Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

today.oregonstate.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 504 posts

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#221

Post by trashtester »

blueflow wrote: post #82
huygens6363 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fear of AGI is not based on Altman’s latest brews. Look at the progress curve of AI in general is one way to get a feeling for it. The other one, which I prefer, is looking at existing AIs for which we thought human ingenuity was top notch and how they are beating us left and right. Strategy, creativity, cunning, all human notions that are being slaughtered. Slowly, but surely. It is “just” a matter of combining. I t…

I'm patiently waiting for my sysadmin job to be automated away. AGI, its time to deliver! I'm waiting. Should have happened yesterday?

25 years ago, I did a back-of-the envelope calculation during a party and came up with roughly 2040. I didn't know that Kurzweil had already predicted 2029. Once I heard about it, I felt Kurzweil was over-optimistic, and stuck to 2040. Recently, though, it has started to seem that AGI before 2029 is more likely than 2040 or after.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#222

Post by _djo_ »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #144
c048 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China said yes to all those things for Western money. They could've said no, they could've put in restrictions to lower their profits and improve conditions. Don't act like China is some poor puppy bullied around by the West.

>China said yes to all those things for Western money. They could've said no Terrible argument. If it's not gonna be China, it's gonna be Vietnam, or Bangladesh, or Pakistan, or Sri Lanka, or whoever the rich west will deem fit to host their dirty industries at the most rock bottom prices so they can make a profit. So again, is really all China's or $POOR_NATION fault, or the West's fault for constantly bidding the p…

Do you really think that China would not have industrialised if not for Western companies? Nothing about China's history shows that that's remotely true.

In fact, outsourcing was only possible because of the various industrial plans that China had put in place in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, all of which prioritised building equivalent capacity to what existed in the West and the USSR.

Moreover, China was destroying its environment in the 1950s already, long before it even allowed real trade with the West.

Let's treat countries as responsible actors in their own right, not as mere non-independent reactors to Western actions.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#223

Post by Workaccount2 »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #194
Workaccount2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AGI by 2030 is not a reach statement at all anymore. The LLM's we have today weren't supposed to show up until 2030 at the earliest and 2050 more realistically. If you go back 10 years and read what people were writing about AI progress, you will find that they were _completely_ off the mark. It's prudent to assume a very liberal timeline for AI progress, based off whats been happening now.

I'm loving this absolutely breathless parroting of "AGI in the next 5 years" and yet: we don't even know what general intelligence is. We don't know how/why/where consciousness arises. It's not even a clearly defined concept. But here we have "Workaccount2" prophesizing the rise of general intelligence :D Please enlighten us sensei, what is actually General Intelligence, and how will you know it's here? I realize my…

Ironically I often post the exact same sentiment that you are sharing. But you are conflating two different things.

AGI doesn't require consciousness. We likely will have no idea whether or not the first AGI computer is conscious or not. What we will know though, is that it is solving novel problems that humans struggle with, and from the outside the only way to discern it isn't another human is because it is way to smart to be one.

I strongly suspect that the first computers which actually are conscious (AGI or not), whenever that happens, will have to fight a heavy uphill battle to prove it. And there will always be a group of people who will never believe an AI (is it even artificial at that point?) is conscious.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#224

Post by trashtester »

blueflow wrote: post #158
Workaccount2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AGI by 2030 is not a reach statement at all anymore. The LLM's we have today weren't supposed to show up until 2030 at the earliest and 2050 more realistically. If you go back 10 years and read what people were writing about AI progress, you will find that they were _completely_ off the mark. It's prudent to assume a very liberal timeline for AI progress, based off whats been happening now.

10 years ago we just had another AI hype. I want to see delivered promises & my job automated before i change my mind.

We're still in the same AI hype as 10 years ago. You just stopped noticing for a while. It really hasn't stopped since AlexNet back in 2012.

Personally, since I first started to learn about Neural Nets in the 90's, I've always predicted that they would bring AGI around the time they matched human brains in complexity and compute power. Back then, assuming Moore's law meant that would be between 2030-40.

Now, there was always the prospect of a serious breakdown of Moore's Law, which might delay it, but since that didn't happen (compute power just moved from CPU's to GPU's), we're now approaching the final stretch. Human brain scale neural nets are already being planned, if not already being built in secret.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#225

Post by unicornhose »

triceratops wrote: post #212
sushibowl wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Possibly, but you have to keep doing it. kicking up dust into the atmosphere tends to have significant short-term impact on the global climate (see e.g. volcanic winters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volcanic_winter ). Then the dust settles shortly and everything returns to normal. But volcanic eruptions that cause a winter like that tend to be quite a bit more powerful than your average nuclear weapon. More importa…

Drop a nuke into a volcano /s

Morbidly curious what would actually happen in this scenario.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#226

Post by trashtester »

short_sells_poo wrote: post #194
Workaccount2 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AGI by 2030 is not a reach statement at all anymore. The LLM's we have today weren't supposed to show up until 2030 at the earliest and 2050 more realistically. If you go back 10 years and read what people were writing about AI progress, you will find that they were _completely_ off the mark. It's prudent to assume a very liberal timeline for AI progress, based off whats been happening now.

I'm loving this absolutely breathless parroting of "AGI in the next 5 years" and yet: we don't even know what general intelligence is. We don't know how/why/where consciousness arises. It's not even a clearly defined concept. But here we have "Workaccount2" prophesizing the rise of general intelligence :D Please enlighten us sensei, what is actually General Intelligence, and how will you know it's here? I realize my…

AGI has nothing to do with consciousness, unless consciousness is for some reason required to attain it (which doesn't seem like it's the case).

AGI simply means that we can create a type of machine that can do any kind of mental task that a human can, at least at a human level.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#227

Post by trashtester »

duozerk wrote: post #124
kylebenzle wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. AGI doesn't even exist and Sam Altman and I agree on one thing, GPTs will not get us there. Saying AGI is a risk is like saying the sun exploding is a risk. 2. Nuclear conflict is real, it's astounding Pakistan or Russia hasnt used the bomb yet but they will when the US backs them into a corner. 3. Climate change? At this point, who cares? We know it's happening and happening VERY slowly so we have PLENTY of time…

> happening VERY slowly > failing to move away from the cost in the next 100 years Unless you're a time-traveler from the 50s who has somehow managed to post here, there is no excuse for this type of disinformation these days. Mentioning higher sea levels is also a red herring; massive agricultural yields collapse will be an issue long before (like, this century) sea levels become a major problem. More than this, we…

This doesn't seem to agree with IPCC predictions. What's your source?

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#228

Post by deelowe »

bel-crow wrote: post #60
waihtis wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, there's roughly three parties to blame, the large corps, the junk manufacturers and the idiots who buy cheap chinese junk en masse

This might be ever so slightly off-topic and a silly question but why aren't sites like SHEIN being banned like Tik-Tok? They cause infinite harm, and clearly we're capable of banning big chinese sites, so why the holdup on SHEIN/Temu? I saw news about Congress members in the US calling for bans last year but nothing happened.

Because TikTok was likely banned for not cooperating with intelligence agencies or perhaps cooperating with the wrong ones.

Re: Fastest rate of natural carbon dioxide rise over the last 50k years

#229

Post by _djo_ »

bloak wrote: post #89
onion2k wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Per capita the US would be on top.

Of the countries mentioned above, yes, and China emits a lot less CO2 per capita than the USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... However Russia emits almost as much CO2 per capita as the USA, and Canada and Australia may be slightly worse than the USA. China has larger CO2 emissions per capita than most EU countries, which is interesting. I'd like to see a breakdown of where that CO2 com…

However, the US's per capita CO2 level keeps decreasing, while China's is increasing at a rapid rate. It's already 60% of the US's level and at this rate will eclipse it in the next few years.

So any solution to climate change that does not take China's emissions into account is doomed to fail just as much as one that doesn't take the US's emissions into account.

Post reply on HN