▲ | notJim 6 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We are much greener though, at least in the West. Climate emissions peaked in Europe and North America in the last few decades (earlier in Europe.) In Europe, forests are growing back, because marginal agricultural land is being returned to forests as yields rise on prime land. I think this is beginning to happen in the US as well. This doesn't mean climate change isn't a problem, because even with this progress, we're way behind and not moving nearly fast enough. But often it's the green side of the spectrum that's lying by catastrophizing and understating progress, while overstating the severity of what's happening. It's happening similarly with AI, where the green movement has decided that AI is unacceptable, even though it has a tiny ecological footprint compared to activities like watching Netflix or eating nuts, let alone eating beef or flying on a plane. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | chickenzzzzu 6 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
That's right. So essentially we are in a deadlock where every side says "im only contributing fractionally to the problem", and nobody on Earth really has the full capability of blocking the activities you described from happening, especially not when there is good money to be made (e.g coal mining vs AI vs raising cows) Doesn't seem like a bright future, but at least AI does have a chance of solving the problem while contributing to it. No other behavior could really say the same. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|