Comment by ben_w

5 hours ago

> I don’t think ai models come close to nuclear weapons or to run-of-the-mill, everyday carbon emissions in terms of danger to humanity.

Even today, AI is the biggest discrete threat to bringing carbon emissions under control. Almost everyone wants to decarbonise… except Trump. Renewables are the cheapest source of new power… but the demand for new electricity for the data centres is so high that all options are on the table, anyone who can manufacture a power source (even when it's a jet engine) is being propositioned for them.

Nukes: is it not common knowledge that the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are currently thriving? That the ground-zeros of the two bombs are memorials, not barren wastes?

Even if all the nuclear powers gave maximum response at first sign of one strike, is anyone pointing a single weapon anywhere in Africa, South America, Central America, or the bits of east Asia (east specifically: obviously Pakistan and India are pointing theirs at each other) that are neither mainland China nor US bases?

(Possibly an unanswerable question given military secrecy; and while I can't think why anyone would anyone point any weapons those ways, that doesn't mean someone with such weapons has not).

https://www.google.de/maps/place/Atomic+Bomb+Hypocenter+Monu...

https://www.google.de/maps/place/Hiroshima+Atomic+Bomb+Hypoc...

The classic worry is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter: the soot thrown up by the ensuing urban fire storms causing temperatures, rainfall to plummet, and hence food production. On reading the scenarios the odds of total human extinction are lower than I recollected, but 80% of world pop dying of starvation dwarfs the direct death toll (usually reckoned in the hundreds of millions)