This is the kind of thing that makes me support use of extra-judicial methods (at least in a temporary and limited context) against global oligarchs and senior lackeys.

The host then followed up with, “Do you think we can meet AI’s energy without total blowing out climate goals?” and Schmidt answered with, “We’re not going to hit the climate goals anyway because we’re not organized to do it — and the way to do it is with the ways that we’re talking about now — and yes, the needs in this area will be a problem. But I’d rather bet on AI solving the problem than constraining it and having the problem if you see my plan.”

This is outright malicious. How exactly would AI “solve the problem”? Later on in the article (I am not watching the propaganda video) alludes to “AI … will make energy generation systems at least 15% more efficient or maybe even better” but he clearly just made that up on the spot. And at any rate, even if “AI” helps discover a method to make (all?) energy generation 15% more efficient that would still require trillion-dollar investments to modify current energy generation plants using the new technology.

Who is Schmidt to say that the returns of using the total spend in the above-mentioned scenario wouldn’t be better used on investing into wind and solar?