Challenging the neutrality myth in climate science and activism

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Christel W. van Eck, Lydia Messling & Katharine Hayhoe: “The myth of a scientist as a purely rational thinker, a “brain in a jar” devoid of emotions and values, still exists in some scientific circles. However, philosophers of science have long shown that it is a fundamental misconception to believe that science can be entirely free of social, political, and ethical values, and function as a neutral entity. As Lynda Walsh explains compellingly in “Scientists as Prophets,” the question of how scientists ought to engage with society is a value judgement itself3. This is particularly true in complex crises like climate change where traditional democratic debate alone cannot ascertain the optimal course of action. Scientists often play a crucial role in such crises, not only through conducting rigorous research, but also through engaging in dialogue with society by framing their research in terms of societal values – which includes rejecting the notion of morally neutral engagement.

This school of thought was recently challenged in a comment in Nature Climate Action titled “The importance of distinguishing climate science from climate activism” In it, Ulf Büntgen, a Professor of Environmental Systems Analysis at Cambridge University, communicated his personal concerns about climate scientists engaging in activism. The comment sparked considerable debate on social media, particularly among climate scientists, many of whom reject the views presented by Büntgen.

We believe a response is necessary, as many of Büntgen’s assumptions are unnuanced or unjustified. It is difficult to provide a full critique when Büntgen has not clearly defined what he means by ‘climate activism’, ‘quasi-religious belief’, or ‘a priori interests’, nor explicit examples evidencing what sort of interaction he finds to be objectionable. However, whether scientists consider certain activities to be activism, and their opinions on colleagues who engage in such activities, along with the general public’s perception of these activities, has been the subject of multiple research studies. While the opinion of an individual scientist is interesting, we argue it is not representative of the broader community’s views nor does it reflect the efficacy of such actions. Furthermore, by making unilateral value-based judgements, we propose that Büntgen is engaging in precisely the activity he deprecates…(More)”

How to rebuild democracy to truly harness the power of the people

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Kyle Ellingson: “Many of us entered this so-called super-election year with a sense of foreboding. So far, not much has happened to allay those fears. Russia’s war on Ukraine is exacerbating a perception that democracy is threatened in Europe and beyond. In the US, Donald Trump, a presidential candidate with self-professed autocratic tendencies, has faced two assassination attempts. And more broadly, people seem to be losing faith in politics. “Most people from a diverse array of countries around the world lack confidence in the performance of their political institutions,” says a 2024 report by the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance.

On many objective measures, too, democracy isn’t functioning as it should. The systems we call democracies tend to favour the rich. Political violence is growing, as is legislative gridlock, and worldwide, elections are becoming less free and fair. Some 30 years after commentators crowed about the triumph of Western liberal democracy, their prediction seems further than ever from being realised. What happened?

According to Lex Paulson at the University Mohammed VI Polytechnic in Rabat, Morocco, we have lost sight of what democracy is. “We have made a terrible confusion between the system known as a republic – which relies on elections, parties and a permanent governing class – and the system known as a democracy, in which citizens directly participate in decisions and rotate power.” …(More)”.

Rethinking ‘Checks and Balances’ for the A.I. Age

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Steve Lohr: “A new project, orchestrated by Stanford University and published on Tuesday, is inspired by the Federalist Papers and contends that today is a broadly similar historical moment of economic and political upheaval that calls for a rethinking of society’s institutional arrangements.

In an introduction to its collection of 12 essays, called the Digitalist Papers, the editors overseeing the project, including Erik Brynjolfsson, director of the Stanford Digital Economy Lab, and Condoleezza Rice, secretary of state in the George W. Bush administration and director of the Hoover Institution, identify their overarching concern.

“A powerful new technology, artificial intelligence,” they write, “explodes onto the scene and threatens to transform, for better or worse, all legacy social institutions.”

The most common theme in the diverse collection of essays: Citizens need to be more involved in determining how to regulate and incorporate A.I. into their lives. “To build A.I. for the people, with the people,” as one essay summed it up.

The project is being published as the technology is racing ahead. A.I. enthusiasts see a future of higher economic growth, increased prosperity and a faster pace of scientific discovery. But the technology is also raising fears of a dystopian alternative — A.I. chatbots and automated software not only replacing millions of workers, but also generating limitless misinformation and worsening political polarization. How to govern and guide A.I. in the public interest remains an open question…(More)”.

The satellite spectrum battle that could shape the new space economy

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Peggy Hollinger and Yasemin Craggs: “In early August, when corporate activity was in a summer lull, Elon Musk’s SpaceX quietly opened up a new front in a global battle over a scarce and precious resource: radio spectrum.

Its target was an obscure international regulation governing the way spectrum, the invisible highway of electromagnetic waves that enables all wireless technology, is shared by satellite operators in different orbits. And the chosen weapon was the US regulator, the Federal Communications Commission. 

On August 9, SpaceX petitioned the FCC to loosen globally agreed power limits on transmissions from operators like itself in low Earth orbit, the region of space up to 2,000km above the planet’s surface set to be a pivotal arena in the future of communication, transportation and defence.

The so-called equivalent power flux density rules were set more than 20 years ago to ensure signals from low Earth orbit did not interfere with those from systems in higher geostationary, or fixed, orbit.

SpaceX, which owns the world’s fastest-growing satellite broadband network, Starlink, told the regulator that these “antiquated power restrictions” were unfit for “the modern space age”. It went on to charge that the international process governing the rules had been hijacked by an alliance between the operators of older, geostationary systems and “America’s staunchest adversaries”. 

At stake was “US global competitiveness in the new space economy” and the future of satellite communication, it said. 

SpaceX’s broadside was the second attempt in less than a year to win a revision of these highly technical rules. Nine months ago at the World Radiocommunication Conference, where regulations governing spectrum use are decided, SpaceX and Project Kuiper — Amazon’s attempt to build a rival to Musk’s system — lost an initial attempt to win global support for a change to the power restrictions. 

Graphic explaining how radio interference can affect satellites

Although many in the industry believe a revision is long overdue, the discussions were tense and divisive, according to participants.

On one side were the upstart tech companies whose low Earth orbit satellite networks are threatening the business models of longer-established competitors with high-speed, low-latency broadband services…(More)”.

Crowdfunding Education

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Victoria Goldiee: “Nigeria’s education system has declined due to inadequate funding and facilities, low admission rates, and a nationwide shortage of qualified teachers. Consequently, receiving a quality education has become a privilege only accessible to families with financial means. According to research by the Nigeria Education and Training Services Industry, 49 percent of Nigeria’s youth enter into trade apprenticeships or expatriate to pursue a better education. In fact, Nigeria has the highest percentage of its students overseas of any African nation.

In February 2016, social entrepreneur Bola Lawal turned to crowdfunding to make educational opportunities accessible to Nigerians. He founded ScholarX as the vehicle to realize this mission through taking advantage of the largely untapped market of unclaimed scholarships, educational grants, and philanthropic donations for African students. The X in ScholarX represents the missing value and recognition that Nigerian youth deserve for their dedication to academic achievement.

“The idea for ScholarX came from the conversation with my friends on our shared experiences,” Lawal recounts, “because I also had difficulty paying for school like millions of Nigerians.” He adds that he was “even suspended from school because” of his inability to pay the tuition fee.

Like Lawal, more than 100,000 Nigerian students overseas rely on scholarships, many of which are backed either by oil and gas companies that aim to recruit students into the industry or by federal government grants for local students. But in recent years, these scholarships have been scaled back or scrapped altogether because of the ongoing economic crisis and recession. The crash of the foreign exchange rate of Nigeria’s currency, the naira, has further threatened the prospects of Nigeria’s overseas students, leaving many unable to pay tuition…(More)”

China’s Hinterland Becomes A Critical Datascape

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Gary Zhexi Zhang: “In 2014, the southwestern province of Guizhou, a historically poor and mountainous area, beat out rival regions to become China’s first “Big Data Comprehensive Pilot Zone,” as part of a national directive to develop the region — which is otherwise best known as an exporter of tobacco, spirits and coal — into the infrastructural backbone of the country’s data industry. Since then, vast investment has poured into the province. Thousands of miles of highway and high-speed rail tunnel through the mountains. Driving through the province can feel vertiginous: Of the hundred highest bridges in the world, almost half are in Guizhou, and almost all were built in the last 15 years.

In 2015, Xi Jinping visited Gui’an New Area to inaugurate the province’s transformation into China’s “Big Data Valley,” exemplifying the central government’s goal to establish “high quality social and economic development,” ubiquitously advertised through socialist-style slogans plastered on highways and city streets…(More)”.

China’s biggest AI model is challenging American dominance

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Sam Eifling: “So far, the AI boom has been dominated by U.S. companies like OpenAI, Google, and Meta. In recent months, though, a new name has been popping up on benchmarking lists: Alibaba’s Qwen. Over the past few months, variants of Qwen have been topping the leaderboards of sites that measure an AI model’s performance.

“Qwen 72B is the king, and Chinese models are dominating,” Hugging Face CEO Clem Delangue wrote in June, after a Qwen-based model first rose to the top of his company’s Open LLM leaderboard.

It’s a surprising turnaround for the Chinese AI industry, which many thought was doomed by semiconductor restrictions and limitations on computing power. Qwen’s success is showing that China can compete with the world’s best AI models — raising serious questions about how long U.S. companies will continue to dominate the field. And by focusing on capabilities like language support, Qwen is breaking new ground on what an AI model can do — and who it can be built for.

Those capabilities have come as a surprise to many developers, even those working on Qwen itself. AI developer David Ng used Qwen to build the model that topped the Open LLM leaderboard. He’s built models using Meta and Google’s technology also but says Alibaba’s gave him the best results. “For some reason, it works best on the Chinese models,” he told Rest of World. “I don’t know why.”..(More)”

Why is it so hard to establish the death toll?

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Smriti Mallapaty: “Given the uncertainty of counting fatalities during conflict, researchers use other ways to estimate mortality.

One common method uses household surveys, says Debarati Guha-Sapir, an epidemiologist who specializes in civil conflicts at the University of Louvain in Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, and is based in Brussels. A sample of the population is asked how many people in their family have died over a specific period of time. This approach has been used to count deaths in conflicts elsewhere, including in Iraq3 and the Central African Republic4.

The situation in Gaza right now is not conducive to a survey, given the level of movement and displacement, say researchers. And it would be irresponsible to send data collectors into an active conflict and put their lives at risk, says Ball.

There are also ethical concerns around intruding on people who lack basic access to food and medication to ask about deaths in their families, says Jamaluddine. Surveys will have to wait for the conflict to end and movement to ease, say researchers.

Another approach is to compare multiple independent lists of fatalities and calculate mortality from the overlap between them. The Human Rights Data Analysis Group used this approach to estimate the number of people killed in Syria between 2011 and 2014. Jamaluddine hopes to use the ministry fatality data in conjunction with those posted on social media by several informal groups to estimate mortality in this way. But Guha-Sapir says this method relies on the population being stable and not moving around, which is often not the case in conflict-affected communities.

In addition to deaths immediately caused by the violence, some civilians die of the spread of infectious diseases, starvation or lack of access to health care. In February, Jamaluddine and her colleagues used modelling to make projections of excess deaths due to the war and found that, in a continued scenario of six months of escalated conflict, 68,650 people could die from traumatic injuries, 2,680 from non-communicable diseases such as cancer and 2,720 from infectious diseases — along with thousands more if an epidemic were to break out. On 30 July, the ministry declared a polio epidemic in Gaza after detecting the virus in sewage samples, and in mid-August it confirmed the first case of polio in 25 years, in a 10-month-old baby…

The longer the conflict continues, the harder it will be to get reliable estimates, because “reports by survivors get worse as time goes by”, says Jon Pedersen, a demographer at !Mikro in Oslo, who advises international agencies on mortality estimates…(More)”.

Germany’s botched data revamp leaves economists ‘flying blind’

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Article by Olaf Storbeck: “Germany’s statistical office has suspended some of its most important indicators after botching a data update, leaving citizens and economists in the dark at a time when the country is trying to boost flagging growth.

In a nation once famed for its punctuality and reliability, even its notoriously diligent beancounters have become part of a growing perception that “nothing works any more” as Germans moan about delayed trains, derelict roads and bridges, and widespread staff shortages.

“There used to be certain aspects in life that you could just rely on, and the fact that official statistics are published on time was one of them — not any more,” said Jörg Krämer, chief economist of Commerzbank, adding that the suspended data was also closely watched by monetary policymakers and investors.

Since May the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis) has not updated time-series data for retail and wholesale sales, as well as revenue from the services sector, hospitality, car dealers and garages.

These indicators, which are published monthly and adjusted for seasonal changes, are a key component of GDP and crucial for assessing consumer demand in the EU’s largest economy.

Private consumption accounted for 52.7 per cent of German output in 2023. Retail sales made up 28 per cent of private consumption but shrank 3.4 per cent from a year earlier. Overall GDP declined 0.3 per cent last year, Destatis said.

The Wiesbaden-based authority, which was established in 1948, said the outages had been caused by IT issues and a complex methodological change in EU business statistics in a bid to boost accuracy.

Destatis has been working on the project since the EU directive in 2019, and the deadline for implementing the changes is December.

But a series of glitches, data issues and IT delays meant Destatis has been unable to publish retail sales and other services data for four months.

A key complication is that the revenues of companies that operate in both services and manufacturing will now be reported differently for each sector. In the past, all revenue was treated as either services or manufacturing, depending on which unit was bigger…(More)”

Problem-solving matter

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by David C Krakauer and Chris Kempes: “What makes computation possible? Seeking answers to that question, a hardware engineer from another planet travels to Earth in the 21st century. After descending through our atmosphere, this extraterrestrial explorer heads to one of our planet’s largest data centres, the China Telecom-Inner Mongolia Information Park, 470 kilometres west of Beijing. But computation is not easily discovered in this sprawling mini-city of server farms. Scanning the almost-uncountable transistors inside the Information Park, the visiting engineer might­ be excused for thinking that the answer to their question lies in the primary materials driving computational processes: silicon and metal oxides. After all, since the 1960s, most computational devices have relied on transistors and semiconductors made from these metalloid materials.

If the off-world engineer had visited Earth several decades earlier, before the arrival of metal-oxide transistors and silicon semiconductors, they might have found entirely different answers to their question. In the 1940s, before silicon semiconductors, computation might appear as a property of thermionic valves made from tungsten, molybdenum, quartz and silica – the most important materials used in vacuum tube computers.

And visiting a century earlier, long before the age of modern computing, an alien observer might come to even stranger conclusions. If they had arrived in 1804, the year the Jacquard loom was patented, they might have concluded that early forms of computation emerged from the plant matter and insect excreta used to make the wooden frames, punch cards and silk threads involved in fabric-weaving looms, the analogue precursors to modern programmable machines.

But if the visiting engineer did come to these conclusions, they would be wrong. Computation does not emerge from silicon, tungsten, insect excreta or other materials. It emerges from procedures of reason or logic.

This speculative tale is not only about the struggles of an off-world engineer. It is also an analogy for humanity’s attempts to answer one of our most difficult problems: life. For, just as an alien engineer would struggle to understand computation through materials, so it is with humans studying our distant origins…(More)”.