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

291–300 of 504 posts

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

#291

Post by triceratops »

trashtester wrote: post #278
duozerk wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite the IPCC being very conservative/optimistic in their scenarios, this is in fact in line with their reports; admittedly my comment above might be badly worded - when I said "near-term", I meant "in the upcoming two centuries or so". The IPCC reports say we might reach 4C, 5C or even more; based on the historical record, such a major change in such a short time - several orders of magnitude faster than previous…

There is lots of space on earth that would be a lot more hospitable to humans if 5C warmer. Like the central eurasian steppe.

What's the soil quality over there?

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

#292

Post by teo_zero »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #217
_yb2s wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of how realistic you think AGI risk is, it’s not marketing hype- it has been a human fear and central in scifi for a long time. Movies like 2001, Terminator, and the Matrix were hugely popular long before AI was profitable. Arguably ancient myths about golems and genies are essentially the same fear and concept. AI companies are afraid of public fear over AI as it might lead to regulating them out of exist…

None of the movies and stories you mentioned were about the "rise of AGI". The closest you can get might be The Matrix via Animatrix? You can go look up what the authors meant by their pieces, there's plenty of analysis of each of those stories. In addition I would love a citation on "the rise of AGI" being a fear in sci-fi for a long time, I've enjoyed quite a bit of science fiction literature and I can only think o…

I understood "rise of AGI" as if preceded by "uncontrolled": a runaway intelligence that ultimately turns against its creators. In that sense, yes, those movies do include this theme.

Your comment makes sense if you intend "rise of AGI" as just growth. But then why should it be a concern?

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

#293

Post by vasco »

DFHippie wrote: post #274
GenerWork wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it does look like our civilization will make it through this intact Has anybody ever seriously believed that we wouldn't make it through? This just seems like an alarmist take to me.

Here's a paradox. If people assume you are alarmist and discount everything you say -- "Oh, you way we need 100. I assume therefore that we only need 20. Here are 20." -- you need to be alarmist to get them to react appropriately. Then they attribute your exaggeration to your own deficiency, not your reaction to theirs. Anyway, that's a general observation, not a claim that any particular position is alarmist.

This way of behaving in life is a very "rat each other out" choice from the prisioner's dilemma. Whenever I notice someone plays this game of shifting overton window instead of just stating what they want, specially at work, I can never take them seriously again.

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

#294

Post by triceratops »

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…

Canada and Russia are much colder than the USA, so some of that additional CO2 might be for heating. Not sure what Australia's excuse is.

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

#295

Post by krainboltgreene »

teo_zero wrote: post #292
krainboltgreene wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the movies and stories you mentioned were about the "rise of AGI". The closest you can get might be The Matrix via Animatrix? You can go look up what the authors meant by their pieces, there's plenty of analysis of each of those stories. In addition I would love a citation on "the rise of AGI" being a fear in sci-fi for a long time, I've enjoyed quite a bit of science fiction literature and I can only think o…

I understood "rise of AGI" as if preceded by "uncontrolled": a runaway intelligence that ultimately turns against its creators. In that sense, yes, those movies do include this theme. Your comment makes sense if you intend "rise of AGI" as just growth. But then why should it be a concern?

None of those movies have AGI as a theme, you have confused "theme" with "plot point".

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

#296

Post by mytailorisrich »

_djo_ wrote: post #279
mytailorisrich wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is doing a lot to decarbonise its economy, probably more than anyone, and is still poorer than the US. Again, you also need to take into account that the US and EU have outsourced emissions to China, which needed that to develop. Still the US emit a huge amount per capita so it's disingenuous so claim that China is a bad emitter, which feels like the US is trying too hard to deflect.

They’re clearly not doing more than anyone given that their emissions rate per capita and as a proportion of industrial output keeps climbing. Claiming the US and EU ‘outsourced’ emissions to China is an overly simplistic view, and one that ignores the way China developed its own industry and targeted the developing world as a market for its goods long before US and EU companies outsourced en masse. China now emits m…

> They’re clearly not doing more than anyone given that their emissions rate per capita and as a proportion of industrial output keeps climbing.

> China now emits more than 60% as much per capita as the US, where thirty years ago it was more like 5%

China was very poor and has been developing... It does not mean that they aren't doing a lot, and probably more than the US do.

> In fact, China’s emissions have been so high in the past thirty years that their total emissions are now also up to more than half of all US emissions since 1850.

Chinas has more than 1.4 billion people now while the US have 333 million and 23 million in 1850... Still China will never reach the emissions per capita level that the US did in the past.

> China is a bad emitter and has already contributed more to global warming than anyone other than the US

That's a highly disingenuous claim, again ignoring population and development, as well as size of global economy.

If you keep ignoring that China has a massive population and is still a developing country, with inhabitants still poorer on average than Europeans and Americans then there cannot be an honest discussion.

What's the US' "excuse" for emitting more than even the EU per capita? They have the best technology and unlimited funds. But, oh yes, it's China who's the bad emitter...

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

#297

Post by _djo_ »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #296
_djo_ wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re clearly not doing more than anyone given that their emissions rate per capita and as a proportion of industrial output keeps climbing. Claiming the US and EU ‘outsourced’ emissions to China is an overly simplistic view, and one that ignores the way China developed its own industry and targeted the developing world as a market for its goods long before US and EU companies outsourced en masse. China now emits m…

> They’re clearly not doing more than anyone given that their emissions rate per capita and as a proportion of industrial output keeps climbing. > China now emits more than 60% as much per capita as the US, where thirty years ago it was more like 5% China was very poor and has been developing... It does not mean that they aren't doing a lot, and probably more than the US do. > In fact, China’s emissions have been so…

What part of per capita are you not getting?

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

#298

Post by trashtester »

kmeisthax wrote: post #252
trashtester wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI is already developing enzymes that can break down plastics. Put them on bacteria, and that plastic may stop being a problem quickly.

Which is great until plastics that we want to keep using start getting eaten by bacteria.

sure. we may have to chose whether or not plastics should be biodegradable. Cant have your cake and eat it, too.

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

#299

Post by globalnode »

belter wrote: post #88
aurareturn wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#1 is very real #2 is warmongering #3 will be solved by human ingenuity I have a more positive outlook. :)

Recent "Star Trek Picard" episode... Data: We are going to die. Geordi La Forge: Data...You are being negative again. Say something positive! Data: I hope we die quickly!

That should be the slogan for the in-coming climate and viral disasters.

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

#300

Post by kjkjadksj »

cheschire wrote: post #199
sharpshadow wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a difficult one, securing livable land and water with nuclear fallout.

I think the implication is that the nuclear war would exist between sovereign rulers, not necessarily between the physical spaces themselves. Wipe out a capital city in an attempt to behead a sovereign government so that their land is available for take over. Apparently though, the bombs that landed on hiroshima and nagasaki did not create much fallout, making the space livable relatively quickly. It seems less destr…

Fallout is used in nuclear war to limit troop movements and other purposes. Making an area a no go zone is exactly one strategy.
Post reply on HN