What do you expect from those that hope youâll see the âVâ on their forehead, while shopping at WalmartâŚthus financially supporting the worst offenders of the cause theyâre working to stop. These are some mixed up peopleâŚperiod and the system is just taking advantage of that.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
WuWei: NJBob: WuWei:Itâs not anthropogenic.
You donât know that.
Yes, I do. I grew up on a ranch. I know bull dung when I see it right off.
Luckily science isnât determined by your bull dung.
âScienceâ
zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
Samm: Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
Umm, the doubling gets larger numerically, 2 to 4 isnât as numerically large increase as 4 to 8. Did I make as much money if my funds go from 2 to 4 as I did when it went from 4 to 8? No, I made twice as much.
The Arctic is not doing so good. The summer ice has shrunk by close to 50% in the last 40 years, warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet⌠Itâs disappearing faster than previously thought.
The Arctic is not doing so good. The summer ice has shrunk by close to 50% in the last 40 years, warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet⌠Itâs disappearing faster than previously thought.
Earth was pretty much a garden of eden with no ice caps. Huge biodiversity and huge biosphere.
Borgia_dude: Samm: Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
Umm, the doubling gets larger numerically, 2 to 4 isnât as numerically large increase as 4 to 8. Did I make as much money if my funds go from 2 to 4 as I did when it went from 4 to 8? No, I made twice as much.
Yes, but thatâs my point. Your steepness observation is only a trick of vantage point. Graph my points, which are an exponential growth, and it looks steep at the end. Zoom out and expand that series all the way to 2056 and the area you originally thought was steep, 16,32 no longer appears steep despite you originally thinking it was.
The point is, for an exponential growth curve the end is always the steep part of the curve and thus the present always is the steep part of the technology curve.
Samm: Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
The exponential can be called steep because steep is relative. But your point is not relative. I thought that was clear.
The Arctic is not doing so good. The summer ice has shrunk by close to 50% in the last 40 years, warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet⌠Itâs disappearing faster than previously thought.
Really? Not doing well? Did you know that Hadrosaurs once lived in large numbers on what today is the North Slope of Alaska when that land lay at a latitude farther north than it does today? Warmer is better.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
No pause?
Orygun: Camp:If we really want to fix it.
Man are there really three conservatives here who now believe in climate change?
all on here believe in Climate change. I challenge you to show one quote from someone on here that says there is no climate change. There is plenty of proof, ice age for one. What we donât believe is man is a significant driver or could do anything about if we were.
Well said.
Those petroleum companies really got their think tank disinfo moneyâs worth.
Borgia_dude: Samm: Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
The exponential can be called steep because steep is relative. But your point is not relative. I thought that was clear.
My point is the very definition of relative. Every âpresent dayâ will seem to be the steep part of the curve.
If the present day is year 5, we are in the steep part of the curve. If present day is year 20, we are in the steep part of the curve. If present day is year 100, we are in the steep part of the curve. But at each of the latter two âpresent daysâ, the previous âpresent daysâ of 5, and 5 and 20 respectively will look rather flat.
Thatâs the nature of the exponential growth curve.
But the reality is technology will not grow indefinitely at an exponential rate.
I have to wonder what kind of lives these people lead if theyâre so immersed in this ideology that they canât function as adults. Are they employed, do they surround themselves with good relationships, is their entire existence based on social media trends? Iâm far more worried about career, family, health, etc. than theoretical extinction level events.
True story: a buddy of mine, whose 2 adult sons still live at home is tormented daily by them and his wife with tales of climate doom and gloom and how Bernie was the one who could have reversed this. The doom and gloomers are actually planning to move to a northern state in the next few years because they are convinced Kentucky and the rest of the southeast will be a desert in 5-7 years. He told them all to have fun with the move.
Samm: Borgia_dude: Samm: Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
The exponential can be called steep because steep is relative. But your point is not relative. I thought that was clear.
My point is the very definition of relative. Every âpresent dayâ will seem to be the steep part of the curve.
If the present day is year 5, we are in the steep part of the curve. If present day is year 20, we are in the steep part of the curve. If present day is year 100, we are in the steep part of the curve. But at each of the latter two âpresent daysâ, the previous âpresent daysâ of 5, and 5 and 20 respectively will look rather flat.
Thatâs the nature of the exponential growth curve.
But the reality is technology will not grow indefinitely at an exponential rate.
Says who?
Borgia_dude: Samm: Borgia_dude: Samm: Borgia_dude: zantax: Borgia_dude: zantax: Orygun:You have more hope than I. But I hope you are right.
Information-related fields advance exponentially, we are hitting the steep part of that curve, I am more worried about super AI than climate change.
Every part of an exponential curve is the steep part. Itâs all relative.
Looks like one part is steeper to me.
Zoom in. Steep is relative.
But your point isnât.
2, 4, 8, 16, 32âŚ
Where isnât it âsteepâ?
The exponential can be called steep because steep is relative. But your point is not relative. I thought that was clear.
My point is the very definition of relative. Every âpresent dayâ will seem to be the steep part of the curve.
If the present day is year 5, we are in the steep part of the curve. If present day is year 20, we are in the steep part of the curve. If present day is year 100, we are in the steep part of the curve. But at each of the latter two âpresent daysâ, the previous âpresent daysâ of 5, and 5 and 20 respectively will look rather flat.
Thatâs the nature of the exponential growth curve.
But the reality is technology will not grow indefinitely at an exponential rate.
Says who?
Says me.
Well you are wrong, likely confusing mooreâs law with the exponential advancement in information related fields.