Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)N
Posts
8
Comments
822
Joined
2 yr. ago

I'm a climate scientist by trade. Interested in interesting things. Ecology, complexity, politics, social change, music.

  • Oh yeah, that sounds like a trip.

    As an Aussie, I approve.

  • What's the gist?

  • What does the name refer to?

  • A plugin that just checks to see if Lemmy has any posts pointing to the current URL would be pretty nice. So I can go and get secondary opinions if I want.

    Not sure how much stress that would put on servers though. I guess probably not that much if searches can just be exact matches on URLs.

  • Interesting. I grew up in a science-heavy family, and eventually became a scientist. A LOT of what's been changing my worldview recently has been a kind of deprogramming from science - reductionist science. Complexity theory in particular, as well as breaking down the dominant cultural view of linear technological progress.

    I don't have anything really super useful at the 101 level, but I'll definitely plug some of the stuff on !complexity@lemmy.world community - it's not necessarily introductory material, but some of it is super accessible and fun to engage with (especially some of the videos).

  • What's the gist? Or, what did it change about your worldview?

  • That's not how I ready their statement... I think Hawke is saying that AI itself is not inherently bad, just that it's being used for bad things. The bad things they identified are different from yours, but I think you're basically saying the same thing over-all?

  • Ah, sorry, I misread.

  • I suspect a lot of the former group is don't that out of ignorance or forgetfulness - I do it all the time, because I often assume people are talking about GenAI. Which is probably a reasonable assumption about 90% of the time these days, but it is better to be clear about it.

    Also, a friend who has a background in AI draws a distinction between ML and non-generative AI: ML is basically tools for overpowered statistical analysis and pattern finding, AI is attempts to partially recreate aspects of intelligence, and can include evolutionary algorithms and stuff. Still not sure I see the distinction (and there is overlap), but they're way more informed than me..

  • GenAI being used in missile guidance makes zero sense - the technology is not applicable there, because you need precision and reliability. Normal AI, sure.

  • I agree with Hawke, I think people are against the use of technology in such a way that it exploits workers and customers, not fundamentally against the technology itself.

    Basically like the Luddites - they smashed weaving looms, not because the technology was fundamentally bad, but because it was being used by capitalists to worsen working conditions and destroy livelihoods.

  • Are people anti non-generative AI? Or is broader AI just getting dragged in to the justified anti genAI sentiment?

  • Would they throw it away if it was hard to read or something?

  • Sea ice (most of the arctic) is VERY different to land ice (which is most of Antarctica). Check some sea ice maps and ice thickness maps to see the difference.

    Also, the two hemispheres are not tightly coupled over short (decadal scales). The Arctic has been warming much faster than the Antarctic (so far).

  • Right, but how do you know who is talking from knowledge, and who isn't?

    Anyway, thanks for the reference, now I know :)

  • At least some penguin species need sea ice to breed, and Antarctic sea ice extent has dropped off a cliff in the last decade (a starting in 2016) (source: went to a plenary about sea ice at the AMOS conference in Aus at the end of June)

    I think what ever happens in Antarctica, it's likely to be complex...

  • I don't get why people have these kind of arguments without providing sources. It makes you both look argumentative and not very trustworthy.

  • Not in a meaningful timeframe, I think. Even if we get a worst case outcome (say +5°C by 2100, ongoing warming), permanent land ice in Antarctica will likely take many hundreds, or even thousands of years to melt entirely.

    It's always going to have frozen winters with lots of snow, due to the long dark polar winter.. I guess some boreal tundra species could survive that, but farming is probably unlikely to be viable, I would guess.

  • Haha, yeah. Also, anything with too many burnt carbs is not great.