

I disagree with the conclusion of the article, although the contents do touch on some important points.
The article itself claims there aren’t enough resources for everyone to live a “developed country lifestyle”, which is connected to higher emissions per capita.
One way forward is to reduce the consumption. But the other way is to reduce the population so there is enough for everyone to be at least somewhat wasteful. Imo, the best would be both.
A chess-specific algorithm beat a language model at chess. Shocking!
Try training a chess model. Actually I think it’s already been done, machines have been consistently better at chess than humans for a while now.