Carbon offsets, AI-driven climate solutions, green technology transition, all these frameworks assume that climate change and rocketing emissions as something solvable by techno-managerial innovation, while failing to recognize fossil fuels and massive energy consumption underpinning the contemporary technological innovation landscape. It's just hilarious to see big tech like Google propagating their climate solutions without even any conscience on their role in exacerbating the problem.
I think you are right, but it's more hideous than "hilarious." Corporations, such as Google, as the ultimate ultrasocial doom mechanism for humanity, and there will never be a way, absent collapse, to stop them.
AI (used to mean Artificial Insemination) is one step of Progress TOO FAR whose main work is justifying its existence.
Eucalyptus is highly inflammable.
Yes, reducing emissions is a political problem. But neo-liberal ideology promotes "market mechanisms" as being more friendly to "economic freedom" than government regulations. So we see various market mechanisms trampling each other in the mad rush to pour out money on the environment problem. AI is a mega-increase in the bad kind of GDP growth that, like arms manufacture, does nothing to increase actual physical or social progress.
Oh joy, another "technology" to save the world...AI is all about surveillance and marketing. If any real effort was applied with AI to find "solutions" to overshoot the answer would quickly resolve to: 1. Don't invest in AI or any other high-energy tech. 2. Reduce individual and aggregate energy consumption and reduce human population. The AI folk have already done this work and don't publish it since it isn't good for their business.
Yup keep it in the ground and protect the forests. Assuming AI is energy intensive results in demand for more gas and nuclear, a pick your poison situation from an emissions perspective that benefits the extractavist model. Unless utilities can prove the demand it should be put down to hype. Utilities have a long history of projecting demand that never materialized, look at CA where San Onofre, Álviso Canyon, the drought years dried hydro, Diablo, etc. when demand was supposed to outstrip generation that never materialized because demand side solutions sufficed to offset demand to servers where capacity isn’t limited and solar and wind proved reliable. Instead of power shortages political figures look to boost tax revenues at the expense of public welfare because the Governor’s compromised regulatory oversight at the Captured Puplic Utilities Commission fails to protect the public interest.
Carbon offsets, AI-driven climate solutions, green technology transition, all these frameworks assume that climate change and rocketing emissions as something solvable by techno-managerial innovation, while failing to recognize fossil fuels and massive energy consumption underpinning the contemporary technological innovation landscape. It's just hilarious to see big tech like Google propagating their climate solutions without even any conscience on their role in exacerbating the problem.
I think you are right, but it's more hideous than "hilarious." Corporations, such as Google, as the ultimate ultrasocial doom mechanism for humanity, and there will never be a way, absent collapse, to stop them.
"Hopium" copyright James Hansen
AI (used to mean Artificial Insemination) is one step of Progress TOO FAR whose main work is justifying its existence.
Eucalyptus is highly inflammable.
Yes, reducing emissions is a political problem. But neo-liberal ideology promotes "market mechanisms" as being more friendly to "economic freedom" than government regulations. So we see various market mechanisms trampling each other in the mad rush to pour out money on the environment problem. AI is a mega-increase in the bad kind of GDP growth that, like arms manufacture, does nothing to increase actual physical or social progress.
Oh joy, another "technology" to save the world...AI is all about surveillance and marketing. If any real effort was applied with AI to find "solutions" to overshoot the answer would quickly resolve to: 1. Don't invest in AI or any other high-energy tech. 2. Reduce individual and aggregate energy consumption and reduce human population. The AI folk have already done this work and don't publish it since it isn't good for their business.
Yup keep it in the ground and protect the forests. Assuming AI is energy intensive results in demand for more gas and nuclear, a pick your poison situation from an emissions perspective that benefits the extractavist model. Unless utilities can prove the demand it should be put down to hype. Utilities have a long history of projecting demand that never materialized, look at CA where San Onofre, Álviso Canyon, the drought years dried hydro, Diablo, etc. when demand was supposed to outstrip generation that never materialized because demand side solutions sufficed to offset demand to servers where capacity isn’t limited and solar and wind proved reliable. Instead of power shortages political figures look to boost tax revenues at the expense of public welfare because the Governor’s compromised regulatory oversight at the Captured Puplic Utilities Commission fails to protect the public interest.