Quantcast
Channel: Fast Company
Viewing all 2811 articles
Browse latest View live

China invested over $100 billion overseas in cleantech since 2023

$
0
0

Chinese firms’ overseas investments in clean energy technology projects have exceeded $100 billion since the start of 2023 as they aim to avoid tariffs in the U.S. and elsewhere, Australian research group Climate Energy Finance (CEF) said on Wednesday.

China is the world’s biggest producer and exporter of products such as solar panels, lithium batteries and electric vehicles, with its investment, innovation and manufacturing capabilities leading the world by an “astonishing margin”, CEF said in a research report.

It is responsible for 32.5% of global electric vehicle exports, 24.1% of lithium batteries and 78.1% of solar panels, but its dominance has sparked concerns it is using its giant capacity surpluses to flood markets, drive down prices and undermine competitors.

The United States and Canada have already slapped 100% tariffs on China-made electric vehicles, and the European Union is set to vote on the issue this week. U.S. imports of Chinese solar panels and lithium batteries are also subject to tariffs of 50% and 25%, respectively.

“The investments from Chinese private companies are largely driven by the need to circumvent trade barriers,” said Xuyang Dong, CEF analyst and co-author of the report.

She said BYD, China’s leading electric vehicle manufacturer, is now building a $1 billion plant in Turkey to avoid a proposed EU tariff of nearly 40%, and battery maker CATL is planning factories in Germany, Hungary and elsewhere.

BYD and CATL did not immediately respond to emailed requests for comment on a Chinese national holiday.

According to a separate study published by Britain’s Grantham Institute this year, two thirds of China’s cleantech capacity would be “surplus to domestic requirements” and looking for export markets by 2030, with total solar production capacity set to reach 860 gigawatts.

China has bristled at the tariff increases, saying restrictions on cheap Chinese imports will hamper efforts to combat climate change.

Senior Chinese climate envoy Liu Zhenmin warned in March that “decoupling” from Chinese manufacturing could raise the global energy transition bill by 20%.

—David Stanway, Reuters


JD Vance didn’t like being fact-checked on the spot, so the CBS debate moderators cut the mics

$
0
0

Tuesday night’s vice presidential debate between Republican nominee JD Vance and Democratic nominee Tim Walz was, for the most part, a civil exchange, focused on policy—especially when compared to last month’s presidential debate.

However, there was one dramatic moment in the debate where things got heated, leading CBS News moderator Margaret Brennan to fact-check Vance, and eventually leading to both nominees having their microphones cut.

In response to a question about immigration, Vance claimed that in Springfield, Ohio, and across the country, schools and hospitals are overwhelmed and housing is “unaffordable because we’ve brought in millions of illegal immigrants to compete with Americans for scarce homes.”

Brennan directly fact-checked Vance’s claim, saying Springfield’s Haitian migrants “have legal status, temporary protected status.”

“Margaret, the rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact-check,” Vance protested.

His continued response prompted a back-and-forth rebuttal from Walz, leading Brennan and co-moderator Norah O’Donnell to ask both candidates to refrain from further discussion, finally cutting both mics.

At the beginning of the debate, the moderators said their role was “to provide the candidates with the opportunity to fact-check claims made by each other.”

After last month’s presidential debate, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and some of this supporters had complained that the ABC moderators fact-checked Trump during his debate with Vice President Kamala Harris.

Immigration, one of the hot-button issues for voters in this election, came up a number of times in the debate and has been one of Trump’s talking points on the campaign trail.

As for the mics, CBS News and the vice presidential nominees did agree to ground rules allowing the moderators to cut off microphones when necessary.

With just 33 days left until the election, both vice presidential nominees were back on the campaign trail courting voters on Wednesday in two highly contested battleground states. Vance is in Michigan while Walz is expected to campaign in central Pennsylvania.

Harris is headed to Georgia to discuss hurricane relief efforts in the aftermath of Helene, then onto Wisconsin on Thursday.

Critics of the EU’s deforestation regulation say it could be a trade barrier

$
0
0

A growing number of governments, international trade organizations and businesses are urging the European Union to reconsider a deforestation regulation set to take effect in December.

Critics of the regulation say it will discriminate against countries with forest resources and hurt their exports. Supporters of the EU Deforestation Regulation, EUDR for short, say it will help combat forest degradation on a global scale.

Several commodity associations have said they support the objectives of the regulation but that gaps in its implementation could harm their businesses.

Environmental organizations have voiced support, saying the EUDR will help slow global deforestation, which is the second-biggest source of carbon emissions after fossil fuels.

Here’s a look at the EU Deforestation Regulation:

What is the EUDR and what products is it expected to impact?

Currently scheduled to go into effect on Dec. 30, the EU Deforestation Regulation will outlaw the sale of forest-derived products within the 27-nation bloc if companies can’t prove their goods are not linked to deforestation. Its scope is wide, including cocoa, coffee, soy, cattle, palm oil, rubber, wood and products derived from these commodities.

To sell those products in Europe, big companies will have to prove they come from land where forests haven’t been cut since Jan. 1, 2021, regardless of whether the deforestation was legal in the countries of origin. Small businesses further down the supply chain are subject to the same obligations and retain legal responsibility if regulations are violated. But they are not liable for due diligence for parts of their products that were already subject to review.

Failure to comply can result in financial penalties and restricted access to the EU market.

The regulation also introduces a benchmarking system that ranks countries or regions based on the risk of non-compliance with the EUDR in three categories: low, standard, or high.

“We have been working very closely with a whole range of stakeholders in order to help them prepare for the entry into effect of the regulation,” European Commission spokesperson Adalbert Jahnz said at a recent press briefing in Brussels.

“We keep the situation under constant review. We are working hard to ensure that all the conditions are met for a smooth implementation of the law,” he said.

On Wednesday the EU offered to delay by a year the introduction of new rules that would outlaw the sale of products that come from forests following an outcry from several governments claiming that it will damage trade and hurt small farmers.

The EU’s executive branch, the European Commission, said that “it would make the law applicable on 30 December 2025 for large companies and 30 June 2026 for micro- and small enterprises,” if the 27 member countries and the bloc’s parliament agree.

Why are there calls for delays in implementing the EUDR?

Officials from leading exporters of affected commodities — including Brazil, Indonesia and the Ivory Coast — object to the regulation, saying it could act as a trade barrier, negatively affect small farmers and disrupt supply chains.

“This regulation disregards local circumstances and capabilities, national legislations, certification mechanisms, their efforts to fight deforestation, and multilateral commitments of producer countries, including the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities,” the Indonesian embassy in Brussels, where the EU is headquartered, said in a statement. Indonesia is the world’s largest exporter of palm oil and exports many other forest-derived commodities.

Politicians within the EU have also raised concerns or asked for postponements. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz asked that the regulation be suspended. Austria and some agricultural ministries in EU member states have also sought to weaken the regulation.

The Commission conceded that “the state of preparations amongst stakeholders in Europe is also uneven. While many expect to be ready in time, thanks to intensive preparations, others have expressed concerns.”

The head of the World Trade Organization reportedly has asked Brussels to reconsider the ban on imports from deforested areas, saying the EU has not yet issued clear compliance guidelines.

The World Trade Organization declined a request for comment from The Associated Press.

Lobbying groups representing businesses that will be impacted — such as animal feed and tire producers — have also voiced concerns about the regulation’s strict traceability requirements and a flawed information entry and database system where companies need to submit their due diligence statements.

How do conservationists hope the EUDR will help protect forests?

Europe ranked second in the amount of deforestation caused by its imports in 2017, according to a 2021 World Wildlife Fund report. Environmental organizations have said the EUDR will help reduce that.

In Brazil — where wildfires have raged during a record drought — 25 environmental groups voiced their support for the regulations in a letter sent to the president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, saying companies and government offices were preparing to implement the new requirements.

“This groundbreaking regulation is the most ambitious legislative attempt to tackle these issues worldwide,” the Brazilian organizations wrote in their letter. “Every second counts to protect human lives today, as well as humankind’s future, avoid climate change, and stop biodiversity losses.”

The regulation could also help set a precedent for other countries considering legislation that would have a similar effect, said Julian Oram, a policy leader for international environmental organization Mighty Earth.

“It’s a catalyst for governments around the world to say enough is enough: That we can’t continue to import or produce goods linked to deforestation, that there has to be a cutoff point— and that is now.”

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

—Victoria Milko, Associated Press

Aniruddha Ghosal contributed to this report.

TSLA troubles: Tesla stock falls 4% after deliveries disappoint—but the robotaxi could be coming soon

$
0
0

On Wednesday, Tesla announced its third-quarter (Q3) productions, deliveries, and deployments report, causing stocks to fall more than 4% as of this writing.

The third quarter, which ended September 30, saw the production of 469,796 vehicles and delivery of 462,890 vehicles. This falls short of Wall Street predictions.

Even so, 2024’s third quarter outshone last year’s, with 435,059 EVs delivered and 430,488 produced. Tesla’s Q3 was also better than its Q2, with 443,956 EVs delivered and 410,831 produced.

Most of the Q3 EV production focused on Model X and Model Y, with 443,668 of those vehicles produced. There were only 26,128 other models produced.

The numbers come amid increased pressure from automakers in China and others in the United States. Some of Tesla’s biggest competitors include China’s BYD, Geely, Li Auto, and Nio.

In the U.S., Tesla faces competition from EV companies such as Rivian. But major automakers including Ford and General Motors are also starting to sell more electric vehicles. GM’s third-quarter report shows that its EV sales increased 60% year-over-year.

Even so, Tesla remains the top seller of battery electric cars in the U.S.

Tesla’s third-quarter earnings report comes out October 23, and investors will be closely watching the company’s profit margins.

Meanwhile, on October 10, Tesla plans to host an event showing off the designs of its new robotaxi. The event hopes to be a pivotal moment for the company, as well as the growing use of AI in Tesla vehicles.

Trump and Harris haven’t set clean energy plans yet. It’s out of their control anyway

$
0
0

Although Vice President Kamala Harris touts clean energy and Donald Trump makes misleading assertions and false claims about it, neither candidate has set forth a comprehensive energy plan. Even if they do, a gridlocked Congress would be unlikely to pass it.

Instead, the next president’s greatest influence on clean energy will come through their handling of legislation and regulations put in place since 2021 under the Biden-Harris administration. As an environmental engineer who studies energy and climate change, I expect that Harris, who has strongly supported these policies, would follow through on them, while Trump’s record as president suggests that he would try to roll them back. Trade policies toward China, the leading producer of clean energy technologies, will also be key.

Legislation and regulations

Three bills passed by Congress under Biden and Harris – the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act – have transformed U.S. energy policy. The three bills allocated hundreds of billions of dollars for building infrastructure, providing incentives for clean energy manufacturing and purchases, and funding clean energy research.

None of these measures is likely to be completely overturned, since each funds numerous projects in red states. But implementation by the next administration will determine how effectively they stimulate clean energy growth.

For example, the Treasury and Energy departments will decide which projects can receive incentives and loans. Other agencies, such as the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, known as ARPA-E, will allocate clean energy research funding.

The Environmental Protection Agency will also play a crucial role. Under the Biden-Harris administration, the EPA issued its most stringent regulations ever for controlling emissions from fossil fuel power plants and motor vehicles. Those rules could accelerate the transition to clean electricity and electric cars.

However, a Trump-led EPA could reverse course, much as it overturned Obama-era regulations designed to reduce carbon emissions from power plants in 2019 and weakened vehicle emissions rules in 2020. Trump also appointed three Supreme Court justices who voted to constrain EPA’s power to reduce emissions.

The role of market forces

Whatever policies the next president sets, domestic energy trends will depend largely on market forces. Both Trump and Biden oversaw a boom in domestic oil and gas production. At the same time, as the costs of wind turbines, solar panels and utility-scale batteries have plummeted, these technologies have dominated new electricity generating capacity.

Currently, the U.S. has a backlog of nearly 2,600 gigawatts of projects waiting to be added to the nation’s electricity grids. That’s roughly eight times the amount of wind and solar generating capacity on U.S. grids today.

However, Congress is deadlocked over competing proposals for streamlining permitting rules. State and local governments and regional grid operators also play key roles and are not easily swayed by federal action.

Still, the next president can influence policy through his or her selection of commissioners to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates interstate transmission of oil, gas and electricity. Presidents also can push Congress to pass permitting reforms.

Trade policy

As fast as U.S. clean energy manufacturing and deployments have grown under the Biden-Harris administration, that increase is dwarfed by China’s output. Chinese companies manufacture over three-quarters of the world’s solar cells and modules, more the half of the world’s wind turbines and three-quarters of the advanced batteries needed for electricity storage and electric cars. China also sells more electric cars than the rest of the world combined.

Like it or not, America’s ability to rapidly deploy clean energy and electric cars will require importing at least some materials from China. After falling behind for decades, there’s simply no way to scale up U.S. manufacturing fast enough to meet national climate goals. Even if solar panels, batteries or electric cars are assembled here, they’ll depend upon critical minerals that are mostly refined in China.

As president, Trump waged a trade war with China. He has vowed to extend existing tariffs to other products from China if he is elected to a second term.

Biden and Harris have also tried to tilt the playing field to favor U.S. companies. The administration is offering loans and incentives for domestic manufacturing, and has also imposed a 100% tariff on electric vehicles and a 50% tariff on solar cells from China.

Such policies may shelter domestic manufacturers for a while, but are unlikely to make them competitive on global markets that are pivoting to electric cars and solar energy.

U.S. standing under the 2015 Paris climate agreement, a legally binding treaty that sets targets for curbing climate change, will also be key. Countries around the world have pledged to shift to clean energy to reduce emissions. The European Union is enacting carbon border tariffs that will penalize imports from high-emitting producers.

If Trump were to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement again, as he did in 2017, and roll back emissions rules, U.S. manufacturers could face new hurdles in exporting their products overseas. For her part, Harris has supported the Paris accord and criticized Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from it.

No reversing the revolution

Markets worldwide are rapidly transitioning to renewable energy and electric cars, which are becoming cheaper, cleaner and more appealing than their fossil-fueled alternatives. Popular subsidies for clean energy would be difficult to claw back. China’s dominance in clean energy technologies will not soon be shaken, whatever trade policies the next administration adopts.

Based on their records, Harris could be expected to build on the legislation and regulations passed under the current administration, while Trump would be likely to roll back some but not all of its advances. Neither candidate is proposing policies as transformative as the ones enacted in the past several years. Whoever is elected will govern within a clean energy landscape that has been reshaped by those policies, and by market forces that are beyond the control of any president.

Daniel Cohan is a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Rice University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Afrofuturism is thriving in Philly. Here are 5 artists that you need to know

$
0
0

From the creation of the Liberty Bell in the 1750s to the world-famous Philadelphia Sound soul music of the 1960s and ’70s, artistic innovation has long been a staple in Philly history. Today, the city’s thriving Afrofuturist scene is continuing this legacy.

Afrofuturism” is a term coined in the 1990s by American cultural critic Mark Dery. Dery used the label to describe “speculative fiction that treats African American themes and addresses African American concerns in the context of 20th-century techno culture.”

The aesthetic has been popularized over the years by mainstream artists, including cinematic pioneer and “Black Panther” director Ryan Coogler and Grammy-winning musical artist Missy Elliott.

Author and filmmaker Ytasha L. Womack powerfully articulated the vastness of Afrofuturism in her 2013 book, “Afrofuturism: The World of Black Sci-Fi and Fantasy Culture.”

“Call it the power of the subconscious or the predominance of soul culture gone cyber pop,” Womack writes, “but this dance through time travel that Afrofuturists lived for is as much about soul retrieval as it is about jettisoning into the far-off future.”

As an Afrocentric scholar, professor of African American studies, hip-hop artist and scholar of Afrofuturism, I get to see the city’s growing Afrofuturist movement firsthand. I have been inspired by Afrofuturist writers and scholars from sci-fi novelist Octavia Butler to fellow Africology professors at Temple University Reynaldo Anderson and Molefi Kete Asante.

Here are five local Philly artists whose innovative aesthetics and ideas are contributing to the still-emerging field of Afrofuturistic art.

Rasheedah Phillips and Camae Ayewa

Rasheedah Phillips, an artist and housings rights attorney, and Camae Ayewa, a poet and musician who performs as Moor Mother, attended high school in Philadelphia and graduated from the Beasley School of Law at Temple University. In 2015 they founded the Black Quantum Futurism collective, which could be considered the artistic cornerstone of Afrofuturist art in Philadelphia.

Rasheedah Phillips’ latest book will be published in January 2025. [Cover Image: AK Press]

This collective hosts various events and creative projects. On their website, Phillips and Ayewa describe their movement as “a new approach to living and experiencing reality by way of the manipulation of space-time in order to see into possible futures.” They blend ideas and beliefs from quantum physics and Black and African cultural traditions of consciousness, time and space.

Although the Black Quantum Futurism website is less active than in previous years, Phillips and Ayewa continue to organize and participate in Afrofuturist events both in Philadelphia and around the world. Phillips has a new book, “Dismantling the Master’s Clock: On Race, Space, and Time,” set for release in early 2025.

Mikel Elam

Though he’s a New York transplant, figure painter and Afrofuturist visual artist Mikel Elam has become an asset to the Afrofuturist art scene in Philadelphia.

“I have a special interest in Africa (which is) considered by many anthropologists to be the origin of all life,” he explains. “In many ways, science, spirituality and art are essential to our cultural and mental development. They are more compatible than we might think.”

Bliss Consciousness by Mikel Elam depicts the artist’s meditation practice and belief that the keys to universal connection come from within. [Image: Mikel Elam/CC BY-NC-SA]

In his pieces, Elam often incorporates cultural masks he’s collected from his world travels, as well as shiny metal keys. His work on display at Philadelphia International Airport combines both. The keys are positioned to reflect the flow of people in transit – sometimes they move in harmony and other times in opposite directions. Unapologetically optimistic, Elam also surrounds the heads with keys to suggest halos or auras.

Serena Saunders

Serena Saunders is a mural artist, Philly native and owner and operator of Passion Art Designs LLC. She transforms walls throughout Philly and beyond into futuristic visions of hope, struggle, Black joy and justice.

Her paintings emphasize the potential for a more peaceful and equitable future. Her “Camo” collection includes a painting that displays a map of Africa hovering over an ocean of streaming colors, including elements of the American flag. The continent appears to be dripping blood into the waters below.

A major component of the Afrofuturist arts movement involves reimagining existing symbols relating to Black culture and life. Saunders’ “Heart” collection incorporates elements of transhumanism – the belief that humans should use technology to enhance their minds and bodies – which are common in Afrofuturist art. Images of the precious blood-pumping organ are merged with pipes, a faucet head and even a grenade.

Saunders’ murals cover dozens of walls around the city, including at the Community Clubhouse at FDR Park, the Boys & Girls Club in Germantown, and Philadelphia International Airport.

Avant-garde jazz musician Sun Ra is an Afrofuturist icon who lived in Philly for 25 years. [Photo: Leni Sinclair/Getty Images]

Sun Ra

One of the greatest avant-garde jazz musicians of the 20th century, Sun Ra is also an Afrofuturist icon who once occupied a modest Philadelphia row home at 5626 Morton St. in Germantown.

Sun Ra led the Sun Ra Arkestra, a jazz group, from the late 1950s until his death in 1993 at age 79. With songs including “Love in Outer Space,” “Door of the Cosmos,” “Saturn” and “UFO,” Sun Ra kept intergalactic reimaginings of life and love at the forefront of his creative expression. From his lavish futuristic outfits to the astrological symbolism “Astro Black,” he remains a meaningful pioneer of Afrofuturist art.

The green-trimmed home at 5626 Morton St. is where Sun Ra used to live and rehearse. [Image: Google Street View/Image capture: Oct 2019]

In 2022, the house where he and bandmates lived and rehearsed was designated a historic landmark. Though not open to the public, it serves as a reminder of the creative, resilient spirit that often resides in humble and unassuming environments, and why we can think of Philadelphia, the city known for being the birthplace of the United States, also as the city of tomorrow.

Aaron X. Smith is an assistant professor of Africology and African American studies at Temple University.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Digital tools help companies retain hourly workers, WorkJam CEO says

$
0
0

The COVID-19 pandemic and the resetting of the economy that followed it made hourly workers more aware of their value. Some experts think employers should expect to field demands for flexible hours and other workplace incentives even as the labor market weakens.

WorkJam, an online platform that was founded in 2014, has tried to be at the forefront of this shift. It provides clients such as Target, Ulta Beauty, and Hilton with digital tools their non-salaried employees can use to swap shifts, complete trainings, and get early access to wages.

Cofounder and CEO Steve Kramer recently spoke with the Associated Press about how companies can better retain hourly workers. The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q. What was the environment like for hourly workers when you started the company?

A. When we started the company in 2014, we set out to solve two issues to help with the socioeconomic issues that existed at the time. And they were large socioeconomic issues. In fact, President Obama, in his State of the Union speech in 2014, had hourly workers on stage with him because there was a lot of scheduling practices that were happening at the time that were creating unpredictability. So Obama actually put in a lot of new compliance rules to protect the hourly worker and to create more predictability in their schedules and their paychecks.

The pandemic was a black swan event for WorkJam because it did empower the employees. There were a lot of social issues that were happening as well. The idea around inclusion.

Q. What savings can your firm deliver for clients?

A. The ability to retain employees, which was very important over the last five or six years with the labor shortage, has a big impact on the bottom line. It costs anywhere between $4,000 to $8,000 to recruit and train a new front-line employee. So if you’re able to retain your employees and reduce attrition, and let’s say it’s a company of 40,000 to 50,000 employees, it turns into millions of dollars of savings.

A. It’s not so difficult to hire hourly workers anymore. Many sectors have pulled back and have slowed down their hiring. Restaurant and hospitality have had modest growth. But certainly in retail, manufacturing, distribution, we are seeing a pullback.

Q. What are companies’ approach to staffing?

A. Organizations are thinking about how to do more with less simply to lower their cost of operations. There’s also more of a focus on ever-boarding, the notion of constantly training your employees on new processes or being able to do different roles within the business.

Q. Why is that?

A. Much of it has to do with flexible scheduling. A lot of companies are wanting to be able to move their staff around either through different locations, departments or different roles within the organization.

Q. What’s the impact?

A. It has a profound impact because you’re able to hire less. You’re able to start hiring by district or by region and be able to share those resources across those locations. A lot of these companies were using third-party labor companies like gig workers and staff augmentation firms to fill their gaps. And the result of it is happier employees because they have more opportunity and a much more streamlined process.

Q. What other ways are companies trying to hold on to workers?

A. Early wage access. That’s a real benefit to the employee, to be able to get access to your wages after you do a shift and have it deposited into your bank account.

The digitization of communication creates an easier environment for employees to work, particularly the younger generation. There’s going to be a lot of people looking for jobs this holiday season for the first time. And so if you think about the younger generation, they want to have a digital relationship with their employer because everything else in their life is digital. And so if you put these systems in place, it has a really big impact on retention.

Q. Given the souring job market, will companies change their approach to hourly workers?

A. Regardless if the economy turns and hiring slows down, how you treat your employees and the expectations of them is here to stay. I don’t think it’s going to regress. I think in other segments, like desk workers, there will be more changes. I think that there’ll be a return to the office. But for front-line employees, there are so many lessons that have been learned over the last two years around how to create a better workforce and the impact that it can have on your bottom line that I think all of these notions and these strategies are here to stay, and they’re going to continue to evolve.

—Anne D’Innocenzio, Associated Press business writer

Big Oil paid more than $42 billion to foreign governments in 2023

$
0
0

The three largest U.S. energy exploration companies paid more than $42 billion to foreign governments last year, about eight times more than what they paid in the United States, according to regulatory filings.

The disclosures from ExxonMobil, Chevron Corp, and ConocoPhillips were required this year for the first time ever under a new Securities and Exchange Commission requirement.

Transparency advocates had been pushing for the rule for more than a decade to shine a light on Big Oil’s foreign financial transactions in its global quest for oil, and provide a sense of whether U.S. taxpayers are getting a fair share of the value of soaring U.S. production.

The United States has become the world’s largest oil and gas producer in recent years, thanks mainly to a boom in the massive Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico.

“The truth is, here in the U.S., we get one of the worst deals for the extraction of our natural resources,” said Michelle Harrison, deputy general counsel for EarthRights International, an environmental advocacy group.

About 90% of Exxon’s nearly $25 billion in global payments went to foreign governments in 2023, even though close to a quarter of Exxon’s global exploration and production earnings come from the United States.

The Texas-based oil giant paid out $22.5 billion in taxes, royalties and other items overseas, with the United Arab Emirates ($7.4 billion), Indonesia ($4.6 billion) and Malaysia ($3.2 billion) topping the list, according to the disclosures.

By contrast, Exxon made about $2.3 billion in U.S.-based payments in 2023, including just $1.2 billion to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, according to Exxon’s report.

Exxon’s U.S.-based upstream earnings totaled $4.2 billion, compared to $17.1 billion in non-U.S. markets, according to Exxon’s 2023 annual report.

In the preamble of Exxon’s SEC report, the company complained that comparisons between U.S. and overseas payments were not fair and said U.S. government payments totaled $6.6 billion last year when you include more than $4 billion in state and local taxes omitted by the regulations.

Exxon declined to comment further.

Chevron, meanwhile, paid $14.6 billion to foreign governments in 2023, including $4 billion to Australia alone, according to the filings. The company paid just $2 billion in the U.S., according to the filings.

A Chevron spokesperson said the company’s overhead in the U.S. can be much lower than in overseas oil fields.

Chevron’s holdings in the Permian Basin, for example, total about 2.2 million acres with about 75% of that land connected to either low or no royalty payments. Chevron executives see that as a huge advantage and one that creates shareholder value, according to presentations by the company.

Last year, most of Chevron’s upstream profits were from international markets – at $17.4 billion compared to $4.1 billion in the United States – according to Chevron’s 2023 annual report.

Chevron did not criticize the disclosure parameters in its filing, and told Reuters it would continue to work with relevant agencies toward transparency and accountability between governments and the industry.

For ConocoPhillips, just $1.3 billion of a total $6.5 billion in total global payments last year went to the U.S., according to the disclosures.

The company declined to comment.

Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act opened the door for the new disclosures around overseas activities by energy exploration and production companies.

A divided SEC adopted the rules in 2020 in a 3-2 vote, as the burgeoning ESG movement, which focuses on environmental, social and governance matters, demanded more transparency on behalf of millions of U.S. investors.

The adoption of the rule, however, came after a pitched years-long battle: A federal court in 2013 vacated the SEC’s first attempt at imposing the mandate, and Congress blocked a second attempt in 2017.

—Tim McLaughlin, Reuters


California spiked a landmark AI regulation. But that doesn’t mean the bill is going away

$
0
0

With the veto of California’s AI bill, the idea of regulating frontier models may be in jeopardy.

The bill, SB 1047, would have required developers of the largest AI models (OpenAI, Anthropic, and the like) to set up and report on a safety framework, and submit to outside safety audits. The bill also included a whistleblower protection clause, and required developers to build a “kill switch” into models in case they began acting on their own in harmful ways. 

Most of the tech industry came out against the bill, saying its passage would shift the focus from innovation to compliance in AI research. It’s worth noting, however, that much of the public supported the bill’s protections, as did a number of respected AI researchers.

Nonetheless, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill this week, saying it fails to assess the risk of AI models based on where and how they’re deployed. “Smaller, specialized models may emerge as equally or even more dangerous than the models targeted by SB 1047—at the potential expense of curtailing the very innovation that fuels advancement in favor of the public good,” Newsom wrote

So, what comes next? SB 1047’s main author and champion, State Senator Scott Wiener, hasn’t ruled out the possibility of introducing the bill again in some form next session, a source close to the matter says. AI researcher Dan Hendrycks, who helped shape the bill, says his organization, the Center for AI Safety (CAIS), which sponsored SB 1047, intends to fight on.

“We’re taking some time to plan, to determine what’s next,” Hendrycks wrote in an email to Fast Company. “There has been a broad bipartisan coalition that came together to support this bill, so we’re incredibly optimistic about future opportunities to coauthor, advance, and advocate for sensible AI safety regulation.”

Time for working groups

One of Newsom’s main complaints about the bill was that it didn’t cover enough types of AI models and applications. As part of his veto, the governor called for the formation of a working group to develop a set of sensible guardrails for AI model developers, and potentially new legislation. The working group will be led by Stanford professor Fei Fei Li, a source with knowledge says. Li, who came out against SB 1047, is an AI pioneer best known for leading Stanford’s Human-Centered AI institute, but she also has a new AI company called World Labs, which is reportedly valued at $1 billion. One of her investors is Andreessen Horowitz, perhaps the loudest critic of SB 1047.

For its part, Andreessen Horowitz plans to hold “blueprint sessions” to help guide legislators in AI regulation. Wiener’s office says the senator has been invited to participate, but the two sides aren’t likely to find much common ground. Indeed, SB 1047’s proponents and critics have fundamentally different ideas on how to regulate AI safety. 

Wiener’s bill sought to put regulatory oversight on the frontier models developed by labs like OpenAI and Anthropic. Wiener and his ilk reason that these huge models could potentially enable an AI app to cause catastrophic harms (shutting down the power grid, for example).

Andreessen Horowitz and others in the industry believe that regulation  should not focus on the model’s capacity for causing catastrophic harms, but rather on the application that actually does a specific thing using the model. For example, if a frontier model-powered medical app causes deaths in a hospital, the app maker (sometimes called the “deployer”) would be held liable. 

But Wiener’s staff points out that such an application-focused law would only be additive to tort liability that already exists in the law. There is no law in California, nor at the federal level, that mandates specific safety guardrails and transparency standards for companies developing frontier models. 

SB 1047 and Congress

California Representative Anna Eshoo believes regulation should focus on requiring AI labs to be transparent about their models and their risks, not on prescribing specific safeguarding requirements and penalties for not using them, as SB 1047 does. Eshoo’s 2023 Foundation Model Transparency Act (with Virginia Democrat Don Beyer), which did not become law, required foundation model developers to disclose facts about training and training data to third-party app developers and the public. 

A legislative aide in her office says SB 1047 wasn’t a major topic of conversation in the halls of Congress. And the lawmakers who were aware of it were mainly interested in how the legislation might integrate with a similar bill at the federal level. 

Eshoo and three other California representatives sent a letter to Newsom urging him to veto SB 1047. The Congresswoman was concerned that the bill might stifle AI research at places like Stanford, which could affect the rest of the country. 

Congress has grown more thoughtful about regulating AI, the aide says. When ChatGPT was released almost two years ago, many lawmakers rushed to get up to speed on generative AI and potential regulatory approaches. But that sense of urgency has faded with the realization that generative AI isn’t going to transform the world overnight. In fact, applying generative AI in useful ways has proved a slow and complex process for many organizations.

If AI is poised to change the world it’s just getting started. Not only is the research into frontier models pushing the state of the art forward quickly, but research into steering and safeguarding models is evolving rapidly too, explains Navrina Singh, CEO of the AI governance platform Credo AI. Asking lawmakers to prescriptively regulate something so fluid is asking a lot. 

“The problem is, as the director of [National Institute of Standards and Technology] said recently, we don’t yet have a science of AI safety,” says Neil Chilson, former FTC chief technologist and current Head of AI Policy for the Abundance Institute, says in an email to Fast Company. Chilson says we don’t even understand the risks that safety guardrails should target. “[W]e lack good evidence on the risk profile of AI models or how to mitigate that risk, if any. Until we have more evidence, we simply don’t know if model-level regulation will help or hurt on net.”

Others believe that SB 1047’s focus on imposing safety guidelines was misguided. If lawmakers want to stop frontier models from enabling catastrophic harms, they should focus on transparency around the data used to train them, says Appian CEO Matt Calkins.

“AI is a function of its data,” he says. “If we don’t want a model to create a killer virus we have to make sure it’s not been trained on data explaining how to make a killer virus. You would prevent the usage of that gain-of-function data.”

Sales professionals need mental health ‘helmets’

$
0
0

Neuroticism is one of the Big Five personality traits, characterised by a tendency to experience negative emotions like anxiety, fear, and frustration. Individuals with high levels of neuroticism are often more sensitive to stress and more likely to react negatively to challenges.

This trait can significantly impact job performance, mental health, and overall life satisfaction, and can also exacerbate mental disorders, including comorbidity – the co-existence of multiple disorders.

The adverse consequences of neuroticism are usually passed on to public health systems, where the overall economic burden of neuroticism has long surpassed the costs associated with treating common mental disorders.

For sales professionals, the job’s inherent uncertainties – such as long sales cycles, complex negotiations, and reliance on commissions – can create a breeding ground for neurotic tendencies. This is especially true for B2B (business to business) salespeople, whose work differs greatly from the consumer salespeople we all interact with.

A consumer salesperson might, for instance, sell you a car – the process would take a few hours at most, with minimal repercussions if the deal fell through. However, a B2B salesperson would be responsible for selling a large company a fleet of vehicles, or a wholesale shipment of parts to a car manufacturer.

These deals can take a long time to close, and involve large transactions, complex products, multiple stakeholders and unpredictable outcomes. All of this massively increases uncertainty.

B2B sales jobs and neuroticism

Our comprehensive study, which involved around 1,700 B2B salespeople and 24,000 non-sales professionals, found a clear link between B2B sales roles and increased neuroticism. The research shows that the constant uncertainty in B2B sales jobs triggers defensive emotional responses which, when activated frequently, can reinforce and heighten neuroticism over time.

Certain features of B2B sales jobs are at the root of this trend:

  • Complex customer needs: B2B salespeople often deal with clients who have multifaceted requirements that need tailored solutions. This can lead to prolonged decision-making processes and uncertain outcomes.
  • Long sales cycles: B2B sales cycles can last months, with success dependent on numerous variables, including the decisions of various stakeholders within the client’s organisation.
  • Negotiation toughness: B2B sales often involve tough negotiations with clients who are experienced in securing the best deals. This can create a high-pressure environment where the salesperson’s success is constantly under threat.
  • Variable Compensation: Many sales roles are heavily reliant on commissions, meaning that financial stability is directly tied to performance. This uncertainty can exacerbate stress and anxiety, particularly during periods of low sales.

Mental health and safety: lessons from construction work

The harmful effects of chronic uncertainty in sales work – namely, a change in personality that may lead to mental disorders – should be treated, in essence, like any other workplace hazard.

Just as the construction industry takes steps to protect workers from physical harm, corporate organisations should consider protecting their employees from psychological harm, particularly in high-pressure roles like B2B sales.

While construction workers wear helmets and safety gear, sales professionals need mental and emotional safeguards to mitigate the risks associated with their work.

The first step for both individuals and companies is to acknowledge the risks associated with B2B sales roles. For employers, this means recognising that these roles can have a significant impact on mental health – similar to how some jobs might carry physical risks – and back this up by offering support to employees. For employees, this means having access to the facts and using them to make informed career choices, as well as taking their own mental health into consideration when accepting new work.

Sales organisations can take proactive steps to support their employees’ mental health. This might include offering mindfulness programs, gym memberships, or access to mental health counselling, as well as making sure employees have time to use these services. Providing paid personal days may also allow employees to take time off when they need a mental health break, promoting a healthier work-life balance and helping prevent an increase in neuroticism.

Managers can also play a crucial role by redesigning sales roles to reduce the factors that contribute to uncertainty and neuroticism. This might involve simplifying sales targets, offering clearer feedback, or providing more stable compensation plans to makes salespeople less dependent on commissions.

Regular mental health checkups should also be required. Just as safety inspections are routine (and often required by law) in physically demanding jobs, psychological assessments should be a standard practice in sales organisations. By regularly assessing employees’ levels of neuroticism and other personality traits, companies can identify when intervention is needed.

Finally, offering training programs that equip salespeople with the skills to handle long sales cycles and tough negotiations can serve as both a development tool and a preventive measure against neuroticism. These programs not only enhance job performance, but also provide employees with strategies to manage the stressors that contribute to psychological harm.

Selma Kadic-Maglajlic is an associate professor of marketing at the Copenhagen Business School.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bank of America outage: Customers report app and website glitches, panic over $0 balances

$
0
0

Bank of America customers reported difficulty accessing their bank accounts on Wednesday, with some saying they couldn’t log on, while others saw balances of $0 in their bank accounts.

The problem became apparent around 12:45 p.m. ET on Downdetector, which collects data on outages.

The issues spiked around 1:20 p.m. ET with a little more than 20,200 reports of outages, which cited an array of problems, including Bank of America access issues via the app and browser. Some customers were not able to access their accounts at all, while others were reportedly able to access some but not all of their accounts. Others said fund transfers remained nonfunctional.

The cities where the most outage problems were reported on Downdector were:

  • New York
  • Seattle
  • San Francisco
  • Los Angeles
  • Phoenix
  • Dallas
  • Houston
  • Chicago

The most-reported problems included:

  • Online banking: 55%
  • Mobile banking: 44%
  • ATM: 1%

Reached for comment by Fast Company, a Bank of America spokesperson said it was working quickly to fix the problem and nearly finished getting operations up and running by late afternoon.

“Some clients are experiencing an issue accessing their accounts and balance information today,” the company said. These issues are being addressed and have largely been resolved. We apologize for any inconvenience.”

This story is developing…

Wildfires have decimated forests. Here’s why replanting trees is a challenge

$
0
0

Camille Stevens-Rumann crouched in the dirt and leaned over evergreen seedlings, measuring how much each had grown in seven months.

“That’s two to three inches of growth on the spruce,” said Stevens-Rumann, interim director at the Colorado Forest Restoration Institute.

Her research team is monitoring several species planted two years ago on a slope burned during the devastating 2020 Cameron Peak fire, which charred 326 square miles (844 square kilometers) in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado.

They want to determine which species are likely to survive at various elevations, because climate change makes it difficult or impossible for many forests to regrow even decades after wildfires.

As the gap between burned areas and replanting widens year after year, scientists see big challenges beyond where to put seedlings.

The U.S. currently lacks the ability to collect enough seeds from living trees and the nursery capacity to grow seedlings for replanting on a scale anywhere close to stemming accelerating losses, researchers say. It also doesn’t have enough trained workers to plant and monitor trees.

The Forest Service said the biggest roadblock to replanting on public land is completing environmental and cultural assessments and preparing severely burned areas so they’re safe to plant. That can take years — while more forests are lost to fire.

“If we have the seedlings but we don’t have the sites prepped … we can’t put the seedlings out there,” said Stephanie Miller, assistant director of a reforestation program.

Scientists, private industry and environmental agencies are acutely aware of the challenges as they consider how to restore forested landscapes in an increasingly arid region.

“We need to start being creative if we want trees on our landscapes,” Stevens-Rumann said. “We’re in a place of such drastic climate change that we are not talking about whether or not some of these places will be a different kind of forest, but whether or not they will be forests at all.”

Reforestation gap

Four years after the Cameron Peak fire — the largest in recorded Colorado history — a smattering of wild raspberry bushes and seedlings has taken root. But the mountainside mostly is dotted with charred trees.

In burn scars across the West and Southwest, areas of forests may never grow back on their own.

Larger and more intense fires destroy trees that normally provide seeds for regeneration or leave burn scars so large trees can’t naturally bridge the gap. The climate also has changed so markedly that many forests can’t regrow in the same places. Even when seedlings take hold, drought and new fires often kill them.

Nineteen of the 20 largest wildfires ever recorded in the contiguous U.S. have occurred in Western states since 2000, according to Sean Parks, a Forest Service research ecologist. That’s when the region slipped into an ongoing megadrought.

The U.S. once was able to reliably replant burned forests. But now the gap between areas in the West that need replanting after fire and the ability to do so has grown to at least 3.8 million acres (1.5 million hectares) — and that could triple by 2050, said Solomon Z. Dobrowski, a University of Montana forest management expert and a study lead author.

Forests are burning more often and especially intense and hot, which can destroy seeds that normally survive fire, harden the ground like concrete and leave barren slopes susceptible to washing away in rainstorms, polluting waterways.

In 22 years since the Hayman fire on Colorado’s front range burned 182 square miles (471 square kilometers) of forest, there has been almost no tree regeneration in the most severely burned areas, researchers and the Forest Service said.

In California’s Sierra Nevada, where up to 20% of the world’s mature giant sequoias and their seeds have been killed by fire in recent years, there are massive openings without seedlings. A U.S. Geological Survey study concluded some groves will never recover without replanting.

But researchers say the odds of forests growing back will worsen regardless of fire intensity because of more heat and drought.

That means burned forest could convert to shrubland and grassland, leading to loss of snowpack that provides drinking water and helps irrigate crops.

“Over 70% of our water in the western U.S. comes from our forested ecosystems and our mountains,” Stevens-Rumann said. “And for that water to come the way we want it … at the right time throughout the year, we need to have forests, not just grasslands.”

Targeted tree planting

When forest ecologist Matthew Hurteau joined the University of New Mexico nine years ago, he took in the aftermath of the 2011 Las Conchas fire that decimated a huge swath of Ponderosa pine forest.

Though the area had been replanted several times, most seedlings died, Hurteau said. While the average survival in the Southwest is about 25%, he said only about 13% of trees planted most recently in the Los Conchas burn scar have survived.

So he planted seedlings of different species at various elevations and on slopes facing different directions, then monitored the soil moisture, temperature and humidity.

A resulting computer model can predict the probability a seedling will survive in a particular spot with about 63% accuracy. It will be used to inform planting this fall.

“Let’s not do the old plant-and-pray” method, said Hurteau. “Let’s plant where we know that their chance of survival is quite high, and in places where the chance … is quite low, let’s just forego planting there.”

Researchers say seedling survival is worst at lower elevations, where it’s hotter, drier and more open — so replanting the same trees in the same areas is likely to fail.

They’re experimenting with planting near surviving trees that might provide shade for seedlings and aid water uptake and with planting in clusters that leave gaps in the landscape. Some are even asking whether different species should replace trees wiped out by fire.

Environmental groups working on private land burned by the Cameron Peak fire are replanting Ponderosa pines 500 feet (152 meters) higher because of climate change and near fallen trees that can provide shade, said Megan Maiolo-Heath, spokeswoman for the Coalition for the Poudre River Watershed.

So far, 84% of trees planted last year remain alive, though long-term survival is uncertain. “Any work in the environmental world at this point can feel daunting and overwhelming,” Maiolo-Heath said. “So I think just taking small bites … and trying not to get too overwhelmed is the way to go about it.”

Forest Service rules generally require planting the same species at the same elevations as before a fire, but it’s increasingly clear the agency will “need to be flexible moving forward,” said Jason Sieg, acting supervisor of the Arapaho and Roosevelt National Forests & Pawnee National Grassland.

Relying on research data, Sieg said, “We’ll be able to plan a strategy around how we set this landscape up for the greatest chance of success … long term.”

For now, that might mean replanting at different elevations or collecting seeds from another location. Eventually, researchers say it could require the controversial option of planting trees not found in an area originally.

Additional research and caution are necessary, researchers and the Forest Service said. But more people are warming up to the idea.

“I’ve seen people go from saying, ‘Absolutely, we cannot move trees around’ to, ‘Well, let’s maybe let’s try it at least, and do a few experiments to see if this will work,'” said Stevens-Rumann, the Colorado scientist.

Restoration challenges

Four years ago, researchers and New Mexico’s state forester wrote a reforestation plan for the state, where 4,500 square miles (11,655 square kilometers) of forest were charred between 2011 and 2021, leaving up to 2.6 million acres (1.5 million hectares) in need of replanting.

That was before the 2022 Calf Canyon-Hermits Peak Fire — the most destructive in state history — burned another 534 square miles (1,383 square kilometers).

They soon discovered a big problem.

“We realized that we were never going to have enough seedlings to meet the objectives,” said Hurteau, the University of New Mexico researcher.

The number of Forest Service nurseries — once financed by deposits on timber sales — dropped from 14 to six in the 1990s as timber harvests declined and habitat protections were enacted, according to a Forest Service report on the nurseries’ history.

Most Western seedling production is private and occurs in Oregon, California and Washington, Dobrowski said.

In places like New Mexico and the Rocky Mountains, “we don’t really have a base of facilities to support widespread reforestation,” the researcher said. “We’re (asking) ‘What’s going to fill the gap?'”

In New Mexico, several universities and the state’s forestry division started the New Mexico Reforestation Center with a goal of building a nursery that can produce 5 million seedlings per year for government, tribal and private lands. The first seedlings will be planted this year.

But experts say much more nursery capacity, seed collection and trained workers are needed to make even modest progress in closing the reforestation gap. And they say public and private sector cooperation will be essential.

“There’s all these bottlenecks,” Hurteau said. “We’ve just underinvested in reforestation for decades in the U.S. There’s a lot of investment in human capital that’s going to have to happen.”

Seed collection, for example, requires the right weather and is expensive and labor-intensive. It takes a few years for a typical Western conifer to develop cones. Then contractors must harvest them, typically by climbing trees. Growing, planting and monitoring seedlings amid more frequent droughts adds to the uncertainty, time and money.

The Forest Service said its biggest challenge is simply that the number of intense wildfires is outpacing the ability to prepare sites for replanting.

But the agency is also modernizing nurseries and seeking ways to either expand internal capacity or work with private industry, states and groups like the New Mexico Reforestation Center.

“This is an all-hands-on effort,” said Miller, from the reforestation program.

Researchers say the challenges complicate a Biden administration goal to plant a billion trees over 10 years in national forests, where it identified a nearly 4 million-acre (1.6 million-hectare) backlog.

But money provided for reforestation in the 2021 infrastructure bill enabled the agency to clear 15% of the backlog, Miller said. “If we can get more site preparation done, that would be excellent so that we can move forward a little bit faster.”

Experts say there clearly will be areas where trees never return but it’s critical that the U.S. does as much possible in a thoughtful way.

“Trees live for hundreds of years so we need to be thinking about what’s right as we plant trees today,” Hurteau said. “Are we putting the right species and densities on the landscape given what the next 100, 200 and 300 years will look like?”

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

—Tammy Webber, Brittany Peterson and Camille Fassett, Associated Press

AP data reporter Mary Katherine Wildeman contributed to this story.

Hurricane Helene is forcing the 2024 presidential campaign to address climate change

$
0
0

The devastation wrought by Hurricane Helene has brought climate change to the forefront of the presidential campaign after the issue lingered on the margins for months.

Vice President Kamala Harris traveled to Georgia Wednesday to see hard-hit areas, two days after her Republican opponent, former President Donald Trump, was in the state and criticized the federal response to the storm, which has killed at least 180 people. Thousands of people in the Carolinas still lack running water, cellphone service and electricity.

President Joe Biden toured some of the hardest-hit areas by helicopter on Wednesday. Biden, who has frequently been called on to survey damage and console victims after tornadoes, wildfires, tropical storms and other natural disasters, traveled to the Carolinas to get a closer look at the hurricane devastation. He is expected to visit Georgia and Florida later this week.

“Storms are getting stronger and stronger,” Biden said after surveying damage near Asheville, North Carolina. At least 70 people died in the state.

“Nobody can deny the impact of the climate crisis any more,” Biden said at a briefing in Raleigh, the state capital. “They must be brain dead if they do.”

Harris, meanwhile, hugged and huddled with a family in hurricane-ravaged Augusta, Georgia.

“There is real pain and trauma that resulted because of this hurricane” and its aftermath, Harris said outside a storm-damaged house with downed trees in the yard.

“We are here for the long haul,” she added.

The focus on the storm — and its link to climate change — was notable after climate change was only lightly mentioned in two presidential debates this year. The candidates instead focused on abortion rights, the economy, immigration and other issues.

The hurricane featured prominently in Tuesday’s vice presidential debate as Republican JD Vance and Democrat Tim Walz were asked about the storm and the larger issue of climate change.

Both men called the hurricane a tragedy and agreed on the need for a strong federal response. But it was Walz, the governor of Minnesota, who put the storm in the context of a warming climate.

“There’s no doubt this thing roared onto the scene faster and stronger than anything we’ve seen,” he said.

Bob Henson, a meteorologist and writer with Yale Climate Connections, said it was no surprise that Helene is pushing both the federal disaster response and human-caused climate change into the campaign conversation.

“Weather disasters are often overlooked as a factor in big elections,” he said. “Helene is a sprawling catastrophe, affecting millions of Americans. And it dovetails with several well-established links between hurricanes and climate change, including rapid intensification and intensified downpours.”

More than 40 trillion gallons of rain drenched the Southeast in the last week, an amount that if concentrated in North Carolina would cover the state in 3 1/2 feet of water. “That’s an astronomical amount of precipitation,” said Ed Clark, head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Water Center in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.

During Tuesday’s debate, Walz credited Vance for past statements acknowledging that climate change is a problem. But he noted that Trump has called climate change “a hoax” and joked that rising seas “would make more beachfront property to be able to invest in.”

Trump said in a speech Tuesday that “the planet has actually gotten little bit cooler recently,” adding: “Climate change covers everything.”

In fact, summer 2024 sweltered to Earth’s hottest on record, making it likely this year will end up as the warmest humanity has measured, according to the European climate service Copernicus. Global records were shattered just last year as human-caused climate change, with a temporary boost from an El Niño, keeps dialing up temperatures and extreme weather, scientists said.

Vance, an Ohio senator, said he and Trump support clean air, clean water and “want the environment to be cleaner and safer.” However, during Trump’s four years in office, he took a series of actions to roll back more than 100 environmental regulations.

Vance sidestepped a question about whether he agrees with Trump’s statement that climate change is a hoax. “What the president has said is that if the Democrats — in particular Kamala Harris and her leadership — really believe that climate change is serious, what they would be doing is more manufacturing and more energy production in the United States of America. And that’s not what they’re doing,” he said.

“This idea that carbon (dioxide) emissions drives all of the climate change. Well, let’s just say that’s true just for the sake of argument. So we’re not arguing about weird science. If you believe that, what would you want to do?” Vance asked.

The answer, he said, is to “produce as much energy as possible in the United States of America, because we’re the cleanest economy in the entire world.”

Vance claimed that policies by Biden and Harris actually help China, because many solar panels, lithium-ion batteries and other materials used in renewable energy and electric vehicles are made in China and imported to the United States.

Walz rebutted that claim, noting that the Inflation Reduction Act, the Democrats’ signature climate law approved in 2022, includes the largest-ever investment in domestic clean energy production. The law, for which Harris cast the deciding vote, has created 200,000 jobs across the country, including in Ohio and Minnesota, Walz said. Vance was not in the Senate when the law was approved.

“We are producing more natural gas and more oil (in the United States) than we ever have,” Walz said. “We’re also producing more clean energy.”

The comment echoed a remark by Harris in last month’s presidential debate. The Biden-Harris administration has overseen “the largest increase in domestic oil production in history because of an approach that recognizes that we cannot over rely on foreign oil,” Harris said then.

While Biden rarely mentions it, domestic fossil fuel production under his administration is at an all-time high. Crude oil production averaged 12.9 million barrels a day last year, eclipsing a previous record set in 2019 under Trump, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Democrats want to continue investments in renewable energy such as wind and solar power — and not just because supporters of the Green New Deal want that, Walz said.

“My farmers know climate change is real. They’ve seen 500-year droughts, 500-year floods back to back. But what they’re doing is adapting,” he said.

“The solution for us is to continue to move forward, (accept) that climate change is real” and reduce reliance on fossil fuels, Walz said, adding that the administration is doing exactly that.

“We are seeing us becoming an energy superpower for the future, not just the current” time, he said.


Associated Press writers Colleen Long in Raleigh, North Carolina, and Christopher Megerian in Augusta, Georgia, contributed to this report.

—Matthew Daly, Associated Press

California’s new AI deepfakes law gets blocked by a federal judge. Here’s why

$
0
0

A new California law allowing any person to sue for damages over election deepfakes has been put on pause after a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction Wednesday blocking it.

U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez said artificial intelligence and deepfakes pose significant risks, but he ruled that the law likely violates the First Amendment.

“Most of AB 2839 acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free and unfettered exchange of ideas which is so vital to American democratic debate,” Mendez wrote.

The law took effect immediately after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed it last month. The Democrat signed two other bills at the time aimed at cracking down on the use of artificial intelligence to create false images or videos in political ads ahead of the 2024 election. They are among the toughest laws of their kind in the nation.

Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Newsom, said the laws protect democracy and preserve free speech.

“We’re confident the courts will uphold the state’s ability to regulate these types of dangerous and misleading deepfakes,” he said in a statement. “Satire remains alive and well in California — even for those who miss the punchline.”

But a lawyer representing YouTuber Christopher Kohls, who sued state officials over the law, called the ruling “straightforward.”

“We are gratified that the district court agreed with our analysis that new technologies do not change the principles behind First Amendment protections,” attorney Theodore Frank said.

The law was also unpopular among First Amendment experts, who urged Newsom last month to veto the measure. They argued that the law is unconstitutional and a government overreach.

“If something is truly defamatory, there’s a whole body of law and established legal standards for how to prove a claim for defamation consistent with the First Amendment,” David Loy, legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, said in an interview in September. “The government is not free to create new categories of speech outside the First Amendment.”

HBO Bitcoin doc ‘Money Electric’ hunts for Satoshi Nakamoto—see a first look at the trailer

$
0
0

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto? 

This is the burning question at the heart of the cryptocurrency space, and it has been since Bitcoin was first introduced to the world more than 15 years ago. 

Satoshi Nakamoto is the moniker used by the individual (or individuals) who developed Bitcoin, published the Bitcoin white paper, and laid out a vision for how the cryptocurrency could be used to change the world. The thing is, nobody knows who Satoshi Nakamoto is. At least nobody has admitted to knowing who they are, even though some people have claimed to be Satoshi in the past.

As such, here we are, with Bitcoin now more or less a fixture of the financial system and trading for more than $60,000 as of writing. With Satoshi, whoever they are, still holding (and having never touched) a stash of 1.1 million Bitcoins, they could be one of the wealthiest people in the world. That makes Satoshi a pretty important person with, potentially, a significant amount of power.

That’s one of the reasons that filmmaker Cullen Hoback set his sights on unmasking Satoshi in his new film, Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery, which airs on HBO on October 8 at 9 p.m. ET and will be available for streaming on Max.

Hoback—whose previous work includes Q: Into The Storm and Terms and Conditions May Apply—spoke with Fast Company about the new film, including what sparked his interest in the Satoshi mystery, why unmasking Satoshi is important, and why he thinks the film’s conclusions will be controversial.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

I knew about the Satoshi Nakamoto mystery and have always wondered why somebody didn’t just spend some significant time trying to figure this out. So, what sparked your interest in this, and what was the genesis of the project?

How do you spend three intense years just reading forum posts and looking through emails? I knew what Bitcoin was before 2017, and that’s when I really started to wrap my head around the inner workings of it. I think anybody who is interested in investigations in general, or, like, has a penchant for trying to solve mysteries, looks at the Satoshi case and goes, that’d be a fun thing to get into. 

But it’s also something that so many people have speculated on over the years, and  there’s this question of whether you can actually solve it or not. Or, can you at least put together a really good case? Of course, I didn’t know if we were going to be able to solve it. And the reason that I jumped into this story following the Q series (Q: Into the Storm), was, actually, Adam McKay. 

Cullen Hoback [Photo: HBO]

It’s just a story that has been out there for so long, and I wanted to be able to put together a pretty sound case. And I hoped that we would be able to use some of the experience gained from, doing previous digital forensics on Q and kind of the lessons learned with the cat and mouse of these anonymous figures who are doing a lot of things to cover their trail, but then also the psychology of what it’s like to have created something, you know, previously, like Q, but now the psychology of what it’s like to create something like Bitcoin, and if they’re alive, be holding on to that secret.

And that, to me, is pretty fascinating. I think that puts us in a pretty good position to try to crack it. And having the privilege of three years really, to just devote to investigating this story, digging into everything we could read on it, looking into every suspect, reading every forum, reading an unreasonable amount of forum posts, put us in a position to be able to do something that I just don’t know that most have the resources or time to really be able to pursue.

If we can start at the beginning, can you explain how you start to investigate? Was there a larger strategy, or did you see what was already known, and pick up the trail from there?

You have to pick up where other researchers have left off. There’s obviously been a lot of energy and research put into trying to crack this mystery. And that’s part of why there are four or five key names that people tend to circle back to—people who seem like, even if they’re not Satoshi, they might know who Satoshi is. Or, you can start to map that Bitcoin’s origin story emanates from this network or these individuals.

I put that on a shelf for a while and said, all right, if I can get prolonged access to one of them as an entry point, that might unlock the larger story. That entry point was Adam Back[…]so it became a key entry point to unlocking the bigger mystery.

What do you think the value is of figuring out who Satoshi is? Why might this be important, especially to people who aren’t in the crypto space?

There’s real value. I think there’s a narrative that exists that Satoshi disappeared and was never heard from again. I think if Satoshi is actively involved in driving global Bitcoin adoption, rendering themselves the richest person on Earth? That’s a different story. You know how we used to rely on a gold standard? There’s a drive right now to rely on a Bitcoin standard, and it would be like one unknown person controlling one-twentieth of all the gold.

Just having this massive stockpile, because Bitcoin is being baked into the backbone of countries now, it’s being used as legal tender in some places. It’s being used in 401(k)s. It’s now being traded on Wall Street. This question of whether or not there’s an anonymous figure out there who controls a giant share of Bitcoin becomes increasingly relevant. And I think this is very important, and this is one of the things I kept coming back to, is that Satoshi could have destroyed their stash in a public way for everyone to see. Assuming they were alive, this is something they could have done. This would have been good for, you know, sort of Satoshi’s security and for the security and longevity of Bitcoin. But Satoshi didn’t do that—which means that the possibility still exists. So, trying to understand who is behind this, whether or not they would pull that lever, is very important.

As a filmmaker, there’s no guarantee that you were going to have an answer all that digging into who Satoshi is. How do you gauge that? How do you consider the fact that you could work so hard and potentially, not see any payoff?

I guess that’s the risk of these kinds of projects. We’re not looking at a case that’s been in the courts or something like that. We’re not looking at something in the past. We’re looking at a real-time investigation. And there’s always a risk with any real-time investigation, especially when you’re pouring your own resources into it. HBO came on somewhere in the middle of this project. 

Once we’d secured what I felt was enough access to be able to start to gauge the network in real life, not online, you know, because that’s the other thing about these types of stories, is that you can only get so far with, you know, what’s left on the internet? I think that if this could be solved on the internet, it would’ve been solved, I think that helps in that it’s like a compass, and it points you in the direction of the key networks and key players. And then you just have to spend time with them, get to know them, get to know who they know. See who they interact with and who they introduce you to. 

Not to spoil anything, but do you feel like you’ve made headway in solving the mystery?

I think we make a hell of a case in the film, and I think that who we land on is unexpected and is going to result in a fair amount of controversy. I think that people are going to debate it regardless of how strong of a case we made, and that’s fine. That’s the nature of this space. We had a lot more evidence than we were able to include in the film. 

But it’s going to be up to the audience—how they view the case, how they view the evidence, and whether or not they’re convinced. 

See the trailer for Money Electric here or via the embedded video above.

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled Cullen Hoback’s last name.


There’s another Tesla Cybertruck recall, this time affecting over 27,000 units

$
0
0

Tesla’s Cybertuck has had a rough time since the vehicles were released to the public. And now things are even worse: Tesla announced on Thursday is was recalling up to 27,185 Cybertrucks because of a new default found with the vehicle.

This is now the fifth recall the Tesla Cybertruck has experienced since January 2024, according to data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Previous recalls have been due to issues with the windshield and truck bed trim and defective accelerator pedals. A full breakdown of the Cybertruck’s problems can be seen here.

The latest Cybertruck recall

So what’s the latest issue that’s caused the fifth Cybertruck recall of the year? According to the NHTSA’s recall notice (Campaign Number: 24V718000), the Cybertruck’s rearview camera image may not display or be delayed in displaying an image. This delay increases the risk of a crash since the driver may not see what is behind them.

“On certain affected vehicles, under certain conditions, the vehicle system (including the rearview image) may not complete a shutdown process before the system is commanded to boot-up,” the safety recall states. “If the driver starts a backing event before the vehicle system completes its shut down and boot-up, the rearview image may not display within two seconds of placing the vehicle in reverse as required by FMVSS 111, S6.2.3.”

The notice says the display may appear blank for as much as six to eight seconds.

What should Cybertruck drivers do?

Thankfully, it appears that Cybertruck drivers won’t be inconvenienced too badly (despite the safety concerns). That’s because Tesla has issued a software fix for the issue, which the company suggests fixes the problem.

“Beginning on or shortly after September 19, 2024, at no cost to customers, affected vehicles received an over-the-air (OTA) software remedy that ensures the back-up camera display complies with the two-second response time, as per FMVSS 111, $6.2.3,” the notice states. “No further action is necessary from owners of affected vehicles that are equipped with software release 2024.32.5.2 or a later release.”

The NHTSA’s listing says Telsa will begin mailing owners of Cybertrucks letters on November 25, 2024, which will detail the problem.

Why Uber and Lyft drivers are using risky DIY Tesla robotaxis

$
0
0

A self-driving Tesla carrying a passenger for Uber rammed into an SUV at an intersection in suburban Las Vegas in April, an accident that sparked new concerns that a growing stable of self-styled “robotaxis” is exploiting a regulatory gray area in U.S. cities, putting lives at risk.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk aims to show off plans for a robotaxi, or self-driving car used for ride-hailing services, on Oct. 10, and he has long contemplated a Tesla-run taxi network of autonomous vehicles owned by individuals.

Do-it-yourself versions, however, are already proliferating, according to 11 ride-hail drivers who use Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) software. Many say the software, which costs $99 per month, has limitations, but that they use it because it helps reduce drivers’ stress and therefore allows them to work longer hours and earn more money.

Reuters is first to report about the Las Vegas accident and a related inquiry by federal safety officials, and of the broad use by ride-hail drivers of Tesla autonomous software.

While test versions of self-driving cabs with human backup drivers from robotaxi operators such as Alphabet’s Waymo and General Motors’ Cruise are heavily regulated, state and federal authorities say Tesla drivers alone are responsible for their vehicles, whether or not they use driver-assist software. Waymo and Cruise use test versions of software categorized as fully autonomous while Tesla FSD is categorized as a level requiring driver oversight.

The other driver in the April 10 Las Vegas accident, who was taken to the hospital, was faulted for failing to yield the right of way, according to the police report. The Las Vegas Tesla driver, Justin Yoon, said on YouTube the Tesla software failed to slow his vehicle even after the SUV emerged from a blind spot created by another vehicle.

Yoon, who posts YouTube videos under the banner “Project Robotaxi,” was in the driver’s seat of his Tesla, hands off the wheel, when it entered the intersection in a suburban part of Las Vegas, according to footage from inside the car. The Tesla on FSD navigated the vehicle at 46 mph (74 kph) and did not initially register a sport-utility vehicle crossing the road in front of Yoon. At the last moment, Yoon took control and turned the car into a deflected hit, the footage shows.

“It’s not perfect, it’ll make mistakes, it will probably continue to make mistakes,” Yoon said in a post-crash video. Yoon and his passenger suffered minor injuries and the car was totaled, he said.

Yoon discussed using FSD with Reuters before he publicly posted videos of the accident but did not respond to requests for comment afterward.

Tesla did not respond to requests for comment. Reuters was unable to reach the Uber passenger and other driver for comment.

Ride-hailing companies Uber and Lyft responded to questions about FSD by saying drivers are responsible for safety.

Uber, which said it was in touch with the driver and passenger in the Las Vegas accident, cited its community guidelines: “Drivers are expected to maintain an environment that makes riders feel safe; even if driving practices don’t violate the law.”

Uber also cited instructions by Tesla which alert drivers who use FSD to have their hands on the wheel and be ready to take over at any moment.

Lyft said: “Drivers agree that they will not engage in reckless behavior.”

Grand ambitions

Musk has grand plans for self-driving software based on the FSD product. The technology will serve as the foundation of the robotaxi product software, and Musk envisions creating a Tesla-run autonomous ride service using vehicles owned by his customers when they are not otherwise in use.

But the drivers who spoke to Reuters also described critical shortcomings with the technology, including sudden unexplained acceleration and braking. Some have quit using it in complex situations such as airport pickups, navigating parking lots and construction zones.

“I do use it, but I’m not completely comfortable with it,” said Sergio Avedian, a ride-hail driver in Los Angeles and a senior contributor on “The Rideshare Guy” YouTube channel, an online community of ride-hailing drivers with nearly 200,000 subscribers. Avedian avoids using FSD while carrying passengers. Based on his conversations with fellow drivers on the channel, however, he estimates that 30% to 40% of Tesla ride-hail drivers across the U.S. use FSD regularly.

FSD is categorized by the federal government as a type of partial automation that requires the driver to be fully engaged and attentive while the system performs steering, acceleration and braking. It has come under increased regulatory and legal scrutiny with at least two fatal accidents involving the technology. But using it for ride-hail is not against the law.

“Ride-share services allow for the use of these partial automation systems in commercial settings, and that is something that should be facing significant scrutiny,” Guidehouse Insights analyst Jake Foose said.

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said it was aware of Yoon’s crash and had reached out to Tesla for additional information, but did not respond to specific questions on additional regulations or guidelines.

Authorities in California, Nevada and Arizona, which oversee operations of ride-hail companies and robotaxi companies, said they do not regulate the practice as FSD and other such systems fall out of the purview of robotaxi or AV regulation. They did not comment on the crash.

Uber recently enabled its software to send passenger destination details to Tesla’s dashboard navigation system — a move that helps FSD users, wrote Omar Qazi, an X user with 515,000 followers who posts using the handle @WholeMarsBlog and often gets public replies from Musk on the platform.

“This will make it even easier to do Uber rides on FSD,” Qazi said in an X post.

Tesla, Uber and Lyft do not have ways to tell that a driver is both working for a ride-hailing company and using FSD, industry experts said.

While almost all major automakers have a version of partial automation technology, most are limited in their capabilities and restricted for use on highways. On the other hand, Tesla says FSD helps the vehicle drive itself almost anywhere with active driver supervision but minimal intervention.

“I’m glad that Tesla is doing it and able to pull it off,” said David Kidd, a senior research scientist at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. “But from a safety standpoint, it raised a lot of hairs.”

Instead of new regulations, Kidd said NHTSA should consider providing basic, nonbinding guidelines to prevent misuse of such technologies.

Any federal oversight would require a formal investigation into how ride-hail drivers use all driver-assistance technology, not just FSD, said Missy Cummings, director of the George Mason University Autonomy and Robotics center and a former adviser to NHTSA.

“If Uber and Lyft were smart, they’d get ahead of it and they would ban that,” she said.

Meanwhile, ride-hail drivers want more from Tesla. Kaz Barnes, who has made more than 2,000 trips using FSD with passengers since 2022, told Reuters he was looking forward to the day when he could get out of the car and let Musk’s network send it to work.

“You would just kind of take off the training wheels,” he said. “I hope to be able to do that with this car one day.”

—Akash Sriram and Abhirup Roy, Reuters

$1.5 billion in U.S. federal funds will go to power grid projects in these three regions

$
0
0

Four electricity transmission projects serving the U.S. southwest, southeast and New England will get $1.5 billion in public funding to improve the grid’s resilience and connect customers with clean energy, the government said on Thursday.

The funds for the second phase of the Transmission Facilitation Program come from a 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law and will enable nearly 1,000 miles (1609 km) of new transmission lines in Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas.

“We’re using it to help large transmission projects get off the ground, projects that otherwise would not get built,” David Turk, the deputy U.S. energy secretary, told reporters on a call.

The investments will create nearly 9,000 jobs, the Department of Energy said.

The first phase of the program, announced a year ago, is supporting grid projects in western and northeastern states.

Turk said his department will buy electricity capacity on the lines and then sell it back when new customers show up.

The projects are:

—Aroostook Renewable Project which will provide New England with access to wind power generated in Maine

—Cimarron Link a 400-mile (644 km) high voltage direct current line from Texas that will deliver power from wind and solar to growing areas in eastern Oklahoma

—Southern Spirit will build a 320-mile (515 km) line connecting the Electric Reliability Council of Texas grid for the first time with grids in the southeastern power markets to prevent outages during extreme weather events like the deadly storm Uri that hit Texas in 2022

—Southline, which will build a transmission line to bring electricity from wind power from western New Mexico across the desert Southwest.

The Energy Department said its National Transmission Planning Study found the U.S. will need to roughly double or triple transmission capacity in the three decades to 2050 in order to meet demand growth and reliability needs.

It said hundreds of billions of dollars of cost savings could be gained through transmission expansion and interregional planning.

—Timothy Gardner, Reuters

Why OpenAI needs another $6.6 billion in VC money

$
0
0

Welcome to AI DecodedFast Company’s weekly newsletter that breaks down the most important news in the world of AI. You can sign up to receive this newsletter every week here.

OpenAI raises another $6.6 billion at a $157 billion valuation

OpenAI’s product lineup and cast of executives are quickly evolving, but one thing has stayed the same–the company’s need for a lot of cash. The company’s main innovation—putting massive computing power behind generative AI models—is, by definition, expensive, given the high cost of server time and specialized chips, not to mention the expensive PhDs needed to run it all. 

Now the company has added another $6.6 billion to its estimated $13.5 billion in funding. Its investors believe the company to be worth $157 billion, up from its $86 billion valuation in February. The round was led by venture-capital firm Thrive Capital ($1.25 billion) and Microsoft ($1 billion), the Wall Street Journal reports. Softbank and Nvidia invested for the first time. 

OpenAI asked the investors not to invest in its close rivals: Anthropic, Elon Musk’s xAI, and Safe Superintelligence, cofounded by OpenAI’s former chief scientist Ilya Sutskever.

OpenAI is making revenue through its API fees and ChatGPT subscriptions, but it’s far from profitable. The new money will reportedly pay for a year of runway for the company to begin generating returns on investments. The new funding comes on the heels of the departure of CTO Mira Murati, who is the latest in a string of OpenAI researchers and executives to resign this year. Also, the company held its developer event this week, in which it announced the ability for developers to essentially build ChatGPT’s Advanced Voice Mode into their own apps.

Perhaps most importantly, OpenAI changed the architecture of its models with its newest “o1” line. The models are designed to work through complex multistep problems. The way they do this is by trying multiple lines of reasoning concurrently, judging the answers, then selecting the best one. This entails generating a lot more tokens at inference time, which requires a lot more compute power. OpenAI gets some of that compute power from Microsoft’s Azure cloud, but it will have to build more clusters of its own and make investments in chips that are optimized for its workloads. 

California’s vetoed AI bill won’t be the last to focus on biggest AI models

Earlier this week, California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed legislation that would have imposed safety and transparency requirements on developers of large frontier AI models such as Meta’s Llama and OpenAI’s GPT-4o. Newsom said that by focusing only on the largest models, regulators might overlook the risks of smaller models deployed in high-risk environments or that do critical decision-making or use sensitive data. 

But even though the bill, SB 1047, ultimately failed, it may be the most high-profile and hotly contested AI bill the U.S. has seen to date. 

“[T]he debate around SB 1047 has dramatically advanced the issue of AI safety on the international stage,” the bill’s lead author, State Senator Scott Wiener, said in a statement responding to Newsom’s veto. “Major AI labs were forced to get specific on the protections they can provide to the public through policy and oversight.” 

Some believe the bill’s popularity among lawmakers and the public will embolden other states to act. “With California’s tech industry, it’s not surprising that they were the first to attempt to pass legislation like this, and it wouldn’t surprise me if other states make similar attempts,” says Brian O’Neill, a computer science professor at Quinnipiac University. 

In some cases, that’s already happening. Colorado, for example, enacted in May a “comprehensive” AI law, SB24-205, which aims to protect consumers from AI systems making biased decisions about them. The bill, which takes effect in 2026, is similar to SB 1047 in that it imposes safety and transparency requirements on AI model developers, but different in that its main focus is to prevent immediate, specific harms such as AI bias (as opposed to future catastrophic harm to the public). 

And the California legislature is bound to be very active next session. “I expect several dozen AI-related bills to emerge out of the California legislature alone in the next legislative session,” says Dean Ball, research fellow with the Mercatus Center, “just as there were several dozen in this term [17 of which were signed by the Governor]. Many of those are likely to be focused on present-day risks as opposed to catastrophic risks from frontier AI systems—but undoubtedly, some will be focused on frontier AI regulation.” 

Marc Andreessen: The AI purists will win

Influential VC Marc Andreessen said this week that his firm, Andreessen Horowitz, sees AI as something more than a technological shift on the order of the arrival of the internet or mobile computing. It’s more like a completely different kind of computing, he said during an on-stage interview Tuesday with Anyscale’s Robert Nishihara at the Ray Summit in San Francisco. Where traditional computers are deterministic (they follow explicit orders in code), neural networks are “probabilistic,” meaning they can do a wider array of things based on less specific instructions, using math to find the most likely answer. And you might get a different answer every time you ask the same question.

Andreessen said that the next wave of startups will apply this kind of computing to all kinds of business and life tasks—an AI travel agent might act on our behalf to plan and book a vacation, for example. Andreessen says startups that use AI to build their product from the start will win out against companies that try to build AI onto an older product that doesn’t fully reimagine the task. “That’s like adding flour to a cake after it’s already been baked,” he said. Andreessen says they have a term at his firm, the “sixth bullet,” which refers to the bullet point companies often add to their pitch decks to show that their product leverages AI.

More AI coverage from Fast Company: 

Want exclusive reporting and trend analysis on technology, business innovation, future of work, and design? Sign up for Fast Company Premium.

Google’s new AI search will change the way you browse the internet

$
0
0

When Google launched its AI Overviews, a world of normies got access to the power of modern AI search. Instead of a page of links, its Gemini model synthesizes one answer—and occasionally adds some glue—in attempts to offer a single, end-all-be-all search result. 

But today, Google is sharing plans that reframe AI search as the exact opposite of that initial strategy. Rather than giving you one perfect answer, it’s designed to help you browse many. The features will come to recipe and restaurant results on mobile devices in the coming weeks, before making their way to travel and shopping.

“We know users love to browse and there’s a joy in discovery . . . it’s not always about that instant answer,” says Rhiannon Bell, VP of UX at Google. “We’re looking at organizing search from a content perspective in new ways that feel more natural to users.”

[Image: Google]

Visually speaking, that means many Google results will look less like a list of links, and more like multimedia clusters. Rather than big hero treatments of single recipes from Epicurious or Bon Appetit, the design prioritizes info density. Clusters will include thumbnails that lead to many different recipes. And then, different clusters can offer more nuanced tangents to explore. While one cluster might have results for pasta primavera, another might have a cluster focused on recipes for dietary restrictions or specific ingredients, while another cluster could be related to pasta cooking techniques. (And in theory, there are all sorts of possibilities for personalization.)

“AI has made this so much easier for us to do in terms of the diversity of the topics and subtopics that matter to your query,” says Bell. “Before it would have been like, directly matched to your keywords; now we can branch off a bit and offer more content around a subtopic that might interest you as well.”

[Image: Google]

Google has a few ways these clusters can appear—some requiring a photo, others operating on just a headline, others excerpting message boards in short answers—so the way these search results play out as you scroll down the page has visual variety that looks more like a publication than a search page. Bell calls this visual cadence, with plenty of white space, an important “rhythm” of browsing.

“As the web grows and evolves, there’s so many more formats out there. It’s not just the blue link; we have forums, human perspectives, image rich content, short and long form videos,” says Bell. “As that richness grows, we have to evolve our product strategy to meet people in search.”

A shift in engagement strategy

When it comes to the topic of information design, it’s hard to argue with Google’s strategy. Not all information should be presented the same way. Not every question can be resolved with one simple answer. And AI can unlock design possibilities we never imagined before, so we do need to think beyond the AI companion.

Notably, Google is adding other new capabilities to search through Lens that look beyond typing in the search bar. You can now film a video with Google Lens while asking a question with your voice, or circle and item from a photo to search to buy. These multimodal styles of search will no doubt play a bigger role in Google products down the line.

[Image: Google]

Google is clearly tweaking its approach to search design to expand and reposition its own search strategy. As the company pays approximately $15 billion to Apple annually to be the default search engine on iPhones, critics have warned that Google is losing its edge in search, be it from ChatGPT/Bing to Gen Z’s love for TikToking instead of Googling—though the company argues that AI search has actually proven to boost its search revenue so far. In fact, the company will be adding advertisements to its AI Overviews (along with welcome outbound links for sourcing).

As for Google’s new AI clustering strategy specifically—which takes you deep down into a more pleasantly designed page to explore links—that feels like a fresh grab for engagement. It’s a way that Google itself can continue to evolve from a quick stop before going somewhere else, to the place you hang out for a while to peruse the web. In fact, I’d argue the new Google is looking ever more like a publisher, using a mix of content types and presentations to keep stories fresh across the page. Case in point: Google’s own content-clustered redesign heavily mirrors the New York Times’ new app—which is increasingly organized to help you discover more stories beyond the headlines of the day, to poke around and stay a while.

I suspect much of the public will enjoy Google’s new approach to search, especially as it comes to other categories like travel and shopping in the future. The company does need to evolve—and what we see here is a mere taste of what Google will need to do with video and richer multimedia.

But it’s also difficult to look at a page full of recipes, neatly shuffled and sorted with AI, and not see this as yet another AI feature that’s competitive with publishers and standalone websites themselves. Because if you’re spending your time discovering on Google, you aren’t spending your time discovering on a publication’s (or store’s) site, app, or social feed. While they’re not showing ads in these new AI results for launch, Google confirmed that ad units—a major topic in Google’s recent antitrust trial—will work their way “across the experience of search” soon. Meaning Google will be using design to monetize the world’s information anew.

What is Google AI search in another two years? An omniscient assistant, like Microsoft Copilot? Or a smarter Flipboard? For now, Google is arguing it can be both. So long as we all promise to keep Googling.

Viewing all 2811 articles
Browse latest View live