Future of Life Institute Podcast

While a single extreme weather event can wreak considerable havoc, it's becoming increasingly clear that such events often don't occur in isolation. Not Cool Episode 11 focuses on compound weather events: what they are, why they’re dangerous, and how we've failed to prepare for them. Ariel is joined by Jakob Zscheischler, an Earth system scientist at the University of Bern, who discusses the feedback processes that drive compound events, the impacts they're already having, and the reasons we've underestimated their gravity. He also explains how extreme events can reduce carbon uptake, how human impacts can amplify climate hazards, and why we need more interdisciplinary research. Topics discussed include: -Carbon cycle -Climate-driven changes in vegetation -Land-atmosphere feedbacks -Extreme events -Compound events and why they’re under researched -Risk assessment -Spatially compounding impacts -Importance of working across disciplines -Important policy measures

One of the most obvious markers of climate change has been the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events in recent years. In the tenth episode of Not Cool, Ariel takes a closer look at the research linking climate change and extreme events — and, in turn, linking extreme events and socioeconomic patterns. She’s joined by Stephanie Herring, a climate scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration whose work on extreme event attribution has landed her on Foreign Policy magazine’s list of Top 100 Global Thinkers. Stephanie discusses the changes she’s witnessed in the field of attribution research, the concerning trends that have begun to emerge, the importance of data in the decision-making process, and more. Topics discussed include: -Extreme events & how they’re defined -Attribution research -Risk management -Selection bias in climate research -Insurance analysis -Compound events and impacts -Knowns and unknowns

Most of us working on catastrophic and existential threats focus on trying to prevent them — not on figuring out how to survive the aftermath. But what if, despite everyone’s best efforts, humanity does undergo such a catastrophe? This month’s podcast is all about what we can do in the present to ensure humanity’s survival in a future worst-case scenario. Ariel is joined by Dave Denkenberger and Joshua Pearce, co-authors of the book Feeding Everyone No Matter What, who explain what would constitute a catastrophic event, what it would take to feed the global population, and how their research could help address world hunger today. They also discuss infrastructural preparations, appropriate technology, and why it’s worth investing in these efforts. Topics discussed include: -Causes of global catastrophe -Planning for catastrophic events -Getting governments onboard -Application to current crises -Alternative food sources -Historical precedence for societal collapse -Appropriate technology -Hardwired optimism -Surprising things that could save lives -Climate change and adaptation -Moral hazards -Why it’s in the best interest of the global wealthy to make food more available

In her speech at Monday’s UN Climate Action Summit, Greta Thunberg told a roomful of global leaders, “The world is waking up.” Yet the science, as she noted, has been clear for decades. Why has this awakening taken so long, and what can we do now to help it along? On Episode 9 of Not Cool, Ariel is joined by Andy Revkin, acclaimed environmental journalist and founding director of the new Initiative on Communication and Sustainability at Columbia University’s Earth Institute. Andy discusses the information gaps that have left us vulnerable, the difficult conversations we need to be having, and the strategies we should be using to effectively communicate climate science. He also talks about inertia, resilience, and creating a culture that cares about the future. Topics discussed include: -Inertia in the climate system -The expanding bullseye of vulnerability -Managed retreat -Information gaps -Climate science literacy levels -Renewable energy in conservative states -Infrastructural inertia -Climate science communication strategies -Increasing resilience -Balancing inconvenient realities with productive messaging -Extreme events

On the eighth episode of Not Cool, Ariel tackles the topic of climate policy from the local level to the federal. She's joined by Suzanne Jones: the current mayor of Boulder, Colorado, but also public policy veteran and climate activist. Suzanne explains the climate threats facing communities like Boulder, the measures local governments can take to combat the crisis, and the ways she’d like to see the federal government step up. She also discusses the economic value of going green, the importance of promoting equity in climate solutions, and more. Topics discussed include: -Paris Climate Agreement -Roles for local/state/federal governments -Surprise costs of climate change -Equality/equity in climate solutions -Increasing community engagement -Nonattainment zones -Electrification of transportation sector -Municipalization of electric utility -Challenges, roadblocks, and what she’d like to see accomplished -Affordable, sustainable development -What individuals should be doing -Carbon farming and sustainable agriculture

The impacts of the climate crisis don’t stop at rising sea levels and changing weather patterns. Episode 7 of Not Cool covers the national security implications of the changing climate, from the economic fallout to the uptick in human migration. Ariel is joined by Lindsay Getschel, a national security and climate change researcher who briefed the UN Security Council this year on these threats. Lindsay also discusses how hard-hit communities are adapting, why UN involvement is important, and more. Topics discussed include: -Threat multipliers -Economic impacts of climate change -Impacts of climate change on migration -The importance of UN involvement -Ecosystem-based adaptation -Action individuals can take

What is geoengineering, and could it really help us solve the climate crisis? The sixth episode of Not Cool features Dr. Alan Robock, meteorologist and climate scientist, on types of geoengineering solutions, the benefits and risks of geoengineering, and the likelihood that we may need to implement such technology. He also discusses a range of other solutions, including economic and policy reforms, shifts within the energy sector, and the type of leadership that might make these transformations possible. Topics discussed include: -Types of geoengineering, including carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management -Current geoengineering capabilities -The Year Without a Summer -The termination problem -Feasibility of geoengineering solutions -Social cost of carbon -Fossil fuel industry -Renewable energy solutions and economic accessibility -Biggest risks of stratospheric geoengineering

In his Research Agenda v0.9: Synthesizing a human's preferences into a utility function, Stuart Armstrong develops an approach for generating friendly artificial intelligence. His alignment proposal can broadly be understood as a kind of inverse reinforcement learning where most of the task of inferring human preferences is left to the AI itself. It's up to us to build the correct assumptions, definitions, preference learning methodology, and synthesis process into the AI system such that it will be able to meaningfully learn human preferences and synthesize them into an adequate utility function. In order to get this all right, his agenda looks at how to understand and identify human partial preferences, how to ultimately synthesize these learned preferences into an "adequate" utility function, the practicalities of developing and estimating the human utility function, and how this agenda can assist in other methods of AI alignment. Topics discussed in this episode include: -The core aspects and ideas of Stuart's research agenda -Human values being changeable, manipulable, contradictory, and underdefined -This research agenda in the context of the broader AI alignment landscape -What the proposed synthesis process looks like -How to identify human partial preferences -Why a utility function anyway? -Idealization and reflective equilibrium -Open questions and potential problem areas Here you can find the podcast page: https://futureoflife.org/2019/09/17/synthesizing-a-humans-preferences-into-a-utility-function-with-stuart-armstrong/ Important timestamps:  0:00 Introductions  3:24 A story of evolution (inspiring just-so story) 6:30 How does your “inspiring just-so story” help to inform this research agenda? 8:53 The two core parts to the research agenda  10:00 How this research agenda is contextualized in the AI alignment landscape 12:45 The fundamental ideas behind the research project  15:10 What are partial preferences?  17:50 Why reflexive self-consistency isn’t enough  20:05 How are humans contradictory and how does this affect the difficulty of the agenda? 25:30 Why human values being underdefined presents the greatest challenge  33:55 Expanding on the synthesis process  35:20 How to extract the partial preferences of the person  36:50 Why a utility function?  41:45 Are there alternative goal ordering or action producing methods for agents other than utility functions? 44:40 Extending and normalizing partial preferences and covering the rest of section 2  50:00 Moving into section 3, synthesizing the utility function in practice  52:00 Why this research agenda is helpful for other alignment methodologies  55:50 Limits of the agenda and other problems  58:40 Synthesizing a species wide utility function  1:01:20 Concerns over the alignment methodology containing leaky abstractions  1:06:10 Reflective equilibrium and the agenda not being a philosophical ideal  1:08:10 Can we check the result of the synthesis process? 01:09:55 How did the Mahatma Armstrong idealization process fail?  01:14:40 Any clarifications for the AI alignment community?  You Can take a short (4 minute) survey to share your feedback about the podcast here: www.surveymonkey.com/r/YWHDFV7

Planning for climate change is particularly difficult because we're dealing with such big unknowns. How, exactly, will the climate change? Who will be affected and how? What new innovations are possible, and how might they help address or exacerbate the current problem? Etc. But we at least know that in order to minimize the negative effects of climate change, we need to make major structural changes — to our energy systems, to our infrastructure, to our power structures — and we need to start now. On the fifth episode of Not Cool, Ariel is joined by Ken Caldeira, who is a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science and the Department of Global Ecology and a professor at Stanford University's Department of Earth System Science. Ken shares his thoughts on the changes we need to be making, the obstacles standing in the way, and what it will take to overcome them. Topics discussed include: -Relationship between policy and science -Climate deniers and why it isn't useful to argue with them -Energy systems and replacing carbon -Planning in the face of uncertainty -Sociopolitical/psychological barriers to climate action -Most urgently needed policies and actions -Economic scope of climate solution -Infrastructure solutions and their political viability -Importance of political/systemic change

The reality is, no matter what we do going forward, we’ve already changed the climate. So while it’s critical to try to minimize those changes, it’s also important that we start to prepare for them. On Episode 4 of Not Cool, Ariel explores the concept of climate adaptation — what it means, how it’s being implemented, and where there’s still work to be done. She’s joined by Jessica Troni, head of UN Environment’s Climate Change Adaptation Unit, who talks warming scenarios, adaptation strategies, implementation barriers, and more. Topics discussed include: Climate adaptation: ecology-based, infrastructure Funding sources Barriers: financial, absorptive capacity Developed vs. developing nations: difference in adaptation approaches, needs, etc. UN Environment Policy solutions Social unrest in relation to climate Feedback loops and runaway climate change Warming scenarios What individuals can do