Idk what you mean about entertainment media because sitcoms were all the rage. And while the U.S. was in denial about climate change they were also emitting far fewer ghg and climate change was much less evident

What do you define as late millennial? Because as someone born toward the tail end of the millennials I feel like while I didn’t personally watch it on tv I heard about it a ton and then as an adult I did a binge watch of it

“AI” doesn’t actually have any intelligence so Skynet is still very far away.

What we can use AI for though is having a missile that can make micro corrections in the air

Machine learning algorithms which is what people are calling AI nowadays have been around for 70 years and are already integrated into military tech.

This is what happens whenthere is no headphone port people are selfish pricks

FTFY

My interpretation of the post was less about the quality of phone speakers and more about disturbing the peace of public spaces

And people could not purchase non biodegradable products

It is also a very large data set it has to go through the average English speaker knows 40kish words and it has to pull from a large data set and attempt to predict what’s the most likely word to come next and do that a hundred or so times per response. Then most people want the result in a very short period of time and with very high accuracy (smaller tolerances on the convergence and divergence criteria) so sure there is some hardware optimization that can be done but it will always be at least somewhat taxing.

It covers shared experiences decently well. Like obviously there is overlap but in the U.S. as a whole most millennials were kids who have a memory of a pre 9/11 world. Most zoomers grew up with WiFi being common in their houses. Most Gen Xers have memories of being a child near the end of the Cold War and were in the work force before Internet was common. Most boomers either served in the Vietnam war or have a memory of someone close to them going off to fight in an unpopular war.

A lot of those experiences have lasting effects in how those generations behave. It doesn’t mean everyone is the same but instead that you can follow trends that are more true for each generation

Then there is also the advantage of tracking a groups shared experiences like for example many millennials were relatively unaffected by the dotcom bubble but for the 2008 recession they were hit much harder

Yes a single blip where there was a 1% decrease in beef without a corresponding drop in GhG that in that same year they had a bunch of cows that were grown to maturity and then slaughtered.

I went a step further though I downloaded the CSV files and ran a correlation on them using excels CORREL function and they had a 0.98911 correlation

If you look at the two charts you listed they correlate very heavily with eachother

So ignoring the fact that English speaking is still not part of eugenics, do you think the only way it can be non eugenics based is if they shared those same sentiments to every country in every language in equal proportion? Or how else could they share the belief that having children is bad for the planet without it being eugenics based on your opinion?

So you are comparing a single year which had a 1% decrease in global beef consumption (1995 to 1996) and using that information to claim that beef doesn’t cause ghg?

That was not my question. Do you think the OP meant that only people who speak English should not have kids?

So are you interpreting the comment as only people who speak English should not have kids?

What was the reduction in beef consumption world wide compared to the reduction in ghg?

That is the classic problem of a correlation. If you are sitting in a room that is warm and you notice that when you are using your laptop the room is slightly warmer and when your laptop is off the room is slightly cooler would you say that the driving force for the temperature of the room is your laptop? Or could it also be the oven, the outside temperature, the heating/air conditioning, the number of people in the room, etc. we do have enough evidence that global air travel is a significant contributor to ghg and therefore climate change but it’s estimated to be 2.5% compared to agriculture which is 10%

300m cows slaughtered a year at 500lb of beef per cow and 22lb of co2 per lb of beef is 1.65B tons of co2e a year from cows. Global aviation makes up 920m tons of co2 from flying

It’s a manner of perspective, Coca Cola is considered one of the largest polluters on the planet but that’s not because corporate Coca Cola is out there polluting for funsies it’s because they make a product that individuals purchase and then individuals improperly dispose of. Sure no one person can stop Coca Cola from polluting but isn’t the pollution caused by your individual purchase your own responsibility?

Are you comparing that to a time that everyone stopped eating beef or how are you using that information to make the claim that meat isn’t the problem?