Warming

* Ecosystems severely damaged at +1C
* Abrupt extinction events from +1.25C
* Planet's liveability at risk by +1.5C
* Global crop failure fears +1.75C
* Impacts we can't adapt to +2C
* Hothouse Earth zone? +2.25C
* Survival is hard before +2.5C

+2.5C likely by 2050-2075

Ocean extinctions:

'The first completely global bleaching event was in 1998. That was a wake-up call for people here in Australia, because that was the first time ever that the Great Barrier Reef had bleached.'

99% of tropical corals will be doomed at 2C.https://t.co/8OB7KpPFEU
Many already endangered species are now at risk of suddenly becoming extinct as extreme events worsen.
https://t.co/Itlnp7z8Hy
'going past 1.5C is dicing with the planet's liveability. And the 1.5C temperature "guard rail" could be exceeded in just 12 years, in 2030.'

Or even in the 2020s.

https://t.co/FQ3r5jWPtn
'Even if warming was limited to 1.5 K, all major producing countries would still face notable warming-induced yield reduction.'

1.5C looks like it could deliver major crises. Risks to crops appear set to grow immensely from +1.75C.

https://t.co/rya17lD5eq
'There's a lot we can’t adapt to even at 2C. At 4C the impacts are very high and we cannot adapt to them.'https://t.co/raYr1X8o33
'when we reach 2 degrees of warming, we may be at a point where we hand over the control mechanism to Planet Earth herself'

https://t.co/5sIG7F3Kjz
'Vague, distant targets for 2030 or 2050 will not keep the world “well below 2C” of warming as the Paris Agreement promised. I can tell you, a 2C hotter world is a death sentence for countries like mine.'

https://t.co/pQAavJB6vs
We need emergency system change now.

Richard Alley, geoscientist at Pennsylvania State University and contributor to multiple IPCC reports:

at 2°C “you are having impacts on most people, impacts on the market, that make it hard for everyone to live.”https://t.co/pLA4CwrCg7
'An estimated 5% of all species would be threatened with extinction by 2°C of warming above pre-industrial levels'.

We're currently on track for 2C by 2034-2043.

https://t.co/PGlUXnEE2Q
https://t.co/CIAIIcuxcC

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."


We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".