Anonymous ID: fa4eed May 31, 2023, 10:09 a.m. No.18930253   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0256 >>0306 >>0309 >>0356 >>0395 >>0496

New York “sinking under weight of its buildings” according to researchers

 

A paper by oceanologists at the University of Rhode Island claims New York will sink by 1-2mm a year under the weight of its buildings.

 

The Weight of New York City: Possible Contributions to Subsidence from Anthropogenic Sources analysed a public database of building outlines and height data as well as the city’s bedrock and the soil types to determine the results.

 

According to the researchers,the total weight of New York is 764 million tonnes. They divided the city into a 100 x 100 grid and calculated the downward pressure on the silt, sand and clay lake deposits that make up the city’s subsoil. The team also added real-world subsidence rates for the past several decades courtesy of satellite measurements.

 

Some areas in Brooklyn, Queens and northern Staten Island may have higher subsidence rates due to structures being built on fill soil.

 

As well as subsidence, New York and other coastal cities also face rising sea levels and the increasing intensity of storms caused by global warming.

 

The paper was written by Tom Parsons, Pei-Chin Wu, Meng Wei and Steven D’Hondt and published earlier this month in the journal Earth’s Future. It references a 2001 study by DW Hobbs that noted structural issues can be caused to building foundations by exposure to salt water.

 

The 2023 paper says: “Increasing urbanisation will likely exacerbate subsidence by groundwater extraction and/or construction density, which combined with accelerating sea level rise implies a growing flood hazard in coastal cities.

 

“As these trends continue it will be important to be mindful of accompanying mitigation strategies against inundation in growing coastal cities.”

 

https://www.globalconstructionreview.com/new-york-sinking-under-weight-of-its-buildings-according-to-researchers/

 

>just the title made me think comms…

>set aside the spoopy 17 = 7 + 6 + 4

Anonymous ID: fa4eed May 31, 2023, 10:22 a.m. No.18930286   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0918

>>18930256

I like that interpretation. It lines up with NYC = 746m tons. I also thought that perhaps NY, being a hotbed of DS activity, is sinking under the weight of its own designs.

Anonymous ID: fa4eed May 31, 2023, 1:01 p.m. No.18930904   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0905 >>0911 >>0916 >>0932 >>0957

OpenAI CEO, top AI brass urge global action on ‘risk of extinction from AI’

 

AI scientists and top executives are equating the risks of AI to pandemics and nuclear war in a short statement published Tuesday by The Center for AI Safety. “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority,” the statement said.

 

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman was among the more than 300 signatories, which included Demis Hassabis, CEO of Google DeepMind; Kevin Scott, CTO at Microsoft; and Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic. There are no signatories from Amazon or its generative AI partner Hugging Face.

 

The Center for AI Safety acknowledged the difficulty of voicing concerns about some of AI’s most severe risks as enterprises rush to adopt the technology and large companies experience stock price boosts after they announce AI initiatives. The goal of the statement is to spark discussion and create common knowledge of the number of experts who take advanced AI’s most severe risks seriously, the group said.

 

This isn’t the first time a swarm of high-profile names in AI gathered under an online statement. In March, there were calls for an industrywide pause on AI development and training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.

 

At the time, more than 1,100 AI and technology experts, as well as former presidential candidates and engineers, supported the six-month moratorium. The open letter published by The Future of Life Institute now has more than 31,000 signatories.

 

Despite the buzz it created, the open letter fell flat. Some executives found it to be vague or abstract, while others viewed it as more of a symbolic statement acknowledging the harm AI could cause.

 

“I actually signed that letter,” Gary Marcus, professor emeritus at New York University, said during the Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing earlier this month. “I took the letter… spiritually not literally.”

 

“I don’t know that we need to pause that particular project,” Marcus said, referring to systems more powerful than GPT-4. “But I do think [the letter’s] emphasis on focusing more on AI safety and trustworthy, reliable AI is exactly right.”

 

The statement released Tuesday doesn’t have the specific call to action element that the open letter illustrated, though the result might end up being the same: directing discourse.

 

The statement follows AI regulation becoming the topic of conversation in Congress, at the G7 summit and within the White House.

 

Altman, who has spoken to leaders around the world within the past month, has changed his tune on regulation since his tour began. When testifying earlier this month before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee, Altman called on Congress to help establish global safeguards and standards for AI use.

 

Then in Europe, Altman said that if regulation crossed a line, OpenAI would cease operating in the European Union before reversing course two days later.

 

“Very productive week of conversations in Europe about how to best regulate AI,” Altman tweeted last week. “We are excited to continue to operate here and, of course, have no plans to leave.”

 

https://www.ciodive.com/news/Extinction-AI-Sam-Altman-Google-DeepMind-Microsoft-regulation/651577/

 

>Seems like an odd change of tune, especially given the last letter signed by Elon a month or two ago. What's their angle?

>I'm guessing they're trying to beat out the smaller players and regulate them out of existence.

Anonymous ID: fa4eed May 31, 2023, 1:06 p.m. No.18930920   🗄️.is 🔗kun

The World is Running Out of Babies, Only 3% of People Live in Nations With Rising Birth Rates

 

In his 1929 book The Thing, G.K. Chesterton warns social reformers to be cautious about changing institutions, laws, or customs:

 

[L]et us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or a gate [is] erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away.”

 

Chesterton was illustrating the often-subtle importance of structures and ideas that moderns are so eager to deconstruct. Before setting longstanding traditions aside, we should first understand these things and understand why previous generations were committed to them. Otherwise, even well-meaning reforms can incur serious consequences, not all of which are immediately obvious, and which fall on future generations.

 

Chesterton’s analogy came to mind while reading an essay by Louise Perry at The Spectator, entitled, “Modernity is making you sterile.” Perry, a maverick feminist and author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, argues that the so-called “progress narrative” cherished among the elites of the developed world, along with the technologies that have enabled it, is keeping us from having babies. Like a slow-acting poison, modernity and its values have eaten away at the fabric of society, though imperceptibly so to those focused only on the present. This, she writes, is the real reason that most of the developed world is currently running out of people:

 

[W]hat we are now discovering is that, at the population level, modernity selects systematically against itself. The key features of modernity–urbanism, affluence, secularism, the blurring of gender distinctions, and more time spent with strangers than with kin–all of these factors in combination shred fertility. Which means that progressivism, the political ideology that urges on the acceleration of modernisation, can best be understood as a sterility meme.

 

In other words, if a society places a low value on children, pretty soon there will not be enough of them. As a friend of mine likes to say, “That’s not magic, it’s just math.”

 

Only 3% of the world’s population currently lives in a country whose birth rate isn’t declining. According to a 2020 BBC report, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Thailand, and South Korea will lose half their populations by the end of this century. Within 75 years, virtually every country on earth will have a shrinking population. Those in the West will be among the first and fastest declining.

 

Why is almost no one talking about this slow-motion crisis? According to Perry, we are blinded by the “urbanism, affluence, secularism, [and] the blurring of gender distinctions” that is collectively embraced by moderns. Committed to maximizing individual freedom and immediate happiness, the West has learned to ignore the subtle usefulness of family, fertility, and gender roles. It assumes that people who once practiced these things “were all bad and stupid.” The results of our beliefs and actions (or inaction) include a seemingly unstoppable drop in birth rates and, in Perry’s words, the eventual “end of our way of life.”

 

A progressive vision of reality sees social reform and technological advancement solely as a means to make life freer, comfier, or more entertaining. Institutions, laws, and customs are ignored or eliminated without ever asking the kinds of questions Chesterton thought important: “What are these traditions and institutions for? What do we owe to future generations?”

 

Perry rightly concludes that an overhaul of modernity is overdue. This will involve asking better questions and, at the very least, reprioritizing motherhood. We must consider why traditional values were valued in the first place, in light of the future and not just the present. Unfortunately, Perry also thinks that such an overhaul can take place without reconsidering the deepest roots of modern individualism or the sexual revolution. For example, among the “values” she hopes to hang onto in an ideal, fertile future are “gay rights.”

 

Still, it’s encouraging to hear a voice outside of conservative Christian circles saying that children are blessings and that healthy societies welcome them. Our increasingly sterile way of life is a sign of sickness at the heart of modernity. Unless we can learn to see the value of past traditions for our future, we’re not going to have one.

 

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Shane Morris. For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, go to breakpoint.org.

 

https://www.lifenews.com/2023/05/23/the-world-is-running-out-of-babies-only-3-of-people-live-in-nations-with-rising-birth-rates/