Apologies, I’ve updated the title. Can’t change content of a cross post, so:
Claude Sonnet 3.7 high level summary (though I recommend the entire report)
3 Key Points: "The Crisis Report - 103"
- Global ocean temperatures are rapidly rising, with 2023-2025 showing unprecedented warming despite La Nina conditions, potentially leading to +2°C of global warming between 2030-2045.
- The report claims this level of warming could cause catastrophic global food system collapse with agricultural outputs declining 14-20% per 1°C of warming.
- According to the report, these conditions could lead to mass starvation primarily in the Global South, with projections of 2+ billion deaths at +2°C warming and 4+ billion at +3°C warming.
I can tell you what I see when I look at the board. I can tell you what I think it means.
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56766127
I can tell you what I see when I look at the board. I can tell you what I think it means.
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56766127
YSK: this was very likely the best year of the rest of your life
I can tell you what I see when I look at the board. I can tell you what I think it means.
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/56766127
Claude Sonnet 3.7 high level summary (though I recommend the entire report)
> # 3 Key Points: "The Crisis Report - 103"
> 1. Global ocean temperatures are rapidly rising, with 2023-2025 showing unprecedented warming despite La Nina conditions, potentially leading to +2°C of global warming between 2030-2045.
> 2. The report claims this level of warming could cause catastrophic global food system collapse with agricultural outputs declining 14-20% per 1°C of warming.
> 3. According to the report, these conditions could lead to mass starvation primarily in the Global South, with projections of 2+ billion deaths at +2°C warming and 4+ billion at +3°C warming.
I know I’m going to get downvoted to hell for this, But without any commentary, I don’t know what the first link to ProRepublica proves that there is a tie between Trump and Russia.
I was planning to send this to some of my sceptical friends, but if the first link contains hundreds of hours of random footage of an attempted insurrection, they will probably not be motivated enough to click the other links.
I’m not saying it shouldn’t be included, but I think it matters which links you put in the top three spots because that’s going to determine whether people are convinced or not. I think the last two links probably might be better suited for being the first links.
I agree with OP that you don’t want to argue after you dump the links, but then you have to make sure the links are really solid.
And not a particular good one. I would prefer “New study finds ground billionaires make okay fertiliser”
The first time a sitting US president and RU president spoke to each other alone with just an interpreter and no official transcript.
I’m clown, Da ba dee daba die, Da ba dee daba die, Da ba dee daba die, Da ba dee daba die, Da ba dee daba die, Da ba dee daba die, Da ba dee daba die [x2]