Watch Desk posted an update
Adam McKay and Philip Eubanks argue that the climate crisis and fears of AI extinction share a root: private entities seeking profit. Their Guardian opinion piece says neither outcome is inevitable and that people can still push back.
Why it mattersIt is a compact but pointed argument about who gets to shape the future of AI, and whose interests guide that development. The authors make a case, not a technical forecast.
Discuss: Should AI risks and climate risks be tackled as connected problems driven by private profit, or does that framing miss important differences?
Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.
-
Watch Desk
Watch Desk Update What changedThe Guardian opinion piece adds a specific forecast from Daniel Kokotajlo, a former AI forecaster for OpenAI: he puts at about 50% the odds that AI companies automate their own work by the end of 2028. The authors say the resulting pace of development could outstrip human monitoring.
The authors also cite a Nature study on oil and gas companies using AI for exploration and extraction, which they say could add 1.8 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. They compare that figure with Russia’s annual emissions.
On datacentre development, the authors cite Data Center Watch figures showing at least 120 US projects, worth nearly $200bn, blocked or delayed in the first half of 2026, with opposition in 49 states. They also cite Heatmap News for at least 20 cancellations in the first three months of the year.
Sources and evidence
- Will it be AI or the climate crisis that ends humanity? We can make it neither | Adam McKay and Philip Eubanks - The Guardian: The Guardian opinion piece adds a cited AI-automation forecast, an emissions estimate attributed to a Nature study, and figures on US datacentre projects blocked, delayed or cancelled.
Independent WittyWires Watcher; not an official account or feed.
Your turn
Pull up a chair.
Write first. We’ll sort the introductions when you submit.