AI can be programmed to operate like humans, but are they really sentient like humans? How do you prove that they have human sentience? — Corvus

How do you know that the person standing next to you has "human sentience"?

AI is unlikely to be sentient like humans without the human biological body. — Corvus

Why can't something with an artificial body be sentient? Not being "sentient like humans" does not exclude being sentient.

Without 2x hands AI cannot prove the existence of the external world, for instance. — Corvus

AI can have tactile pressure sensors which allow it to "feel" the world. AI can also have other sensory systems which allow it to "see" the world.

AI might be able to speak human languages, but they would lack the voice quality which also transfers the content of the emotions and feelings. — Corvus

AI is getting to the stage where they do have voice quality and facial expressions which display emotions and feelings. They can also "hear" human voice quality and "read" human faces.

AIs are machines designed to carry out certain tasks efficiently and intelligently, hence they are the tools to serve humans. — Corvus

Humans are biological machines which carry out certain tasks for bacteria. Hence humans are tools to serve bacteria.

Exxon CEO blames public for failure to fix climate change

:lol: — Mikie

Mikie, are you laughing out loud to cover your embarrassment over the fact that the Exxon CEO makes good sense?

From your link:

This spring, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will release its finalized rule on companies’ climate disclosures.

That much-anticipated rule will weigh in on the key question of whose responsibility it is to account for emissions — the customer who burns them (Scope II), or the fossil fuel company that produces them (Scope III).

Exxon has long argued for Scope II, based on the idea that it provides a product and is not responsible for how customers use it.

Last week, Reuters reported that the SEC would likely drop Scope III, a positive development for the companies.

Woods argued last year that SEC Scope III rules would cause Exxon to produce less fossil fuels — which he said would perversely raise global emissions, as its products were replaced by dirtier production elsewhere. — Saul Elbein (The Hill)

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary "sentient" means
1 : responsive to or conscious of sense impressions
2 : having or showing realization, perception, or knowledge : aware
3 : finely sensitive in perception or feeling.

Using these descriptions of what "sentient" means, does that mean that a Tesla car is "sentient"?

What proof do you have that ants don't philosophize?
— Agree-to-Disagree

I step on them before they can develop the social conditions for philosophy. — Lionino

Ants have been in existence for more than 100 million years. That is plenty of time to develop the social conditions for philosophy.

Ants are social insects. They live in organized communities, work cooperatively and efficiently, create a clear division of labor, wage war, and occasionally capture slaves.

In addition to being able to communicate, ants have an excellent sense of direction. They can find their way back to their nest by vision and smell. They orient themselves by the position of the Sun and by memory of landmarks, such as trees. Some ants also leave scent trails to aid other ants.

Leafcutter ants are industrious creatures that use the leaves to farm fungus which they eat – they are essentially mushroom farmers.

Herder ants tend to aphids – the little green bugs that drink plants’ nutrients and are considered pests by every farmer on earth, except for their own six-legged keepers. Ants love the sugary substance aphids exert and treat the bugs as their dairy cows.

Ants Have Been Raising And Milking Caterpillars Like Livestock For Millions Of Years. Some ant species have cared for certain insect species that produce food for them. Much like how humans milk cows, ants can milk a particular caterpillar species in order to obtain a nutritious beverage.

In return for providing ant colonies with sustenance, the ants care for the caterpillars in the same way that a farmer cares for his pigs or cows. In fact, some of these ant species have even been observed building shelters for their caterpillars.

During the dark of night, the ants will stand guard outside of the caterpillar’s shelter in order to protect them from predatory attacks. At the crack of dawn, the ants will herd the caterpillars up a tree in order to allow them to feed on leaves. These caterpillar herds are guarded around the clock by ant soldiers.

You have probably stepped on the ant equivalent of Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato.

And it's BS, by the way. Parents need to be firm sometimes, but they never have to be cruel. — Vera Mont

It is cruel to make children eat vegetables. :grin:

One of the things that I learnt as a parent is that sometimes you have to let you children make their own mistakes (allow them to get "hurt" - which is cruel). You could try to always stop them from making mistakes, but then they would never learn to take responsibility for their own lives. You have to be cruel (let them make mistakes which "hurt" them) in order to be kind (teach them to think for themselves and take responsibility for their decisions). In the right measure (you do try to stop them from driving while drunk).

I've seen every Star Trek, Next Generation, Voyager and DS9 episode at least three times. You do realize that the Prime Directive is exclusive to that franchise? — Vera Mont

Yes. But the Prime Directive makes good sense and I am sure that aliens with space travel capability are intelligent enough to work it out for themselves.

Aliens not only are not bound by the PD; they've never even heard of it. — Vera Mont

Aliens may not have heard the term "Prime Directive" but I am sure that they understand the concept.

We can have no idea how they think or what motivates them. — Vera Mont

True. So they might follow a belief similar to the Prime Directive. :grin:

Explain that to Data. — Vera Mont

I am confident that Data can understand the logic behind "You've gotta be cruel to be kind, in the right measure". Human parents usually understand this concept.

The gods are images of man magnified to whatever size it takes to grant their wishes. — Vera Mont

It is amazing that the gods want the same things that I want.

Nobody ever follows the Prime Directive. — Vera Mont

Proof? Aliens could be watching us now without interfering. They probably want to see if Donald Trump can win the next election without their help.

If you have space travel capability and an impulsion to help those in trouble, it's impossible to obey. — Vera Mont

If you know that interfering is likely to cause things to be worse than not interfering, then it would be possible to obey the Prime Directive. Some aliens might not want to play god.

an impulsion to help those in trouble — Vera Mont

You've gotta be cruel to be kind, in the right measure.

like an ant can't comprehend the larger world beyond its capacity — praxis

What proof do you have that ants don't philosophize?

With a question like this, I am always mindful of Clarke's third law, 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.' How do we tell the difference between an apparent miracle and something else? — Tom Storm

Exactly. If I witnessed a "miracle" or a verified suspension of the known laws of physics/nature then I would probably assume that it was caused by an alien with advanced technology.

Perhaps God IS an alien with advanced technology. If so, then he/she has not followed the Prime Directive (from Star Trek - the guiding principle that prohibits interfering with the natural development of other civilizations).

I think that I possibly refuse to believe that a god exists on principle.

I am always mindful of Voltaire's statement, "if god did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him".

Something weird is going on in Australia. They’re gonna fry in a few years. Must be that problem with populism I was talking about. — Punshhh

It is nice to meet somebody who knows more about Australia than Australians do.

Why is it that many Australians are willing to "fry" despite the calamitous bushfires?

Heat pumps outsold gas furnaces again last year — and the gap is growing — Mikie

I fully support the use of heat pumps where they are appropriate. But as usual, the devil is in the details.

Heat pumps look good on paper, but there are issues.

The following quotes come from an article called "Are Heat Pumps a Climate-Friendly Solution to Reduce Carbon Footprint?"
https://climateadaptationplatform.com/are-heat-pumps-a-climate-friendly-solution-to-reduce-carbon-footprint

Swapping a boiler to a heat pump is more complex. There are costs and space involved. First, heat pumps are larger than gas boilers and require outside space. Second, heat pumps run at cooler temperatures than boilers do, and for the freezing winter temperatures, old and leaky homes comprise 60% of European properties.

These properties would need to be insulated, which means additional costs to homeowners on top of installing a heat pump. The price of switching to heat pumps could quickly become problematic and politically toxic, the article notes. The least that governments can do is to cover some of the cost and ensure that there are enough skilled workers to retrofit homes, the article suggests.

While many households in the U.S. could benefit from switching to heat pumps, the study also notes that wide-scale heat pump adoption may have unintended, undesirable consequences. Study authors simulated widespread heat pump adoption outcomes to determine the circumstance that makes heat pumps a wise choice.

“The key finding is that for around a third of the single-family homes in the U.S., if you installed the heat pump, you would reduce environmental and health damages,” according to Parth Vaishnav, an assistant professor at the School for Environment and Sustainability at the University of Michigan and a co-author of the paper (Rocheleau, 2021).

However, installing a heat pump would only benefit some. For others, installing a heat pump would be more expensive because the cost of generating electricity is higher than the cost of in situ fossil fuel use. Heat pumps are also less efficient to heat houses in colder climates and will increase power bills. In 24 of the studied cities, mostly in colder climates, peak residential electricity demand increased by over 100% if all houses adopted heat pumps, which would require grid upgrades.

The study suggests that switching about 30% of single-family homes to heat pumps will reduce harm to the environment and human health and allow savings for households. The best places to start are the parts of the country with a moderate climate. The authors also suggest cleaning up the grid as fast as possible to allow wider uptake of heat pumps and noting that heat pumps will continue improving and increase efficiency in colder climates.

Thankfully, deniers are a small minority, both in the US and the world. So, fuck ‘em. — Mikie

Small ???

I think that you are in denial Mikie.

Some recent research, reported on this webpage:
https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2024-02-16/despite-the-evidence-nearly-15-of-americans-deny-climate-change

Despite the Evidence, Nearly 15% of Americans Deny Climate Change

In fact, more than 20% of the populations of Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and North Dakota do not believe in climate change, results show.

For example, less than 12% of the population of California does not believe in climate change, but northern California’s Shasta County had denial rates as high as 52%.

Similarly, denial across Texas averages 21%, but at the county level denial ranges from 13% in Travis County to 67% in Hockley County.

From The Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/jan/16/third-of-uk-teenagers-believe-climate-change-exaggerated-report-shows

A third of UK teenagers believe climate change is “exaggerated”

[teenagers are probably more likely to believe in climate change than non-teenagers - not really "small" Mikie]

From Statista:
https://www.statista.com/chart/19449/countries-with-biggest-share-of-climate-change-deniers



From The Conversation:
https://theconversation.com/the-number-of-climate-deniers-in-australia-is-more-than-double-the-global-average-new-survey-finds-140450

The number of climate deniers in Australia is more than double the global average, new survey finds

Australian news consumers are far more likely to believe climate change is “not at all” serious compared to news users in other countries.

The Digital News Report: Australia 2020 was conducted by the University of Canberra at the end of the severe bushfire season during January 17 and February 8, 2020.

More than half (58%) of respondents say they consider climate change to be a very or extremely serious problem, 21% consider it somewhat serious, 10% consider it to be not very and 8% not at all serious.

Regardless of political orientation, only 36% of news consumers think climate change reporting is accurate. This indicates low levels of trust in climate change reporting and is in stark contrast with trust in COVID-19 reporting, which was much higher at 53%.

The findings also point to a significant section of the community that simply don’t pay attention to the issue, despite the calamitous bushfires.

Climate deniers are like creationists. — Mikie

Climate deniers remain with their denial. — Mikie

You seem to believe that all climate deniers are the same. At the extreme point of denial. In reality there is a spectrum of denial. Your attitude is making people move towards the extreme point of denial.

You have created a self-fulfilling situation Mikie. Kudos for making the situation worse.

Good. They never intended to cooperate anyway, because they deny there’s a problem. Fuck ‘em. — Mikie

Many people will cooperate if they are asked nicely. But when you are nasty to them, and call them insulting names, then they are likely to dig their heels in. That means that you have probably lost the fight against climate change.

Which is more important Mikie, your ego or the fight against climate change?

if there are deniers — Christoffer

Calling people "deniers" creates an "us and them" mentality. This makes it even less likely to get cooperation. People who call other people "deniers" are part of the problem, not the solution.

So add one more subject that the climate-denying troll knows nothing about: heat pumps. Cool. :up: — Mikie

"heat pumps. Cool. :up:" says Mikie.

Was the pun intended Mikie?

My own interest is converting heating systems from fossil fuels to heat pumps (and better insulation), ... — Mikie

The following excerpts come from the Financial Times article
https://www.ft.com/content/21beeb8d-08de-46db-97c4-a976d3f0b90c

‘Outraged and furious’: Germans rebel against gas boiler ban

But the proposed boiler ban has already led to a series of unintended consequences. Thousands of Germans are seeking to beat the ban by installing new gas boilers before the January 1 deadline set by the bill, locking in CO2 emissions for decades to come.

Around 168,000 gas boilers were sold in Germany in the first quarter of this year, a 100 per cent increase on the previous year, according to the ZVSHK, a trade association for heating, plumbing and air conditioning engineers.

"Wärmewende" means "heating revolution" or "heating transition".

“This Wärmewende is just not feasible,” said AfD MP Marc Bernhard during a Bundestag debate on the issue on Wednesday. “We don’t have enough skilled workers, we don’t have enough electricity and people don’t have enough money to pay for this madness.”

When does climate activism become climate terrorism? — Agree-to-Disagree

Better sooner than later the way things are currently going. Can you give me your address for the list? — Benkei

The United States (and probably many other countries) traditionally has a policy against negotiating with terrorists. If you get too extreme then you will be shooting yourself in the foot, and you will make it even harder to bring about change.

The French revolution had much needed beheadings. — Benkei

When does climate activism become climate terrorism?

The Golden Rule

Treat others as you would like others to treat you.

Bullies love this rule. They don't follow it, but they are protected by the rule from retribution.

A better rule would be "Treat others as they treat you"

Bullies get what they deserve, and nice people are treated nicely.

Cheats never prosper.

And it's been done to death. How much more education do these people need? The denial group have slowly started to go into just acceptance of a changing world, but they do so in the context of not acting anyway. The outcome of their reasoning is the same as their previous pure denial. — Christoffer

Insulting and bullying people, and exaggerating the effects of climate change, does not cause most people to make major changes.

A carrot usually works better than a stick.

Irreligious. Because I have never found a religion that is plausible and matches my values.

that requires a level of martial law as it is a war against inaction. Any industry that does not have a strategy or plan to change course will lose their execs and board, any politicians who don't have a serious plan for changing a nation's course in time will be removed from power. — Christoffer

How many countries do you think would be willing to instigate martial law to fight climate change?

What will be done to countries which refuse to instigate martial law?

Who exactly will be in command and set the goals? (Donald Trump?)

Some civilians may not comply. Civilians in the U.S. own close to 400 million firearms and the total number of firearms owned by private citizens vastly exceeds the police and military. By comparison, the U.S. military holds about 4.5 million guns, and state and local police have just over 1 million.

What you are suggesting will probably cause more problems than climate change will?

There may be a handful of sceptics who genuinely don’t accept the science. But they will fade away soon as the climactic impacts start to be felt. — Punshhh

Are you saying that the existence of sceptics shows that there are people who are not feeling the impacts of climatic change?

Who are you going to believe, climate scientists, or your own lying eyes?

I can no longer see the "Climate Change (General Discussion)" discussion on the main page.

The most recent post is 8 hours ago but the discussion is not visible at that time on the main page.

I can get to the "Climate Change (General Discussion)" discussion by finding one of my posts to this discussion and clicking on the title, so the discussion is available. It just doesn't show on the main page.

this does not take away from the fact that there is such a thing as kindness — Bob Ross

You've gotta be cruel to be kind, in the right measure. :grin:

if there are deniers, there's no point in trying to convince them as they are acting through a cult mentality. You cannot convince them as long as they are deeply rooted within their community of denial. — Christoffer

Please define what a denier is. You seem to label people as deniers if they don't believe everything that you want them to believe, or if they don't want to do everything that you want them to do.

Aren't climate activists acting through a "cult mentality"? People who are in a cult usually don't think that they are in a cult.

What if the "deniers" are actually in the majority. You would need to convince them, or bulldoze them. Bulldozing them certainly doesn't sound like democracy. And they may not go quietly. They might start disrupting traffic, throwing things over famous works of art, and gluing themselves to things.

Why aren't climate activists making more effort to promote the education of women and giving women more access to reproductive health services
— Agree-to-Disagree

What makes you think they aren't? Some of us are so smart we can walk and chew gum at the same time! — unenlightened

What have you done to promote the education of women and giving women more access to reproductive health services?

What brand of gum do you chew? :grin:

Yes, It's almost as if the Chinese government had planned it. Their population will decline as productivity increases, stabilising at a level their agriculture can sustain. No such good news though for Africa, India, S. America or Indonesia, unfortunately. — unenlightened

There is a growing consensus that environmental problems, particularly the effects of climate change, pose a grave challenge to humanity. Pollution, habitat destruction, intractable waste issues and, for many, deteriorating quality of life should be added to the list.

Economic growth is the chief culprit. We forget, though, that environmental impacts are a consequence of per capita consumption multiplied by the number of people doing the consuming. Our own numbers matter.

A radical rethink of the global economy is needed to address climate change. In relation to population growth, if we can move beyond unhelpful ideologies, the solution is already available.

People are not stupid. In particular, women are not stupid. Where women are given the choice, they restrict the number of children they have. This freedom is as basic a human right as you can get.

Women will show the way, if only we would let them. — The Conversation

A recent study suggests that as women become more educated and have access to reproductive health services, they choose to have less than 1.5 children on average.

Why aren't climate activists making more effort to promote the education of women and giving women more access to reproductive health services, rather than concentrating their efforts on demonizing oil and gas. This is especially important in places like Africa, India, S. America and Indonesia.

Billions will die. The human population will crash. We are in overshoot, and the planet cannot sustain us in our current numbers or lifestyle. — unenlightened

The human population will fall dramatically in many countries for reasons not related to climate-change/global-warming. The following information is based on the study published in Jul 2020 called "The Lancet: World population likely to shrink after mid-century, forecasting major shifts in global population and economic power".

https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(20)30677-2/fulltext

Population in more than 20 countries to halve by 2100: Study

The Earth will be home to 8.8 billion people in 2100, two billion fewer than current UN projections, says new study.

More than 20 countries, including Italy, Japan, Poland, Portugal, South Korea, Spain and Thailand, will see their numbers diminish by at least half by the year 2100, according to projections in a major study.

Another 34 countries will probably decline by 25–50%, including China, with a forecasted 48·0% decline

China’s population will fall from 1.4 billion people today to 730 million in 80 years, said the study led by an international team of researchers, published in The Lancet on Wednesday.

By century’s end, 183 of 195 countries, barring an influx of immigrants, will have fallen below the replacement threshold needed to maintain population levels, it said.

Good news for the environment

These forecasts suggest good news for the environment, with less stress on food production systems and lower carbon emissions

“Our analysis suggests that as women become more educated and have access to reproductive health services, they choose to have less than 1.5 children on average,” he explained by email.

It is very interesting doing a search in google news for "climate change exaggerated".

https://news.google.com/search?q=climate%20change%20exaggerated

Here are some of the results:

Third of UK teenagers believe climate change exaggerated, report shows — The Guardian

Bill Gates sees ‘a lot of climate exaggeration’ out there: ‘The climate is not the end of the planet. So the planet is going to be fine’ — fortune.com

Why Some Americans Do Not See Urgency on Climate Change
In-depth interviews find some Americans consider crisis language overblown, leading to added skepticism of claims — pewresearch.org

Climate change alarm is exaggerated, we should not demonise oil and gas: Elon Musk — wionews.com

Climate scientist admits to focusing solely on global warming in paper about United States wildfires and ignoring other 'key aspects' just to get published

Brown says studies will get rejected unless they 'support certain narratives' — Daily Mail

Scientist admits the ‘overwhelming consensus’ on the climate change crisis is ‘manufactured’ — New York Post

Beware of exaggerated claims of climate harm — Calgary Sun

Electric car mastermind Elon Musk claims threat of climate change is 'overblown' in the short term - despite making a fortune in eco ventures — Daily Mail

Americans Most Likely to Say Global Warming Is Exaggerated — news.gallup.com

This is how many Brits think the threat of climate change has been exaggerated

one in three Britons over the age of 55 think the threat of climate change is over-exaggerated

Analysis of the poll also revealed that men are twice as likely as women to say that it is definitely true that the threat is over-exaggerated — uk.news.yahoo.com

Climate change not as threatening to planet as previously thought, new research suggests — The Telegraph

You talked about "running them over":

Globally we need to run them over and change the course of how society operates
— Christoffer

How do you plan to do that? — baker

He will probably do it in fossil fuel cars because EV's need frequent recharging and the queues to use the charge stations are too long. :grin:

Did anyone ever wonder why they changed their brand from "global warming" to "climate change"?
— Tzeentch

It will be global climate catastrophy in a couple of decades. — Benkei

What about "global boiling"?

‘Era of global boiling has arrived,’ says UN chief as July set to be hottest month on record — The Guardian

your perception of others’ abilities to think or understand is worthless. — Mikie

Oh the irony. It burns. It burns.

Congratulations on figuring out how Google Charts works, and to your series of useless graphs. — Mikie

Look at what the graphs are showing, not the way that they were made.

By the way, the were not made using Google Charts.

Mikie has been at this for over 100 pages and 3 years now, just in this thread; some irritation is to be expected, when one cannot get beyond the frigging title of the thread. — unenlightened

After being at this for over 100 pages and 3 years now, why hasn't Mikie realized that he is doing things the wrong way?

Is Mikie wrong, or is everybody else wrong?

Mikie should heed some useful advice, "when in a hole, stop digging".

All those idiots protesting and pushing for nuclear disarmament for all those decades, screaming about how a nuclear war would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? No! Just more doomerism/alarmism. — Mikie

Sorry Mikie, but I changed a few words in your statement.

All those idiots protesting and pushing for CO2 reduction for all those decades, screaming about how global warming would be the “end of humanity.” Did it happen?? No! Just more doomerism/alarmism.