The way it happens is that sea level rises slowly, so slowly it's barely noticeable. Then, literally overnight, a storm causes specific sections of land to go underwater. It's very expensive, even if we plan for it. But we never do seem to plan for it adequately, do we?

CO2 emissions will go down as fossil fuels become harder to obtain and the cost of alternative energy decreases. It's inevitable to reduce CO2 emissions, because fossil fuels will simply be exhausted. All we can do is speed up that process by imposing a carbon tax. We came together to reduce CFC emissions and sulfur emissions to alleviate the ozone hold and acid rain, so why not CO2 emisisons?

One foot of sea level rise is not a loss of one foot of beach, unless the beach has a 45-degree angle. A few feet of sea level rise is going to displace many millions of people.

I checked the video. He said "If this continues over centuries, we could get a runaway greenhouse effect." That's a huge "if", but yes, there is a non-zero chance of us putting so much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere that we could trigger a runaway greenhouse effect and the Earth could become similar to Venus. No one is seriously proposing that would actually happen. That's not what the concern about climate change is. Stop being alarmist.

Well, I suppose if you replace "civilization" with "the human species," and "be at risk" with "go extinct," you're correct. But read what he actually said. "Civilization would be at risk" not "The human species would go extinct." They're different statements.

Climate change is not a death sentence. There aren't any reputable scientists saying it is. I think you may have been listening to some sensationalist media stories, and possibly embellishing what they state. If you like, you can read some of the published effects of climate change, and "all life dying" is not one of them.

Individual action is not going to reduce carbon dioxide emissions much. We need to replace fossil fuels with alternative sources of energy, which is something individuals can't do on their own. We need to build new power plants. This is something we will need to do anyway, since fossil fuels will not last forever. The only option is how quickly we wean ourselves off fossil fuels, not whether or not we do it. And doing so more quickly has the added benefits of reducing pollution and ocean acidification.

So what does it mean that capitalism is founded on that very idea, that everyone will do what is in their own best interest?

Welcome to capitalism, baby. Greed, for lack of a better term, is good. You may want to look into alternative economic models.

Death is a necessary part of life. So if I kill you with my gun, there's no problem, right?

Maybe the press reports on the people who are more famous (who tend not to be AI researchers). But Stuart Russell, UC Berkeley AI researcher and co-author of the best selling AI textbook of the last two decades, has concerns about the matter, too.

In any case, when you're close to the project you can tend to lose sight of the big picture. Probably few scientists at Los Alamos thought of the long-term consequences of the weapons they were designing.

Another thing to keep in mind is that hardly anyone believes that we're close to creating human-level artificial intelligence, particularly AI researchers.

There aren't four billion public IP addresses in use. The problem is that in the early days they handed out class A subnets like they were candy, wasting millions of IP addresses with every one. Most computers don't have their own public IP address -- they have a private IP address and access the Internet via NAT.

Not for me. I just finished downloading GCC 5.1 and Visual Studio 2014!

But New Horizons was trying to avoid collisions, not create them!

They did name Charon, Doofus.

So once she tried to break a satellite and she fixed it by mistake? Oops!