Skip to main content

Home/ History Readings/ Contents contributed and discussions participated by Javier E

Contents contributed and discussions participated by Javier E

Javier E

Opinion | 'If Germany Can Do It, Why Can't We?' - The New York Times - 0 views

  • The mass migration of people seeking refuge from war and poverty in prosperous democracies has become a major challenge of the 21st century. While it has posed differing and often real problems in different parts of North America and Europe, a common repercussion has been the rise of far-right movements, which feed popular — and often misguided — fears of invading alien tribes stealing jobs and benefits, spreading terrorism and crime and diluting national cultures and identities.
  • Germany, Europe’s economic powerhouse and a state with generous social services, has been a prime destination for refugees. Their number reached a record 3.48 million refugees and others fleeing conflict, including Ukrainians, as of the end of June, by far the most of any European state.
  • The public has reacted accordingly. A recent poll in Germany found that 44 percent of respondents said migration and refugees are the country’s most pressing problem, and about 77 percent said Germany needed a change in its policies.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • One consequence has been the rapid rise, after Ms. Merkel flung open the borders, of Alternative for Germany (AfD), a far-right party that has morphed into a rabidly anti-immigration and anti-Muslim party that the German intelligence service has classified as “suspected extremist.” Once a marginal political player, AfD came in first and second, respectively, in state elections in the eastern states of Thuringia and Saxony.
  • The Social Democrats (SPD) did well in recent elections in Brandenburg, but the victory was tenuous. It’s estimated the AfD came in second by a scant percentage point or two, and exit polls indicated that three-quarters of those who voted for the Social Democrats did so only to block the AfD.
  • There were few initial indications of how well the border measures were working, but the effect was probably not great. Germany’s western borders have been open for decades in the Schengen border-free zone in western Europe, and countless highways and byways freely crisscross state boundaries.
  • Austria has already angrily declared that it would not accept anyone rejected by Germany, while Geert Wilders, whose AfD-like anti-immigration party won the largest share of seats in Dutch elections last year, asked: “If Germany can do it, why can’t we?
  • what bugs Germany’s neighbors more these days is what they see as a big, powerful and overbearing neighbor paying ever less heed to the high-minded principles of European solidarity, especially on an issue as intractable and Europe-wide as migration.
  • “It’s perceived as German arrogance when Germany takes unilateral decisions on migration at the expense of its neighbors without coordinating the action with them.”
  • Critics cite Germany’s attitude following the 2008 economic crisis, when Berlin insisted on imposing onerous measures on indebted countries, especially Greece. Germany was also criticized for its unilateral decision to close all its nuclear power plants following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, a decision that set back the European drive to cleaner energy and led to greater German dependence on Russian gas.
  • Germany is, in fact, in the driver’s seat, especially since the exit of Britain from the E.U. and the decline of France’s influence.
  • The problem across Europe is that while uncontrolled migration creates political headaches, there is an acute need for skilled labor. That requires Europe-wide action, and despite various plans and proposals, the goal of reducing numbers remains elusive, and is likely to remain so as long as wealthy democracies like Germany remain a beacon of hope for suffering people.
Javier E

'Game Change' Knew Exactly What Was Coming - The Atlantic - 0 views

  • Game Change, pre-Trump, pre-pandemic, pre–January 6, unknowing as it obviously was of all the weirdness that was coming down the pike, saw quite clearly the cleavage in the American psyche out of which the future—our present!—would emerge.
  • before the pick is announced, brutal Steve Schmidt is struck by Palin’s equanimity. (She is gazing blissfully out the window.) “You seem totally unfazed by this,” he says. She turns to him: “It’s God’s plan.” And despite the slight glaze of fanaticism on Moore’s face as she says this, and the flash of panic on Harrelson’s, you’re kind of with her. Schmidt, about to ascend to 30,000 feet, doesn’t know that he’s in the hands of God. But Palin does!
  • McCain-Palin was a tragedy: A great statesman, desperate for the win, succumbed to vanity and made a pact with darkness. That’s one way to look at it.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • McCain-Palin was a comedy: A flailing candidate, wrecked on his own ego, made a ludicrous decision, and it all blew up in his face. That’s another way to look at it
  • Game Change sort of splits the difference: McCain-Palin was a movie, soapy but terribly consequential, and we still don’t know how it’s going to end.
Javier E

Opinion | This Is Why MAGA Loves JD Vance - The New York Times - 0 views

  • In choosing Vance and discarding Pence, Trump traded actual decency for a man who can simulate decency, and that’s exactly what Vance did on Tuesday night.
  • With those words and in that moment, Vance told MAGA: Don’t be fooled by my civility; when real power is on the line, I’m with Trump. He’s said so before. Just last month, he told the All-In podcast that he “would have asked the states to submit alternative slates of electors and let the country have the debate about what actually matters and what kind of an election that we had.”
  • There was nothing peaceful about the transfer of power from Trump to Joe Biden. Even the relative calm of Inauguration Day (which Trump skipped) was guaranteed only by a troop deployment that made any substantial disruption impossible.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • But he couldn’t keep it together for the entire evening. At the very end, the mask slipped. When pressed to say whether Trump lost in 2020, Vance said, “Obviously, Donald Trump and I think that there were problems in 2020,” and he had the gall to say, “It’s really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on Jan. 20, as we have done for 250 years in this country.”
  • No one should underestimate the importance of that moment. Earlier in the debate, Vance explicitly backed away from his previous anti-abortion positions. If abortion is no longer sacred for Republicans, we know who is: Trump. Vance will compromise on abortion, but he won’t waver from the Big Lie.
  • Even so, vice-presidential debates can still be instructive. And on Tuesday night, voters learned exactly why MAGA loves Vance so much. He’s a talented communicator. He has a compelling life story. He can make the ideological and policy case for Republican populism better than any other politician in America. And he’s no Mike Pence: He would wreck the Republic for Donald Trump.
Javier E

Silent Solar - by Bill McKibben - The Crucial Years - 0 views

  • Solar panels have, over the last months, suddenly gotten so cheap that they’re now appearing in massive numbers across much of the developing world. Without waiting for what are often moribund utilities to do the job, business and home owners are getting on with electrifying their lives, and doing it cleanly.
  • Pakistan, where power prices in the wake of Putin’s Ukraine invasion have soared so dramatically that sales of electricity have gone down ten percent in the last two years. That should cripple a country—”yet somehow it’s economy grew by two percent anyway.”
  • what was happening? Basically, Pakistanis were buying huge quantities of very cheap Chinese solar panels and putting them up themselves. Pakistan, they reported, “has become the third-largest importer of Chinese solar modules, acquiring a staggering 13GW in the first half of this year alone.” This is particularly astonishing because the country’s entire official electricity generating capacity is only 46 GW.
  • ...21 more annotations...
  • in just six months, Pakistan imported solar capacity equivalent to 30% of its total electricity generation capacity - an absolutely staggering amount.
  • Energy analyst Dave Jones has gone to great lengths to track this spread on Google maps, finding building after building across the country with big new solar arrays on the roof.
  • “In Namibia we uncovered they have about 70 megawatts of distributed generation—that’s rooftop solar pv that’s about 11 percent of Namibia’s installed capacity
  • by the end of the year, Pakistan’s distributed solar system could be nearing half the capacity of its entire grid! This isn’t just growth; it’s a silent revolution in energy production.
  • reports something similar happening in country after country—Zimbabwe, Eswatini, Lesotho, Madagascar, on and on.
  • This won’t just transform the climate, it will transform lives.
  • South Africa is the biggest market, and it has five gigawatts of distributed solar—about 9 percent of South Africa’s installed capacity.”
  • “You will not see these numbers anywhere,” he said. “They’re not reported in national plans, not anywhere in continental statistics. No one knows about them. It’s only when you speak to the utilities,” and even they know mostly about the larger installations—there are doubtless far more hut-scale systems across Africa.
  • People are driven by the high cost of electricity, but also by its unreliability—in much of the continent “load-shedding” is endemic, with diesel generators roaring on to compensate, at least at businesses solvent enough to afford it
  • For middle-class Pakistanis, they can pay off the investment in a few years selling back power to the grid; in poor areas, things like tube wells for irrigation are now increasingly run on solar. This means not just a decline in natural gas use for centralized generation; it also means many noisy, dirty and expensive diesel generators that used to provide backup power are being turned off
  • All this, he points out, is happening without any help from governments, and except for South Africa without financing from banks, who haven’t yet learned how to evaluate the credit ris
  • many nations probably won’t need the big and expensive increases in bulk electric supply they’ve been predicting. And Nana and his colleagues are working hard to figure out how to make the most of this—how to turn solar pv into real economic assets for entire communities, through practices like net metering.
  • The African market is a huge market for some of the Chinese manufacturers, so we have availability—huge availability. The market is flooded with panels from China.”
  • IEA said this weak that oil demand around the world is softening because of “surging” sales of electric vehicles.
  • In China, demand for gasoline will peak this year or next and then decline sharply.
  • California—arguably earth’s most modern economy—has managed to weather its worst heat waves ever without blackouts this simmer thanks to ever-growing batteries of…batteries
  • “It is increasingly challenging to address the nuances of complex topics like the energy transition because of the growing segregation into ideological camps, which in turn reduces the space for honest practical dialogue,” said Adam Matthews, chief responsible investment officer at the Church of England Pensions Board, which manages over £3 billion ($3.9 billion) of assets.
  • Alastair Marsh reports that some of the big financial houses are just plain abandoning their ballyhooed climate targets.
  • A recent Bloomberg Intelligence analysis said most US companies have “significantly scaled back” discussions of ESG and similar topics on quarterly earnings calls. And for those whose goals appear increasingly out of reach, the temptation to keep quiet is even greater.
  • +The oft-strained relationship between labor and environmentalists took a big step forward last week, when the annual convention of the International Association of Machinists adopted an important series of new pledges
  • After considering new findings, members passed a resolution to include the concept of “Just Transition.” This concept asserts that workers displaced from jobs by climate change should receive supplemental income, insurance, and pension benefits. It aims to address and correct the inequities faced by people of color who have been systematically excluded from jobs in the energy sect
Javier E

(1) Donald Trump Is Not Your Nutrition God - by Joe Perticone - 0 views

  • Right-wing health obsession comes in many forms. Some men—and it is overwhelmingly men—will evangelize their online followers about the purported benefits of eating only red meat, while other men thump the tub about opposing vaccines. Others proclaim the hazards of seed oils—that is, oils derived from pressed seeds like safflower and rapeseed. 
  • Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance has copped to being a seed oils avoider who relies instead on ghee
  • The broadly conspiracist view that Big Government and Big Agriculture are colluding to poison American citizens is increasingly common among Trump’s highest-profile allies.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Trump, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., declared that “we are just poisoning the poor citizens” by not including enough vegetables or healthy foods in school lunch programs. Days later, Kennedy appeared on Fox News to rail against seed oils, which he said are “associated with autoimmune injuries and ADHD,” not to mention “depression.” He added:
  • Kennedy’s insinuation that seed oils cause ADHD, which went unchallenged by the Fox host, is false. The National Institutes of Health actually found in a 2022 study that an “increased dietary intake of polyphenols (some seed oils contain polyphenols) is associated with a lower risk of ADHD in preschool and school children.”
  • During his administration, the federal government overhauled nutritional standards to strip school lunch programs of fruit and vegetables (worsening the very lack Kennedy decried for “poisoning the poor citizens”). The Trump administration also significantly increased the agricultural subsidies Kennedy described as one of the country’s besetting forms of corruption while simultaneously reducing the FDA’s role in policing food safety.
  • In the pre-Trump era, Republicans ridiculed Michelle Obama’s school lunch program, which Trump immediately rolled back upon entering the White House. Now many of them are criticizing the poor state of school lunches, but without having the policy chops to offer a better health and nutrition program. Instead, we’re left with a constant stream of conspiracies that flow from the feverish mouths of health cranks.
Javier E

Stretchy dairy cheese now possible without cows, company says | Food | The Guardian - 0 views

  • DairyX’s approach is a third route – precision fermentation. It is now scaling up its operation and aims to seek the regulatory approval needed for consumers to buy the product in 2027. If successful, the caseins could be used by cheese and yoghurt companies as a drop-in replacement for dairy milk, without changes to equipment or ingredients.
  • Other companies developing fermented caseins include New Culture in the US, which is focusing on mozzarella, and Australia’s Eden Brew, targeting cow-free milk, as well as All G Foods, Fooditive and Standing Ovation.
  • “People have been trying to take the cow out of making dairy since the late 1970s,” said Dr Arik Ryvkin, DairyX founder and chief executive. Early efforts used plant protein but about a decade ago biotechnology developments opened a new path, pioneered by the company Perfect Day, he said. “We now bring the last step in that line of evolution … helping dairy companies make the exact products consumers desire while helping cows live happier lives.”
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • Ryvkin previously followed a vegan diet for 10 years, but became frustrated at being unable to include good cheese in what he ate: “So I slipped, and then decided to solve the problem for everyone.”
  • Many existing plant-based dairy products use additives, such as stabilisers, emulsifiers and thickeners, but still do not fully replicate the stretchiness and creaminess of regular dairy products. DairyX used engineered yeast strains to produce casein that is genetically identical to dairy proteins. But for these proteins to self-assemble into the tiny balls – called micelles – they also had to perfect the addition of other attached molecules which determine the properties of the protein
  • Dr Stella Child, at the Good Food Institute Europe, which supports alternative protein development, said: “Producing caseins that can self-assemble into micelles – while not the only method of developing these ‘building blocks of dairy’ – could help to bring affordable and attractive products to the market sooner by reducing production costs and eliminating the need for additives.”
  • The scientists tested and refined their research by coagulating the proteins in the same way as when making cheese. They have yet to taste the product, as this requires regulatory approval. Galit Kuznets, at DairyX, said. “Our casein also eliminates the need for hormones and antibiotics [used in cows] on dairy farms.”
  • The company is using evolutionary techniques to select for the yeast strains that produce the largest amount of proteins, aiming to make the product the same price as dairy casein. Price parity and taste are the key to future success, said Ryvkin.
  • Preliminary analysis indicates that climate-heating greenhouse gases from the production of DairyX’s fermented casein are 90% lower than for regular dairy if the leftover yeast mass is reused, potentially as food ingredients, or 50% lower if not. All precision fermentation products require far less land and water than their animal counterparts.
  • Other approaches to cow-free dairy proteins are being taken by companies such as Israel’s NewMoo, which is growing casein proteins in plant seeds, and New Zealand’s Daisy Lab, which is making “all yeast, no beast” whey powder.
Javier E

An Evangelical Climate Scientist Wonders What Went Wrong - The New York Times - 0 views

  • Mark Noll is a historian at Notre Dame. He wrote a book in 1994 called “The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind.” In it he tracked how the political evolution of the United States directly related to how people viewed religion from an increasingly nationalistic and individualistic perspective, an increasing rejection of authority. Noll’s book, even though it was written so long ago, shows how the land had already been cleared, tilled and sowed for when the Moral Majority came along in the 1980s. They took advantage of those fertile fields to deliberately politicize religion in America. They couldn’t have succeeded if it wasn’t for this trend over the last hundred years to conflate individualism and American culture with theology.
  • churches are not catechizing.33 Jacobs, in Wehner’s article, “The Evangelical Church Is Breaking Apart,” which was published in late October: “People come to believe what they are most thoroughly and intensively catechized to believe, and that catechesis comes not from the churches but from the media they consume. . . . The churches have barely better than a snowball’s chance in hell of shaping most people’s lives.” People might show up for one hour on a Sunday morning, and half of that is singing, and there’s some entertaining talking because they want to keep people coming in the door because that’s how you fill the coffers. Churches are not teaching and people are spending hours and hours on cultural and political content and that is what is informing our beliefs.
  • the biggest problem is not the people who aren’t on board; the biggest problem is the people who don’t know what to do.44 According to research conducted by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, 26 percent of people believe climate change is an urgent problem but are unsure what they can do to solve it. And if we don’t know what to do, we do nothing. Just start by doing something, anything, and then talk about it!
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • Talk about how it matters to your family, your home, your city, the activity that you love. Connect the dots to your heart so you don’t see climate change as a separate bucket but rather as a hole in the bucket of every other thing that you already care about in your life.
  • Talk about what positive, constructive actions look like that you can engage in individually, as a family, as an organization, a school, a place of work
  • Even if we live in a progressive bubble, most of the people are not activated, and we activate them by using our voice.
  • we’re so individualistic that it affects our perspective on climate solutions. We think it’s all about us and then we’re racked with guilt over the bottle that we didn’t recycle or the hamburger that we ate.
  • I get discouraged and depressed reading about that stuff. That’s why we need to make people aware that, yes, our personal actions do matter but they matter because they can change others.
  • When we take that extra step of saying: “Hey, I tried a Beyond Meat burger, and it was delicious. Let’s go to this place for lunch and give it a try together.” Or: “I reduced my food waste. Have we thought about composting in our cafeteria?” If you take those kinds of actions, all of a sudden you’ve got 30, 50, 100 more people whose hands are on the boulder beside you, and you realize, hey, we might have a shot at fixing this.
  • We are primarily emotional, and emotions are engaged deeply with climate change because it brings up the most profound sense of loss: People on the right, for example, deeply fear losing their liberties because of climate solutions.
  • So what we need to do is to show everyone how climate solutions are not only not incompatible with who they are but help more genuinely express who they are and what we care about; make us an even more-genuine advocate for national security, an even stronger supporter of the free market, an even more independent person or, in my case, a more genuine expression of my faith.
  • the dean came and sat down and said, “I used to be an evangelical.” So I asked the obvious question: “Why are you no longer?” He said: “It wasn’t because I doubted the existence of God. It’s because I couldn’t see any evidence of God working in people. I saw person after person who claimed that they took the Bible seriously, they were Christian” — I’m paraphrasing — “and all I saw was the opposite of love. It got to the point where I couldn’t see any evidence of God working in people.” That’s what I’ve struggled with, too. What breaks my heart is the attacks I get from people who identify as Christians.
Javier E

Exclusive | Americans Are More Reliant Than Ever on Government Aid - WSJ - 0 views

  • Americans’ reliance on government support is soaring, driven by programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
  • That support is especially critical in economically stressed communities throughout the U.S., many of which lean Republican and are concentrated in swing states crucial in deciding the presidential election. Neither party has much incentive to dial back the spending.
  • As America’s population aged, more counties came to count on this government backing for a significant share of their total income. That is defined by EIG, the think tank, as those in which government safety-net and social programs account for 25% or more of personal income in the county.By 2000, roughly one in 10 counties drew a significant share of their income from federal and state safety-net and social programs.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • By 2022, 53%—more than half of all U.S counties—drew at least a quarter of their income from government aid.
  • The big reasons for this dramatic growth: A much larger share of Americans are seniors, and their healthcare costs have risen. At the same time, many communities have suffered from economic decline because of challenges including the loss of manufacturing,
  • For its analysis of government spending, EIG used a government definition of income that includes spending on programs that Americans pay into, such as Medicare and Social Security. Another major government health program—Medicaid—is also counted.
  • About 70% of counties in Michigan, Georgia and North Carolina are significantly reliant on the government income. So are nearly 60% of counties in Pennsylvania. In Arizona, 13 of the 15 counties are heavily reliant on safety-net income.
  • Many of the counties that rely heavily on government safety-net and social-program money have this in common: They are clustered in the battleground states that will decide the presidential election.
  • Though counties that rely significantly on government spending tend to be small, they are still home to nearly 22% of the U.S. population.
  • Measured another way, more than 44% of Michiganders live in counties that are significantly reliant on the government programs. In Arizona, Pennsylvania and North Carolina, more than a third of the populations live in such counties.
  • About 14% of people there were born in another country, roughly matching the U.S. level. EIG’s data shows that counties with more immigrants tend to rely less on the government programs EIG tallied, while counties with small foreign-born populations tend to rely more on this government spending.
  • vernment spending to help address poverty also contributes to the trend of increasing reliance, especially during economic downturns. But poverty in the U.S. has been relatively stable while the population grows older. Meanwhile, the costs of an aging population are rising. 
Javier E

China's Stimulus Measures Are Part of an Economic Bazooka, Assembled Piece by Piece - WSJ - 0 views

  • China’s leaders have been drip-feeding support into their ailing economy for three years. This week, they jacked up the dose.
  • A major injection of stimulus from the central bank—and promises of more government support from the Communist Party’s top decision-making body—mark the beginning of a more muscular approach from Beijing to righting the economy after months of hesitancy,
  • It electrified the markets, sparking a seventh straight day of gains on Shanghai’s stock market that has pushed the benchmark index up 11%—its biggest such run in four years—and into positive territory for the year.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • “China is in a bit of a systemic pickle,” said George Magnus, a research associate at the University of Oxford’s China Center and a former chief economist for UBS. “It is not because interest rates are too high, or mortgage rates are too high, or down payments on second homes are too high,” he said, referring to moves by the central bank to lower all three this week. “That is not the reason China is in this economic hiatus.”
  • Meantime, the U.S. economy has notched year after year of robust growth despite painful inflation and a sharp rise in interest rates.“It’s the U.S. economy that is leading the way now. China is lagging, it’s struggling,”
  • Chinese officials set a growth target of around 5% for this year. But as the months passed, that goal began to look increasingly out of reach
  • At the same time, the economy has grown increasingly lopsided, with its factories benefiting from buoyant exports and a gusher of government-directed investment even as consumer spending languishes.
  • In China, the consumer gloom can be seen at dairy farms, restaurant chains and shopping malls. Temu owner PDD Holdings in August sought to tamp down shareholders’ expectations of never-ending profit growth, saying more upmarket rivals were increasingly eating into its market by luring bargain-conscious Chinese shoppers with cut-price deals. 
  • Many economists say giving consumption a greater role in China’s investment-heavy economy would put it on a more sustainable growth path. Doing so would require big economic reforms, such as expanding healthcare and the social safety net, which are politically unpalatable to Chinese leaders like Xi, who finds Western-style “welfarism” anathema to his goal of turning China into a technological colossus that can stand up to the U.S.
  • Even boosting consumption in the short term has proven difficult, given Chinese households’ high propensity to save rather than spend. Uncertainty over jobs and earnings has heightened that impulse.
Javier E

How neo-Nazis are using AI to translate Hitler for a new generation - The Washington Post - 0 views

  • In audio and video clips that have reached millions of viewers over the past month on TikTok, X, Instagram and YouTube, the führer’s AI-cloned voice quavers and crescendos as he delivers English-language versions of some of his most notorious addresses, including his 1939 Reichstag speech predicting the end of Jewish people in Europe. Some seeking to spread the practice of making Hitler videos have hosted online trainings.
  • Extremists are using artificial intelligence to reanimate Adolf Hitler online for a new generation, recasting the Nazi German leader who orchestrated the Holocaust as a “misunderstood” figure whose antisemitic and anti-immigrant messages are freshly resonant in politics today.
  • The posts, which make use of cheap and popular AI voice-cloning tools, have drawn praise in comments on X and TikTok, such as “I miss you uncle A,” “He was a hero,” and “Maybe he is NOT the villain.” On Telegram and the “dark web,” extremists brag that the AI-manipulated speeches offer an engaging and effortless way to repackage Hitler’s ideas to radicalize young people.
  • ...24 more annotations...
  • “This type of content is disseminating redpills at lightning speed to massive audiences,” the American Futurist, a website identifying as fascist, posted on its public Telegram channel on Sept. 17, using a phrase that describes dramatically reshaping someone’s worldview. “In terms of propaganda it’s unmatched.”
  • The propaganda — documented in videos, chat forum messages and screen recordings of neo-Nazi activity shared exclusively with The Washington Post by the nonprofit Institute for Strategic Dialogue and the SITE Intelligence Group — is helping to fuel a resurgence in online interest in Hitler on the American right, experts say
  • content glorifying, excusing or translating Hitler’s speeches into English has racked up some 25 million views across X, TikTok and Instagram since Aug. 13.
  • The videos are gaining traction as former president Donald Trump and his Republican running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, have advanced conspiracy theories popular among online neo-Nazi communities, including baseless claims that Haitian immigrants in Ohio are eating pets.
  • Experts say the latest generation of AI tools, which can conjure lifelike pictures, voices and videos in seconds, allow fringe groups to breathe fresh life into abhorred ideologies, presenting opportunities for radicalization — and moderation challenges for social media companies.
  • One user hosted a livestream on the video-sharing site Odysee last year teaching people to use an AI voice cloning tool from ElevenLabs and video software to make Hitler videos. In roughly five minutes, he created an AI voice clone of Hitler appearing to deliver a speech in English, railing about Jews profiting from a capitalist system.
  • The user, who uses the handle OMGITSFLOOD and is identified as a “prominent neo-Nazi content creator” by the SITE Intelligence Group, which tracks white supremacist and jihadist activity online, said on the livestream that Hitler is “one of the best f — king leaders that ever lived.” The user added that he hoped to inspire a future leader like Hitler out there who may be “voting for Trump” but “just hasn’t been pilled.”
  • Creating the video required only a few-second sample of Hitler’s speech taken from YouTube. Without AI, the spoofing would have demanded advanced programming capabilities. Some misinformation and hate speech experts say that the ease of AI is turbocharging the spread of antisemitic content online.
  • “Now it’s so much easier to pump this stuff out,” said Abbie Richards, a misinformation researcher at the left-leaning nonprofit watchdog Media Matters for America. “The more that you’re posting, the more likely the chances you have for this to reach way more eyes than it ever would.”
  • “These disguised Hitler AI videos ... grab users with a bit of curiosity and then get them to listen to a genocidal monster
  • On TikTok, X and Instagram, the AI-generated speeches of Hitler don’t often bear hallmarks of Nazi propaganda. A video posted on TikTok in September depicted a silhouette of a man who seemed to resemble Hitler, with the words: “Just listen.”
  • Over a slow instrumental beat, an AI-generated voice of Hitler speaks English in his hallmark cadence, reciting excerpts of his 1942 speech commemorating the Beer Hall Putsch, a failed Nazi coup in 1923 that vaulted Hitler to prominence. The video, which is no longer online, got more than 1 million views and 120,000 likes, according to Media Matters for America.
  • “There’s a big difference between reading a German translation of Hitler speeches versus hearing him say it in a very emotive way in English,” she said.
  • Frances-Wright compared them with videos that went viral on TikTok last year in which content creators read excerpts of Osama bin Laden’s “Letter to America” manifesto, drawing replies from young Americans such as, “OMG, were we the baddies?”
  • On TikTok, users can easily share and build on the videos using the app’s “duet” features, which allow people to post the original video alongside video of themselves reacting to it, Richards said. Because the videos contain no overt terrorist or extremist logos, they are “extremely difficult” for tech companies to police, Katz added.
  • Jack Malon, a spokesperson at YouTube, said the site’s community guidelines “prohibit content that glorifies hateful ideologies such as Nazism, and we removed content flagged to us by The Washington Post.”
  • ISD’s report noted that pro-Hitler content in its dataset reached the largest audiences on X, where it was also most likely to be recommended via the site’s algorithm. X did not return a request for comment.
  • that doesn’t mean Nazism is on the decline, said Hannah Gais, a senior research analyst at the center. Right-wing extremists are turning to online forums, rather than official groups, to organize and generate content, using mainstream social media platforms to reach a wider audience and recruit new adherents.
  • The number of active neo-Nazi groups in America has declined since 2017, according to annual reports by the nonprofit Southern Poverty Law Center, partly as a result of crackdowns by law enforcement following that year’s deadly “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville.
  • While it’s impossible to quantify the real-world impact of far-right online propaganda, Gais said, you can see evidence of its influence when prominent figures such as conservative pundit Tucker Carlson, billionaire Elon Musk and Trump adviser Stephen Miller espouse elements of the antisemitic “great replacement” conspiracy theory, or when mass shooters in Buffalo, El Paso and Christchurch, New Zealand, cite it as inspiration.
  • posts glorifying or defending Hitler surged on X this month after Carlson posted an interview with Holocaust revisionist Darryl Cooper, which Musk reposted and called “worth watching.” (Musk later deleted his post.)
  • the pro-Trump conspiracy theorist Dominick McGee posted to X an English-language AI audio recreation of Hitler’s 1939 Reichstag speech, which garnered 13,000 retweets, 56,000 likes and more than 10 million views, according to X’s metrics.
  • extremists are often among the first groups to exploit emerging technologies, which often allow them to maneuver barriers blocking such materials on established platforms.
  • “But in the broader scheme of politics, it can have a desensitizing or normalizing effect if people are encountering this content over and over again,” he said.
Javier E

I've found the cure for climate anxiety | The Spectator - 0 views

  • new documentary, Climate: The Movie, by the maverick filmmaker Martin Durkin, is becoming a phenomenon, though it’s received almost no publicity in the mainstream media. It rejects the idea that we’re in the midst of a ‘climate emergency’,
  • Climate: The Movie confronts this argument head on, not by disputing the 97 per cent figure, but by interviewing William Happer, a spry 84-year-old former physics professor at Princeton
  • One of the reasons it’s so hard to challenge the narrative about climate change is because it supposedly reflects the ‘settled’ scientific consensus. We’re told that 97 per cent of climate scientists agree that global warming – or ‘global boiling’, as it’s now called – is caused by humans burning fossil fuels and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • it has already racked up millions of views online and been translated into ten languages. I watched it on YouTube on Monday and can confirm it’s a dazzlingly entertaining film that distils the case against climate alarmism into a succinct 80 minutes.
  • ‘There’s this mischievous idea that’s promoted that scientific truth is determined by consensus,’ he tells Durkin. ‘In real science, there are always arguments, no science is ever settled. It is absurd when people say the science of climate is settled. There’s no such thing as settled science, especially when it comes to climate.’
  • Not so, says Steve Koonin, a former scientific adviser to President Obama and now a professor at NYU. The geological record shows that for the past 500 million years the Earth was considerably warmer than it is now. In fact, we’re still in the late Cenozoic ice age, according to Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace. (Yes, he’s now in the sceptic camp.) ‘We’re at the tail end of a 50 million-year cooling period and they’re saying it’s too hot?’ he asks.
  • Are you under the impression the Earth has never been hotter
  • the film features a cast of distinguished scientists, including the winner of the 2022 Nobel Prize for physics, who gleefully take on all the sacred cows of the environmental lobby
  • But surely there’s no disputing that CO2, a greenhouse gas, is responsible for the 1 degree uptick in average global temperatures since the beginning of the industrial revolution
  • Oh yes there is, says the Nobel Laureate John Clauser, who points out that if rising CO2 levels were the cause of the temperature increase, you’d expect the former to occur before the latter. But evidence from drilling into ancient ice cores reveals CO2 only increases after the temperature starts to rise, usually following a lag of 100 year
  • Levels of this trace gas are far lower today (about 423 parts per million) than they were 500 million years ago (7,000 parts per million), and if CO2 is causing global warming, then why has the temperature barely risen since we started pumping out CO2 on an industrial scale in the 1940s? ‘I assert that there is no connection whatsoever between CO2 and climate change,’ says Clauser
  • What about the increasing frequency of extreme weather events? Bunkum, says Koonin. There were more heatwaves in the US in the 1930s than there are today; the number of forest fires is going down; there’s been no increase in the frequency of hurricanes over the past 120 years – ‘Even the IPCC admits that,’ chuckles Happer – and no observable increase in drought
  • For good measure, the film points out that polar bear numbers are growing and the Great Barrier Reef is thriving.   
Javier E

Where Environmentalists Went Wrong - Yascha Mounk - 0 views

  • what is wrong with a particular kind of increasingly common environmental regulation: one that is short on impact but big on virtue signaling.
  • Some American states have banned cafés and restaurants from offering their customers single-use plastic straws.Many jurisdictions around the world now require grocery stores to charge their customers for plastic bags.The EU has phased out incandescent light bulbs.The EU has also banned plastic bottles with removable caps, leading to the introduction of bottles that don’t always properly close once they have been opened.Though not yet implemented, some prominent organizations and activists have called for gas stoves to be banned.
  • These seemingly disparate examples share an important commonality: They are a form of policy intervention that achieves small improvements for the environment at the cost of a salient deterioration in quality of life or a large loss of political goodwill. For that reason, each of these interventions is likely to backfire.
  • ...48 more annotations...
  • policy makers and environmentalists need to get smart about political capital: how to build it and, most importantly, how to avoid wasting it.
  • Environmentalist policies don’t just need to be well-intentioned or feel virtuous; they need to be effective in accomplishing their stated goals.
  • Cumulatively, they risk giving citizens the impression that those in charge care more about forcing them to change their lifestyle than about solving real problems
  • If we want to win the fight against climate change, we need to get serious about achieving the biggest possible environmental impact for the smallest possible price in quality of life and political goodwill
  • Low-impact policies that demand small, if frequent and highly salient, sacrifices feel virtuous. But they deplete a disproportionate amount of political capital.
  • It’s time for a new paradigm. Call it “effective environmentalism.”
  • This is driven by a deeper sense, widespread in the environmental movement, that the fight against climate change is coterminous with the fight to remake the world from scratch. To many, social ills like racism, sexism and even capitalism itself are facets of one interrelated system of oppression. A victory against any one facet requires a victory against all.
  • Naomi Klein’s bestselling This Changes Everything is a classic of the genre. Tellingly, the first change she admonishes her readers to make concerns their lifestyle: “For us high consumers,” she writes, preventing the dire future that awaits humanity requires “changing how we live.”
  • Even more tellingly, Klein maintains that making these changes will require nothing short of the abolition of capitalism. To her, the right way to understand this historical moment is as “a battle between capitalism and the planet.”
  • it turns out that you can’t scare and shame people into taking action on climate change. If anything, this political moment seems to be characterized by a mix of apathy and backlash. In the United States, a recent poll of young voters reveals that only 6 percent of them consider “environmental issues” their top priority, the same number who say their top priority is immigration (economic issues easily eclipse both).
  • As recently as four years ago, Germany’s Green Party was polling around 25 percent of the vote, and looked likely to lead a federal government for the first time in the country’s history. Now, its support is down to about ten percent, with the decline among young voters especially dramatic. Opinions about the party in the electorate give a clue about the source of its troubles:
  • In a recent exit poll conducted during the state election in Brandenburg, 71 percent of voters complained that the party “has insufficient concern with the economy and creating jobs.” 66 percent complained that the party “wants to tell us how to live.”
  • The environment, like most areas of public policy, is the realm of painful trade-offs. Efforts to fix the climate crisis will involve a significant degree of expense and inconvenience. For both moral and strategic reasons, the goal of environmental regulation should therefore be to accomplish important goals while minimizing these costs insofar as possible
  • effective environmentalism consists in actions or policies which maximize positive impact on the environment while minimizing both the price for humans’ quality of life and the depletion of a collective willingness to adopt other impactful measures.
  • most of the time, such a definition is less helpful than the spirit which animates it. And that spirit is best captured in a more informal register. So rather than focusing on the definition, effective environmentalists should evaluate any proposed action, policy or regulation by asking themselves three questions:
  • . How big a positive impact (if any) will the proposed action have?
  • In politics, it’s easy to obsess over whatever happens to be salient. If some question touches a cultural nerve, or has given rise to major political battles in the past, its stakes can come to seem existential—even if not much hinges on it in the real world. This is part of what makes it so tempting to obsess about such things as banning plastic straws or detachable bottle caps (which have little impact) rather than tax incentives or cap-and-trade schemes (which would have a vastly larger impact)
  • 2. To what extent will the proposed action lead to a deterioration in quality of life?
  • this also gives them reason to care about the negative consequences that environmental policies may have for human welfare. So the extent of the trade-off needs to be a key consideration. The bigger an adverse impact a particular policy has on people’s quality of life, the more skeptical we should be about implementing it.
  • For the most part, people who worry about climate change and other forms of environmental degradation are motivated by a concern about human welfare. They worry about the negative consequences that runaway climate change would have for humankind
  • 3. To what extent will the proposed action lead to backlash?
  • Political capital is limited. In most democracies, a clear majority of the population now cares about climate change to some extent. But this genuine concern competes with, and tends to be eclipsed by, voters’ concern about economic priorities like the availability of good jobs
  • This context makes it all the more important for voters to feel that governments and environmental groups are focusing on impactful steps that leave them in charge of decisions about their own lives; otherwise, support for any environmental policy is likely to polarize along partisan lines, or even to crater across the board. 
  • When I coined the term “effective environmentalism,” I was of course inspired by an earlier movement: “effective altruism.”
  • for all of the problems with effective altruism, the original insight on which it is built is hard to contest. People spend billions of dollars on charitable contributions every year. Much of that money goes to building new gyms at fancy universities or upgrading the local cat shelter. Wouldn’t it be better to direct donors’ altruistic instincts to more impactful endeavors, potentially saving the lives of thousands of people?
  • Something similar holds true for the environmental movement. Many activists are more focused on interventions that feel virtuous than on ones that will make a real difference. As a result, much of the movement has proven ineffective
  • Effective altruists pride themselves in adopting principles and mental heuristics that are supposed to help them assess what to do in a more rational way. These include not judging an idea based on who says it; reserving judgment about an idea until you’ve analyzed both its benefits and its costs; paying attention to the relative weight of different priorities; and being skeptical about forms of symbolic politics that don’t lead to real change
  • these norms make a lot of sense, and have relevance for environmentalists focused on having real impact.
  • So, to figure out what policies can make the biggest difference in the fight against climate change, and actually win the political capital to put these into practice, effective environmentalists should:
  • Assess Policies on the Basis of their Impact, not Their Perceived Purity:
  • Prioritize Actions that Solve the Biggest Problems:
  • It would be a mistake to subsume all environmental concerns to the fight against climate change. People have reasons to care about living in a clean environment or alleviating animal suffering even if it does not help to protect us from the threat posed by climate change
  • There are a variety of environmental goals, and it makes sense to recognize this plurality of goods. And yet, those who care about environmental goals need to have a clear sense of relative priorities. Some goals are more important than others
  • effective environmentalists should unflinchingly give precedence to the most important goals.
  • Be Willing to Build Cross-Ideological Coalitions:
  • Activists increasingly pride themselves in being “intersectional.” Since they believe that various forms of oppression intersect, people who want to participate in the fight against one form of injustice must also get on board with a set of progressive assumptions about how to combat other forms of perceived injustice
  • This can raise the entrance ticket for anyone who wants to get involved in fighting for an environmental cause; distract major environmental organizations from fighting for their stated goals; and make powerful players unwilling to forge tactical coalitions with partners whose broader worldview they disdai
  • Effective environmentalists should reject this purist instinct, making common cause with anyone who favors impactful action irrespective of the views they may hold about unrelated issues.
  • Put People in Charge of Their Own Lives:
  • Effective environmentalists should fight to transition as much of the economy as possible to forms of energy that do not emit carbon. This will require broad political support and, yes, real financial trade-offs
  • effective environmentalists should avoid overly intrusive regulations about how people then go about using that energy. If consumers are willing to pay an elevated price for the pleasure of sitting on an outside terrace in the late fall, it shouldn’t be for the government or for environmental activists to decide that a different use of energy is more morally righteous.
  • No-Bullshit Environmentalism
  • For the last decades, the environmentalist movement has tried its hand at fear-mongering.
  • this kind of rhetoric is factually misleading and politically disastrous.
  • This is why I favor a different approach. This approach centers the serious risks posed by climate change. But it also insists that humans are capable of meeting this moment with a mix of collective action and ingenuity.
  • With the right investments and regulations, we can reduce carbon emissions and mitigate the impact of a warming planet. And while this transition will exact considerable costs, it need not make us poor or require us to abstain from putting plentiful energy to its many miraculous uses.
  • at a start, the mix of policies advocated by effective environmentalists is likely to include: a commitment to creating energy abundance while transitioning towards a low-carbon economy; significant investment in both renewable and nuclear energy; regulatory action to raise the price of fossil-fuels; the adoption of genetically-modified crops that can withstand a changing climate; public and private investment to mitigate the effects of the warming that is already underway; the development and adoption of new technologies that can capture carbon; and a willingness to do serious research on speculative ideas, such as marine cloud brightening, that have the potential to avert worst-case outcomes in the case of a climate emergency. 
  • In life as in economics, trade-offs are real. But in the context of a growing economy, we should be able to bear those costs without suffering any overall reduction in human affluence or well-being. If we adopt the principles of effective environmentalism and take energetic action, our future shines bright.
Javier E

Opinion | Artificial Intelligence Requires Specific Safety Rules - The New York Times - 0 views

  • For about five years, OpenAI used a system of nondisclosure agreements to stifle public criticism from outgoing employees. Current and former OpenAI staffers were paranoid about talking to the press. In May, one departing employee refused to sign and went public in The Times. The company apologized and scrapped the agreements. Then the floodgates opened. Exiting employees began criticizing OpenAI’s safety practices, and a wave of articles emerged about its broken promises.
  • These stories came from people who were willing to risk their careers to inform the public. How many more are silenced because they’re too scared to speak out? Since existing whistle-blower protections typically cover only the reporting of illegal conduct, they are inadequate here. Artificial intelligence can be dangerous without being illegal
  • A.I. needs stronger protections — like those in place in parts of the public sector, finance and publicly traded companies — that prohibit retaliation and establish anonymous reporting channels.
  • ...19 more annotations...
  • The company’s chief executive was briefly fired after the nonprofit board lost trust in him.
  • OpenAI has spent the last year mired in scandal
  • Whistle-blowers alleged to the Securities and Exchange Commission that OpenAI’s nondisclosure agreements were illegal.
  • Safety researchers have left the company in droves
  • Now the firm is restructuring its core business as a for-profit, seemingly prompting the departure of more key leaders
  • On Friday, The Wall Street Journal reported that OpenAI rushed testing of a major model in May, attempting to undercut a rival’s publicity; after the release, employees found out the model exceeded the company’s standards for safety. (The company told The Journal the findings were the result of a methodological flaw.)
  • This behavior would be concerning in any industry, but according to OpenAI itself, A.I. poses unique risks. The leaders of the top A.I. firms and leading A.I. researchers have warned that the technology could lead to human extinction.
  • Since more comprehensive national A.I. regulations aren’t coming anytime soon, we need a narrow federal law allowing employees to disclose information to Congress if they reasonably believe that an A.I. model poses a significant safety risk
  • But McKinsey did not hold the majority of employees’ compensation hostage in exchange for signing lifetime nondisparagement agreements, as OpenAI did.
  • People reporting violations of the Atomic Energy Act have more robust whistle-blower protections than those in most fields, while those working in biological toxins for several government departments are protected by proactive, pro-reporting guidance. A.I. workers need similar rules.
  • Many companies maintain a culture of secrecy beyond what is healthy. I once worked at the consulting firm McKinsey on a team that advised Immigration and Customs Enforcement on implementing Donald Trump’s inhumane immigration policies. I was fearful of going public
  • Congress should establish a special inspector general to serve as a point of contact for these whistle-blowers. The law should mandate companies to notify staff about the channels available to them, which they can use without facing retaliation.
  • Earlier this month, OpenAI released a highly advanced new model. For the first time, experts concluded the model could aid in the construction of a bioweapon more effectively than internet research alone could. A third party hired by the company found that the new system demonstrated evidence of “power seeking” and “the basic capabilities needed to do simple in-context scheming
  • penAI decided to publish these results, but the company still chooses what information to share. It is possible the published information paints an incomplete picture of the model’s risks.
  • The A.I. safety researcher Todor Markov — who recently left OpenAI after nearly six years with the firm — suggested one hypothetical scenario. An A.I. company promises to test its models for dangerous capabilities, then cherry-picks results to make the model look safe. A concerned employee wants to notify someone, but doesn’t know who — and can’t point to a specific law being broken. The new model is released, and a terrorist uses it to construct a novel bioweapon. Multiple former OpenAI employees told me this scenario is plausible.
  • The United States’ current arrangement of managing A.I. risks through voluntary commitments places enormous trust in the companies developing this potentially dangerous technology. Unfortunately, the industry in general — and OpenAI in particular — has shown itself to be unworthy of that trust, time and again.
  • The fate of the first attempt to protect A.I. whistle-blowers rests with Governor Gavin Newsom of California. Mr. Newsom has hinted that he will veto a first-of-its-kind A.I. safety bill, called S.B. 1047, which mandates that the largest A.I. companies implement safeguards to prevent catastrophes, features whistle-blower protections, a rare point of agreement between the bill’s supporters and its critics
  • if those legislators are serious in their support for these protections, they should introduce a federal A.I. whistle-blower protection bill. They are well positioned to do so: The letter’s organizer, Representative Zoe Lofgren, is the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
  • Last month, a group of leading A.I. experts warned that as the technology rapidly progresses, “we face growing risks that A.I. could be misused to attack critical infrastructure, develop dangerous weapons or cause other forms of catastrophic harm.” These risks aren’t necessarily criminal, but they are real — and they could prove deadly. If that happens, employees at OpenAI and other companies will be the first to know. But will they tell us?
1 - 20 of 10252 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page