Coquinha_gelada_hm t1_j6n13ju wrote
we already have a lot of scenarios studied and made by humans. We don't know the data they fed this A.I, so, i will stick with humans on this one.
pete_68 t1_j6pj8jp wrote
Yeah, we've done such a bang-up job so far. How many articles have I read in the past year where climate change has turned out to be worse than what scientists predicted? Maybe 100. For a while it seemed like there were 1 or 2 a day. This is worse than we expected, that's worse than we expected.
I'm going to go with the AI models 'cause the humans have totally fucked it up.
fungussa OP t1_j6n1flz wrote
AI is already exceeding expert capability of humans in many fields. So do you think there's a law that humans will always be superior?
throwaway4abetterday t1_j6n30ol wrote
No rule, just a fact. At least that's what you'd say if we asked the same of you about this AI when you know damn well the things get results wrong all the time.
Remarkable-Way4986 t1_j6n73gh wrote
AI doesn't seem to come up with much new. It just studies what people have already come up with, including errors and bias. Then mashes it all together
throwaway4abetterday t1_j6p1q3b wrote
That's exactly the problem with it.
fungussa OP t1_j6ndd7n wrote
Really?? AI is being used to find novel materials in material science to novel medicines and research in physics. We're now also seeing it with AI art and ChatGPT.
Remarkable-Way4986 t1_j6ney29 wrote
Theoretical and unproven from what scientists have already suggested should be out there
fungussa OP t1_j6ni8w8 wrote
Seriously, why are you just making things up??
> AI Designs Quantum Physics Experiments beyond What Any Human Has Conceived - Originally built to speed up calculations, a machine-learning system is now making shocking progress at the frontiers of experimental quantum physics
cvviic t1_j6nfiq4 wrote
It’s finding novel materials By them inputting measurements from every material we currently have. Plus inputs on things we already know. Like phase points, shear strength, all their forces. With out a lot accurate data. The AI could make any guess.
Global warming data is literally all speculative as it hasn’t happened yet. I would suggest you start treating AI like a tool that needs calibration. Some times that tool isn’t/can’t be calibrated for the job
fungussa OP t1_j6nitve wrote
You're just making things up.
> AI Designs Quantum Physics Experiments beyond What Any Human Has Conceived - Originally built to speed up calculations, a machine-learning system is now making shocking progress at the frontiers of experimental quantum physics
> Global warming data is literally all speculative as it hasn’t
What?? Satellites have been measuring less radiation escaping the upper atmosphere then is entering it, and they measuring increased radiation abdorption in the bands in which CO2 absorbs radiation.
There's no point in trying to deny basic physics and chemistry.
cvviic t1_j6o601e wrote
Let me preface this with saying global warming is a thing. My problem is this god like ideologies people are building around AI.
Ok the global warming not having data was a poor use of words on my end. I meant we don’t have data on a runaway green house affect. The physics may state that at “this” specific point we can’t turn it around. The problem is “this” point can’t have real world data. Because we have never seen the world hitting “this” point. The world has to many variables to claim your current measured and mathematically devised outcomes of atomic interactions Covers them all. And with out that hard data to feed into an AI it will make erroneous calculations.
The link you sent only hardens my point of AI using Hard data to make predictions. Idk if you brush up on where we are in quantum physics. But their aren’t to many variables. Yes there is things we don’t understand. But by MEASURING them we know there are mathematically probable out comes depending on only a few variables. It’s all the hard data gathered from places like the LHC that makes AI powerful in this situation. Honestly the only inputs for developing novel materials would be the number of protons, neutrons, electrons, and all of there known forces. With that an AI could easily make new materials.
AI is Amazing at pattern recognition and extrapolates up from the patterns it’s seen in previous data. With out a closed system of all know variables AI can and will make mistakes.
fungussa OP t1_j6o7vbg wrote
Science says that it's not likely that there will be a runaway greenhouse effect, however, the Earth could enter a hot-house state, losing all polar ice with very high sea level rise.
You're not entirely coherent, but I think English is not your first language.
That being said, you don't know much about climate change nor about AI.
Google DeepMind is one of the world's leading AI research labs, and it will be using AI to model weather and climate (it's been one of DeepMind's primary goals, to use AI to understand and find solutions to climate change).
https://analyticsindiamag.com/deepminds-next-project-weather-climate-modelling/
cvviic t1_j6ochuj wrote
Have deep mind give you the temperature and humidity of your county 3 months from know. Then tell me when that time comes if it is 100% accurate. I’m trying to help you see that you are the one who doesn’t understand how AI works.
I definitely lack knowledge on climate change. But I have a pretty firm understanding of AI.
fungussa OP t1_j6odnit wrote
I'm not interested in continuing this conversation.
fungussa OP t1_j6n45n5 wrote
You clearly haven't been watching the news,
Coquinha_gelada_hm t1_j6n5kff wrote
and you're givind too much credit to a bunch of ifs and elses. A.I learns from things made by humans, btw. they also can't learn like humans. They need alot of data and a lot of trainning to copy humans. And i'm saying this as a CS major.
fungussa OP t1_j6n6b13 wrote
> A.I learn from things made by humans
Not necessarily.
Satellite data, temperature data, ocean salinity, wind speeds etc are not 'things made by humans'.
Coquinha_gelada_hm t1_j6na9q4 wrote
the satellites, sensors, etc... stuff made by humans.
fungussa OP t1_j6nbcnk wrote
That's ridiculous, those are measurements based on natural phenomena and laws.
Franklin_le_Tanklin t1_j6phpg5 wrote
Mm. And all of the human ones have turned out to be wrong so far and have underestimated the effects.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments