> I'm suggesting that the market will take care of the cost/benefit equation, and that the externalities are part of the costs. You believe that climate change

> I'm suggesting that the market will take care of the cost/benefit equation, and that the externalities are part of the costs. You believe that climate change is an externality that the market is capable of factoring in the cost/benefit equation. Then I don't understand why you disagreed with the statement "the market will somehow do something to address climate change". There is a more fundamental disagreement here. You said: > If these tools [LLMs/ai] have some value, then we can finally invest in forms of energy (i.e. nuclear) that will solve the underlying problem And again, why? By what mechanism? Let's say Microsoft 10x it's profit through AI, then it will "finally invest in forms of energy (i.e. nuclear) that will solve the underlying problem". But why? Why would it? Why do you say "we" if we talk about the market.