AI catastrophists will feel better if they become climate catastrophists?

A friend in San Francisco is an AI catastrophist, as least as far as the economy is concerned. He’s not worried about robots taking over and, after reflecting on the damage that humans say that humans have caused to Mother Earth, killing all of the humans. He’s concerned about the value of his three-unit building in San Francisco. I said, “Why don’t you become a climate change catastrophist? You won’t have to worry about the trajectory of the U.S. economy if all cities except Denver are inundated by melting in Greenland and Antarctica.”

As a starting point towards transitioning (always a beautiful process!) from AI Doomer to Climate Doomer, here’s a 2015 article on how even Orlando (100′ above sea level) is doomed once Greenland and Antarctica melt:

3 thoughts on “AI catastrophists will feel better if they become climate catastrophists?

  1. I think Greta T. is working bottom up, and needs to return to top down. We may be past the Middle East enrichment tipping point, farther past the point of no return than global warming. We probably should have started reducing the flow of money into OPEC in the 1970s, and found alternative sources of energy. Giving the Middle East so much money just refueled and reinvigorated the thousands of years of apparently irreconcilable squabbling. Our interference, furthermore, brought their wrath to our own shores. An entire generation of activists doesn’t remember 911, as they welcome further incursions.

    Some of the best political and military minds have tried to establish stability, with techniques from diplomacy to brute force to precision bombing, and failed. Even the mighty power of youth activists on flotillas of rafts ain’t gonna do jack squat. (I suppose there is some fun and enrichment for the hawkish set to light shit up.) If we could establish energy independence and find ways to bleed out the money that remains there, we might have a chance. Go back to treating them like Africa. How many trillions in surplus would we have if we didn’t have to police this region?

    • Mr. Neo Hippy, you comment that the U.S. should have “started” to reduce the flow of money into OPEC in 1970s by finding “alternative” sources of energy. You will be glad to know that not only did the U.S. “start” this reduction, but it was finished years ago. The U.S. became a net *exporter* of natural gas in 2017 and a net exporter of crude oil and crude products in 2019/2020. The U.S. is now the largest global producer of oil & gas.

  2. > A friend in San Francisco is an AI catastrophist, as least as far as the economy is concerned. He’s not worried about robots taking over and, after reflecting on the damage that humans say that humans have caused to Mother Earth, killing all of the humans. He’s concerned about the value of his three-unit building in San Francisco.

    He’s the right kind of alarmist. If one needs to invest emotions into something, it better be something that they have real control over. Analyzing climate change, and issues one almost has no control over is fine, but investing emotions in them, is not very smart IMO. I have seen this kind of attitude in retirees and children, and always found it something that I should learn from.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *