Climate Change’s Dynamic Duo? Putting a Price on Attention, Turning Boardrooms Into Bedrooms, An #AI Election, Plus More! #187
Grüezi! I’m Adrian Monck – welcome!
–––
1️⃣ Can Earth’s Most Powerful Duo Fix The Climate?
No, but they can make a start.
Imagine hosting the neighbours for drinks. You want to mention their noise. They want to talk about the fence.
In great power diplomacy some of the same rules apply: be cordial; be courteous; be careful.
Climate Change
Xi Jinping and Joe Biden lead two countries that account for 40% of the stuff that’s heating up our planet.
And they did produce an announcement about agreeing to do something to stop that. How far does it go? The latest scientific recommendations are here. But let’s try and put some numbers on it.
Getting rid of carbon power? 30-50%
The science goal is to get to near-zero power emissions by 2035, and announcement commits to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030, this commitment goes a third to a half of the way there.
Cutting other greenhouse gases? 50-70%
To limit warming to 1.5°C scientists suggest a 45% cut from 2010 levels by 2030. The US and China goals are half to three-quarters of what’s needed.
Carbon Removal Technologies? 5-10%
The world need billions of tons of CO2 removal capacity by 2050. Current commitments and technologies are in the very early stages of development, so the proposals are probably only 5-10% of what’s required.
TL;DR?
So this work has all been going in the climate diplomacy kitchen, and COP28 is coming up.
But what it shows is that these meetings can get things moving, because ultimately world-changing stuff like global warming gets wrapped up with other diplomatic stuff.
Rather like cable TV, you can’t choose the channels, just the bundle.
⏭ Here’s China’s summit readout. And here’s the US version.
–––
2️⃣ Why Not Paying For Paying Attention Works
Social media exploits a fundamental human need.
Economist Karthik Srinivasan looked at creators posting videos on platforms like TikTok.
He asked a very simple question.
His conclusion?
People prize attention ahead of cash and social media corporations have found a new way to deliver that and monetise it.
But those same corporations have a responsibility not to turn satisfying a need into exploiting a weakness.
Srinivasan makes two points:
“Given the meteoric rise of social media and its function as a forum that shapes our public discourse, getting the design of these online spaces right is important.
“The value that people place on attention provides a novel justification for the regulation of social media algorithms.”
⏭ Google and the Attention Economy Go to Court.
–––
3️⃣ Disinformation Warriors
That academic you follow could be a weapon of information war.
Meet Kathleen, an academic. She had over 2,000 friends on Facebook. And she had views!
Her Facebook posting journey looked like this:
Anti-Vaxxer during COVID;
Anti-Ukraine when Russia invaded;
Anti-Israel after October 7.
We know about Kathleen thanks to Alexandra Levine at Forbes who revealed that she is – surprise, surprise – a fake.
Who would bother to create such a fake account? What’s all the effort for?
If your mission is to poison the public sphere in the West, it makes perfect sense.
Kathleen’s account has all the hallmarks of being manufactured in Russia.
Disinformation researcher Paul Barrett spells out why:
“Russian accounts don’t necessarily try to change anyone’s mind; they try to heighten polarization by encouraging Americans to go for each other’s jugular.”
Freedom isn’t free. Not when it’s freedom for disinformation agents to operate for years in free societies.
Meanwhile, in Germany one of the country’s leading journalists is accused of taking €600k from Russia.
Hubert Seipel has made sympathetic documentaries on Vladimir Putin and Edward Snowden.
As a TV pundit he’s argued for a softer line on Russia. He says the €600k was “sponsorship.”
⏭ Forbes itself may – or may not – have been bought by a Russian oligarch.
–––
4️⃣ Wonder What An #AI Election Would Be Like?
Argentina has you covered with its AI presidential campaign.
The NYT has been looking at Argentina’s Presidential election showdown between centre-left Peronist Sergio Massa and right-wing populist Javier Milei:
“Argentina’s election has quickly become a testing ground for A.I. in campaigns, with the two candidates and their supporters employing the technology to doctor existing images and videos and create others from scratch.
“A.I. has made candidates say things they did not, and put them in famous movies and memes. It has created campaign posters, and triggered debates over whether real videos are actually real.”
⏭ Meta is banning political campaigns from using its generative AI tools.
–––
5️⃣ The City Where Nothing Goes to Waste
Germany’s Baltic Recycling Centre.
⏭ What Kiel can teach the world.
–––
6️⃣ Is A Boardroom Your Next Bedroom?
That’s the new American dream...
⏭ Helsinki in Finland is also looking at turning offices into homes.
–––
7️⃣ A Film To Watch This Weekend
Sorry, it’s not ‘The Marvels.’
Wars destroy people very quickly. That’s the news.
Wars also destroy people slowly. That’s movies.
Waltz With Bashir is an Israeli filmmaker’s attempt to come to terms with his military service which included – indirectly – the massacre of civilians.
It is a powerful and haunting film, beautifully scored by Max Richter.
⏭ Here’s writer Jonny Freedland’s 2008 review.
–––
If you enjoy this newsletter – please recommend it!
Best,
Adrian
