Pirate's Cove

Well, only if something changes. Can you guess what?

Could AI Fix Climate Change? Probably Not Under Capitalism.

“There’s no question that in four or five years’ time, we’re going to use a lot more fossil fuel,” Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang told Ezra Klein of The New York Times. “But also, in the next decade in front of us, at no time in history are we better prepared to move to sustainable energy,” he added. “If you want to turn a corner on climate change, if you want a future that’s sustainable, lean into AI.”

It is perhaps surprising, given the tone of much mainstream discussion of artificial intelligence, that the man at the helm of the world’s most valuable company, which produces chips essential to the new technology, was agnostic about whether AI would stop climate change. “It could be solar, it could be nuclear, it could be fission, fusion, hydro, you name it,” Huang said in his hour-long interview with Klein. The future would be great, but he was uncertain about how. His rhetoric is a prime example of how the language of climate politics, and of climate obstruction, has changed since the emergence of powerful AI models.

In a way, Huang’s rather vague promises are a return to the rhetoric of the early days of climate politics, when economists like Nobel Prize winner William Nordhaus won renown for models that heavily discounted the future compared to today. By this thinking, spending lots of money now to avoid climate damages later was not worth it because future humans would be so rich that they could afford the climate costs. The model was called “DICE”; humans should roll one.

Well, it’s weird that governments and rich folks are spend tons of money on solving climate doom and yet nothing changes. They always want more money. It couldn’t be due to it being a scam, right? Anyhow, let’s just skip to the end of this Jacobin piece, and, remember, Jacobin as is hardcore Modern Socialist, hating on capitalism, wanting government control of the means of production, and controlling Everyone Else

Artificial intelligence is clearly a powerful technology: no one should dismiss this because they prefer to mock the tech elites building it. The primary concern at present should be that this technology is emerging into a global economic system dominated by profit seekers, largely unconcerned with the climate crisis, whom governments are for the most part allowing to regulate themselves. While some have compared the current AI build-out to the Manhattan Project, nuclear technology was never allowed to remain in private hands.

If AI is to help solve the climate crisis without causing great damage of its own, governments will have to take more control of the firms building it and rewrite economic rules to channel this new power in the right direction.

Huh.

Read: Say, Could AI Solve Climate Doom? »

Usually the answer goes to things like Progressivism (nice Fascism), slush money to spread around, and cultism. But, hey, don’t forget about TDS!

Why Cities and States Are Fighting Climate Change in Courtrooms
Faced with a president who has called global warming a hoax, officials have filed dozens of suits against oil companies to try to cover the costs of extreme weather.

See? TDS

The fight over who should pay the soaring costs of climate change — the intensifying wildfires, storms and heat waves — has moved to the courts.

Nationwide, more than 60 state and local governments have filed dozens of lawsuits seeking damages from oil companies over global warming, which is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. With a president who has called climate change a hoax and a gridlocked Congress, courtrooms have become one of the few remaining options for communities seeking relief.

“Globally, neither national legislatures nor governments are taking adequate action, and so the advocates of climate action are turning to the courts,” said Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University.

The cultists are trying to institute their cult beliefs via courts, because they cannot convince everyone else to comply and get it through the legislatures.

Now the highest court in the land has entered the fray. On Monday, it heard arguments over a lawsuit filed by the city and county of Boulder, Colo., against two energy companies. Many, if not most, of the dozens of other cases nationwide hinge on the Supreme Court’s decision.

The rest of the article is about the Supreme Court hearing, but, the NY Times had to start with Trump Trump Trump. But, they, like the rest, never advise their cult Comrades to give up their own use of fossil fuels, stop eating meat, etc and so forth.

Read: Cities And States Fight Hotcoldwetdry Because Of TDS »