Fair comment. Can you go into more detail regarding why this classification matters?<p>I note you&#x27;ve refrained from taking a position regarding climate change - fair enough, it is a gnarly subject. I don&#x27;t think that it neatly falls into an adversarial or &quot;random process&quot; classification. I think it is reasonable to regard the consequences of climate change as both intentional, and highly political, with large doses of randomness and uncertainty.<p>Here&#x27;s a perhaps terrible analogy: for whatever reason, suppose people are willing to pay money to watch me shoot a gun into the air. Perhaps they find it entertaining. Occasionally bullets might fall in an unlucky place and kill someone or damage property. I certainly don&#x27;t intend anyone or anything in particular any harm, but hey, I&#x27;ve got to earn some money to pay the bills.