly trust whatever an AI puts in front of them, so if we do get one to output how to fix climate change, people might actually pay attention for once.

This might just be the thing we actually need to get some progress started. I can't believe that I'm actually saying that.

Quinn Norton

@tek_dmn 😂

i mean, i don't think you're right, because they might trust ai, but does it make them do anything? nah. but it's funny.

Diane 🕵

@quinn @tek_dmn

There may be a way AI could help.

Billionaires are so polluting and so love excessive consumption, that I suspect an AI could give similarly wrong, overconfident answers to a human billionaire with less overall pollution

Pete Alex Harris🦡🕸️🌲/∞🪐∫

@quinn
I mean, *we* want to, but the people saying they need AI to give them a different answer, one they prefer, don't want to.

We also know what to do about those people to stop them deciding we can not do anything about climate change if they don't like how it has to be done, but they don't like that answer either.

Diane 🕵

@quinn

Yep.

Honestly I think much of the world wants too...

Mostly it's the well off and richer in the major oil producing countries who are blocking action.

You know USA, Russia, Middle East.

Germany gets an dishonorable mention for their car obsessions.

I mean a pretty good thing to do would be to require that air travel pay to sequester the carbon. (for real using direct air capture, which currently costs about $600/ton CO2, and not with bogus carbon credits)

It'd only roughly double the cost of flying

@quinn

Yep.

Honestly I think much of the world wants too...

Mostly it's the well off and richer in the major oil producing countries who are blocking action.

You know USA, Russia, Middle East.

Germany gets an dishonorable mention for their car obsessions.

I mean a pretty good thing to do would be to require that air travel pay to sequester the carbon. (for real using direct air capture, which currently costs about $600/ton CO2, and not with bogus carbon credits)

Quinn Norton

@alienghic based on everyone's behavior, almost everyone in the world wants to ignore it.

mkj

@quinn I think "decade" should be "century" in your post. Other than that, I agree!

Quinn Norton

@mkj we didn't have the solar/wind/etc until recently.

Androcat

@quinn That. Absolutely that!

But also: AI isn't smart, and never will be.

LLMs have teeny tiny brains, zero understanding and no intelligence.

Like, a big LLM has a neural network backing it that is maybe 50000 layers (that's being generous).

50000 layers is comparable to ~7000 neurons.

An ant has 200000 neurons.

They are dumb af, and will never be able to solve anything that isn't already in a FAQ it was trained on.

Łukasz :verified:

@quinn it’s like me trying to figure out how to lose weight but without any exercise or diet… maybe AI can help with this as well?

Troed Sångberg

@quinn True. And not true ;)

We definitely can solve the part we've caused, but one of the realizations from climate change research is not only what our CO2/methane emissions do, but also a lot more insight into the natural part.

There is some misconception that as long as we fix our emissions climate will be "stable". It never has been. Thus we should do climate adaptions _in addition_ to halting emissions.

(Don't build houses in flood valleys/Plant trees in cities/Don't build close to the coastlines/Make sure rain has _equal_ ability to get soaked up on land we've built on ... etc)

@quinn True. And not true ;)

We definitely can solve the part we've caused, but one of the realizations from climate change research is not only what our CO2/methane emissions do, but also a lot more insight into the natural part.

There is some misconception that as long as we fix our emissions climate will be "stable". It never has been. Thus we should do climate adaptions _in addition_ to halting emissions.

Lord Caramac the Clueless, KSC

@quinn What they mean, of course, is that some technomagical hyperintelligence will find a solution where everyone can keep doing whatever they do, the rich and powerful can keep their power and wealth, and nothing really changes at all.

Jargoggles

@quinn
People push technological solutions to social problems because they don't want to solve social problems.

Cluster Fcku

@quinn it's just a way to dilute the argument and weaken support for any solution, if you can add ever more "but ifs", in order to both-side & all-sides, and hand the destructive status quo a win.

zompus

@quinn I'm old enough to remember a wave of posts about using blockchain to...do something...that would solve global warming. At least it gave me lots of people to block on LinkedIn.

Wilfried Klaebe

@quinn Exactly. Take the billions away from the billionaires, use them to solve the problems.

Go Up