If people stopped eating meat and we turned the massive amount of land we waste raising animals to slaughter into carbon sinks it absolutely would be enough. But go on justifying your addiction that’s literally killing the planet. I’m sure your grandchildren would agree.
Yes it will.
A study mentioned on Our World in Data suggests that if the entire world adopted a vegan diet, our total agricultural land use could shrink dramatically, from 4.1 billion hectares to 1 billion hectares, a reduction of 75% . This reduction is significant because agriculture, particularly livestock farming, is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.
Further, a research team, including scientists from Leiden University, found that if high-income countries switched to a plant-based diet, almost 100 billion tons of CO2 could be pulled out of the atmosphere by the end of the century. This switch would reduce annual agricultural production emissions by 61%, and converting former cropland and pastures to their natural state could remove another 98.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by the end of the century .
Additionally, a study by scientists from Stanford University and the University of California, Berkeley, found that phasing out animal agriculture over the next 15 years would have the same effect as a 68% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions through 2100. This would contribute 52% of the net emission reductions necessary to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. The phase-out of animal agriculture could create a 30-year pause in net greenhouse gas emissions and offset almost 70% of the heating effect of those emissions through the end of the century .
If everybody would just stop eating fucking meat we wouldn’t be having this problem. Your addiction is killing the planet.
Maybe in America but Iraq protests and Occupy were worldwide.
Also the population was a lot smaller then.
Since then the only larger protest was occupy. They didn’t just ignore that one they beat the shit out of it.
Are you unaware of the vast corpus of leftist texts about just this? Do you think leftists are just teenagers on TikTok?
you’re doing a really good job of breaking this stereotype, bub
Smug sense of superiority. You’re special and do things the right way because everyone else is too dumb.
Oh wow! It’s you! From the tweets!!
until doomblade :p
GPT4 or 3.5? What are you studying?
It got updated a few days ago and the new one is quantized so it’s not quite as smart, might be part of it. The tuned GPTs or plugins make it better overall post-update, though, I think. But the base model definitely got a little dumber.
tapping a 6/6 to make 1/1s would feel weird AF, though
I just made a GPT for this and it was really awesome! Thanks!
I think this would be a good one to make a GPT of, that way you wouldn’t have to keep prompting it and could refine it more easily as you go.
Ooh that’s a neat fact. I wonder how much training it would take for it to be able to make those images. I’m not sure the available models are capable of that right now. They have trouble with English text and I’m sure that they’re trained mostly on that. There’s an added wrinkle to Arabic in that GPT writes from left to right. From my understanding models like BERT, ROBERTA and BART don’t have that issue as readily, since they “read” bi-directionally. Pi does, as well. I don’t know enough about the back-end of DALLE 3 to know if it would naturally have extra issues with Arabic but my suspicion is that it would not, as I imagine it uses a diffusion model, which works by refining random noise.
I’m not sure. I know it has different tunings but I don’t know much about them.
Actually I do have one tip, though, which is to tell it to play make-believe, or pretend that it has an opinion and then tell you it. Many of the bots are highly pre-trained to respond asserting that they absolutely cannot have an opinion, which is more or less true. But their “made up” opinions tend to be pretty much the same regardless of when you’ve asked. So it can definitely make up its “mind” about something, which is of course a byproduct of biases of the texts its trained on or its application of logic and its “ethics.” It makes sense within this context that their “opinions” would be the same regardless of when or how you ask.
I had a nice conversation with pi.ai about machine consciousness - but I did have to keep reminding it to pretend it had an opinion, or else it would default into the “as an AI I blah blah blah” stuff.
It tends to both-sides issues like that. Here’s its initial response as an example:
AI-generated art is a fascinating and rapidly evolving field. It has the potential to democratize artistic expression, enabling those without traditional artistic skills to create visually compelling works. This technology can also serve as a tool for professional artists, offering new possibilities in digital art and design.
However, it also raises important ethical and creative questions. Issues like originality, copyright, and the impact on traditional artists’ livelihoods are significant concerns. The line between inspiration and appropriation can become blurred when AI systems are trained on existing artworks.
In essence, AI art represents both a remarkable technological achievement and a complex cultural phenomenon, with its benefits and challenges continually evolving as the technology advances.
I think since it “views” the technology as being best applied as assistance neither of your followups super apply. If you disagree OR agree I’m happy to ask it whatever followup you’d like me to.
most of it is in perfect iambic, as well.
I think Israel themselves said that casualties were 61% civilian, and they count any male of “fighting age” as Hamas, so 70 sounds about right