RNC's livestreaming partner for the GOP debate is a haven for disinformation and extremism


Sun, September 24, 2023

NEW YORK (AP) — The second Republican presidential debate will be broadcast Wednesday on Fox Business Network and Univision, but the exclusive online livestream will take place on Rumble, an alternative video-sharing platform that has been criticized for allowing— and at times promoting — far-right extremism, bigotry, election disinformation and conspiracy theories.

By bringing viewers to Rumble to watch the GOP debate, as it did with the first one last month, the Republican National Committee is driving potential voters to a site crawling with content that flouts the rules of more mainstream ones such as Facebook, Instagram and YouTube.

Earlier this year, RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel said using Rumble instead of YouTube as its livestreaming partner was a decision aimed toward " getting away from Big Tech.”

Asked about the criticism against the platform, the RNC said in an emailed statement that “hate, bigotry and violence is unfortunately prevalent on every social media platform, and the RNC condemns it entirely, but the RNC does not manage content or pages outside of our own.”

Rumble, founded in 2013, prides itself on being “immune to cancel culture.” Its website says “everyone benefits when we have access to more ideas, diverse opinions, and dialogue.”

That approach has catapulted the site to popularity in recent years as many conservatives have sought alternative social media companies that won't remove their posts or suspend their accounts for false or inflammatory content. The company, which went public in 2022, has been backed by conservative donors such as venture capitalist Peter Thiel and Republican Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio.

It has grown to average 44 million active users per month, according to its most recent quarterly filing. By comparison, its closest mainstream cousin, the Google-owned video service YouTube, has billions of monthly logged-in users, a spokesperson said.

It's hard to gauge to what extent the debates have affected Rumble's user base because the company hasn't released that data yet. But it's clear the company's reach is growing. Desktop and mobile web data from the research firm Similarweb, which doesn't include traffic from apps, shows the platform had about double the number of unique visitors in August 2023 as it did the year before.

Rumble’s web traffic also is consistently much higher than that of other right-wing social media platforms, such as Truth Social, Gab, or Gettr, according to Similarweb’s analysis.

Politicians have taken notice. Since the Republican presidential primary contest began, several candidates have started posting their campaign videos on the platform, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy and current GOP front-runner Donald Trump. Democratic challenger and anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also has a profile on the site.

Yet as Rumble's influence has grown, the platform continues to be overwhelmed by content that denies the results of the 2020 election, pushes bigoted views about race and gender, and encourages harmful conspiracy theories.

In the weeks since the first debate, the site’s leaderboard of top-performing content, which is featured prominently on Rumble's home page, has regularly included multiple accounts that promote QAnon, a baseless conspiracy theory that has led to violent incidents and deaths.

A search for “election” on the platform populates videos that falsely claim the so-called deep state cheated in the 2020 presidential election, and that the 2024 election already has been rigged.

An analysis from NewsGuard, a firm that monitors online misinformation, found last year that nearly half the videos suggested by Rumble in response to searches for common election-related terms came from untrustworthy sources.

Rumble's press team said the company is not responsible for the content in the leaderboard and search functions. In an emailed response, they said the leaderboard rankings are generated from the most liked recent videos on the site.

“Rumble is a platform and does not create content, just as other social media platforms host content without producing or endorsing it," the email said.

The company's response pointed out that even YouTube has announced it will no longer take action against claims of fraud in the 2020 election. However, YouTube, unlike Rumble, has said it will continue to remove content that tries to deceive voters in the 2024 elections.

Meta, which runs Facebook and Instagram, also has quietly rolled back some of its safeguards against election misinformation in recent years. But it has continued several other initiatives such as its third-party fact-checking program, which enlists the help of news outlets to investigate the veracity of popular falsehoods spreading on Facebook or Instagram. The Associated Press is part of that effort.

Beyond election fraud claims and conspiracy theories, Rumble also has come under fire for being slow to respond to hate speech and calls for violence.

Ahead of the first GOP debate last month, the live feed for the GOP’s official pre-show on Rumble was overridden with racial slurs and bigoted comments. The episode was then hidden from public view. The RNC said it was taken down to direct users to the debate livestream and avoid confusing viewers with multiple videos.

Trump’s campaign videos on Rumble also have generated violent and hateful user responses, including a threatening comment on a recent video that asserted President Joe Biden should be hanged. Other comments on his recent videos told Trump to “execute” Democrats and suggested that someone should “build a lot of gallows.”

Rumble said it removed those comments in response to AP's inquiry. It said the posts violated the platform's content policies that ban “the incitement of violence, illegal content, racism, antisemitism, promoting terrorist groups (designated by US and Canadian governments), and violating copyright, as well as many other restrictions.”

Later, in a post on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, Rumble founder Chris Pavlovski responded to the AP's inquiry by saying the posts were “a few comments out of millions.”

It's difficult to say conclusively whether Rumble has more hateful, extreme or conspiracy theory content than competitors such as YouTube, said Jared Holt, senior research analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a London-based think tank that tracks online hate, disinformation and extremism. But he said Rumble uniquely appeals to creators who make that sort of content.

“It's managed to strike a rare alt-platform sweet spot,” he said. "It has loose enough content guidelines and a large enough potential audience size to make operating there worth a creator's effort.”

The RNC hasn't yet announced whether it will work with Rumble for future debates. Holt said the partnership already is legitimizing the platform in the eyes of many viewers.

“This RNC streaming deal with Rumble will certainly direct more people to the platform, where they’re likely to find extreme and misleading content — and perhaps more importantly, almost no content that would counteract it with different perspectives or corrections,” he said.

___

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Ali Swenson, The Associated Press

California bill to have human drivers ride in autonomous trucks is vetoed by governor

The Canadian Press
Sat, September 23, 2023 



SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom has vetoed a bill to require human drivers on board self-driving trucks, a measure that union leaders and truck drivers said would save hundreds of thousands of jobs in the state.

The legislation vetoed Friday night would have banned self-driving trucks weighing more than 10,000 pounds (4,536 kilograms) — ranging from UPS delivery vans to massive big rigs — from operating on public roads unless a human driver is on board.

Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, head of the California Labor Federation, said driverless trucks are dangerous and called Newsom's veto shocking. She estimates that removing drivers would cost a quarter million jobs in the state.

“We will not sit by as bureaucrats side with tech companies, trading our safety and jobs for increased corporate profits. We will continue to fight to make sure that robots do not replace human drivers and that technology is not used to destroy good jobs,” Fletcher said in a statement late Friday.

In a statement announcing that he would not sign the bill, the Democratic governor said additional regulation of autonomous trucks was unnecessary because existing laws are sufficient.

Newsom pointed to 2012 legislation that allows the state Department of Motor Vehicles to work with the California Highway Patrol, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration “and others with relevant expertise to determine the regulations necessary for the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads.”

Opponents of the bill argued self-driving cars that are already on the roads haven’t caused many serious accidents compared to cars driven by people. Businesses say self-driving trucks would help them transport products more efficiently.

Union leaders and drivers said the bill would have helped address concerns about safety and losing truck driving jobs to automation in the future.

The bill coasted through the Legislature with few lawmakers voting against it. It’s part of ongoing debates about the potential risks of self-driving vehicles and how workforces adapt to a new era as companies deploy technologies to do work traditionally done by humans.

Newsom, who typically enjoys strong support from labor, faced some pressure from within his administration not to sign it. His administration’s Office of Business and Economic Development says it would push companies making self-driving technologies to move out-of-state.

The veto comes as the debate over the future of autonomous vehicles heats up. In San Francisco, two robotaxi companies got approval last month from state regulators to operate in the city at all hours.

Last Tuesday in Sacramento, hundreds of truck drivers, union leaders and other supporters of the bill rallied at the state Capitol. Drivers chanted “sign that bill” as semi-trucks lined a street in front of the Capitol. There are about 200,000 commercial truck drivers in California, according to Teamsters officials.

Also Friday, Newsom vetoed a bill that would have required judges in custody cases to consider whether a parent affirms their child’s gender identity and another measure that would have barred state prison officials from sharing information about incarcerated immigrants with federal officials.

The Associated Press

Climate change forces Americans to reconsider profit, greed, power and truth | Opinion

Andrew Fiala
Sun, September 24, 2023 

This past week, the Secretary General of the UN, António Guterres, described the climate emergency with apocalyptic language. He said, “Humanity has opened the gates of hell.” He called for quick action to avoid the climate inferno.

This call to action is not directed primarily at individuals like you and me. Individuals can drive less, for example. Or you could eat less meat. But the climate-friendly choices of individuals are less important than institutional and systemic change. To close the gates of hell, nations, states and corporations need to be transformed.

One interesting step occurred in California this past week. The state sued five major oil companies, claiming these firms lied about the climate impact of their products. The lawsuit alleges that the oil companies encouraged “disinformation and denialism” about the link between fossil fuels and climate change. This included a deliberate effort to “discredit” the scientific consensus about that link.

Gov. Gavin Newsom said, “For more than 50 years, Big Oil has been lying to us — covering up the fact that they’ve long known how dangerous the fossil fuels they produce are for our planet.” Attorney General Rob Bonta said, “Oil and gas companies have privately known the truth for decades — that the burning of fossil fuels leads to climate change — but have fed us lies and mistruths to further their record-breaking profits at the expense of our environment.”

Activists have called out this bad behavior for a long time. But the California lawsuit puts teeth behind the accusations by aiming to punish the oil companies. The proceeds of any settlement will establish a fund that would be used to respond to climate emergencies and to pay for mitigation and adaptation efforts. All of this is occurring at a time when gas prices are high, cars are expensive, and auto workers are on strike.

Could this be the beginning of a radical shift in the fossil fuel infrastructure? Maybe. But while lawsuits aimed at corporations could be part of the solution, the long-term solution must be cooperative rather than hostile. The oil companies should stop lying. But greed, power, and short-term self-interest are not easy to overcome. And so, while punishment and blame are on the table, the ultimate solution requires a change of culture and moral development.

Consider the moral and cultural shifts that have occurred in prior movements for social change. The abolition of slavery in the United States required a war. But that war was accompanied by a shift in moral thinking, which held that slavery was simply wrong. The movement for women’s rights required a struggle in the streets. That struggle was paralleled by a shift in our understanding of women and men. A similar process unfolded in the civil rights movement.

There is a chicken-or-egg question in these movements. Did the moral shift come first, or was it a result of struggle? There is no simple answer here. There are layers and phases and feedback loops in these cultural transformations. Antagonism is part of any struggle. But the long-term goal is moral development. Cultural shifts ask us to re-conceive our humanity, to reorder our priorities, and to respond in new ways to the world.

One hundred and fifty years after slavery was abolished, it is no longer imaginable that any human being would be enslaved. A hundred years after women gained the right to vote, it’s hard to imagine that anyone would have denied that right to half the population. That’s the kind of change that is needed to solve the climate crisis. We need to create a world in which it would be unimaginable for powerful corporations to lie and profit while spewing destructive chemicals into the atmosphere.

Secretary General Guterres said that we have opened the gates of hell. That’s a metaphor with religious resonance. It points toward the need for a spiritual solution to the climate crisis. To close the gates of hell, we need structural change, but also moral transformation. Lawsuits will help. But in the long run we need to change the way we think about profit, greed, power, and truth. In short, we need to rethink what we value, and we need to re-imagine the world we hope to leave to our grandchildren.

Andrew Fiala is a professor of philosophy and director of The Ethics Center at Fresno State. Contact him: fiala.andrew@gmail.com.

African rhino numbers rise for first time in decade despite poaching

RFI
Sun, September 24, 2023

© AFP - Luca Sola


Conservationists have confirmed the number of rhinos across Africa increased last year, hailing the first bit of "good news" in a decade for an animal heavily threatened by poaching.

Nearly 23,300 rhinoceros roamed the continent at the end of last year, up 5.2 percent on 2021, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

"With this good news, we can take a sigh of relief for the first time in a decade," said Michael Knight, a wildlife ecologist who chairs the IUCN's African Rhino Specialist Group.

The IUCN combined rhino estimates from various nations to produce the continental tally and said a combination of protection and biological management initiatives had led the number of black rhinos to increase by 4.2 percent to 6,487.

White rhinos were up 5.6 percent to 16,803, the first increase since 2012, IUCN said.

"It is imperative to further consolidate and build upon this positive development and not drop our guard," Knight added.
Rhino horns

Rhinos have been decimated by decades of poaching driven by demand from Asia, where horns are used in traditional medicine for their supposed therapeutic effects.

More than 550 rhinos were killed by poachers across the continent in 2022, mostly in South Africa, according to the IUCN.

South Africa is home to nearly 80 percent of the world's rhinos.

What The Corn Industry Doesn't Want You To Know


Gina Badalaty
Sun, September 24, 2023 

hand holding ear of corn - Infusorian/Shutterstock

Corn is everywhere in the American household. This ubiquitous crop is on our plates, in our products, and even in our gas tanks. Maybe it's because of its versatility -- it can be considered a vegetable or grain, depending on when you harvest it. Because it has been modified to resist all kinds of external threats, a bumper crop is ensured every time so you can have perfect corn on the cob every summer.

Yes, corn is a modern wonder of technology found everywhere thanks to Big Agriculture (Big AG) -- those corporate entities that make millions from pushing factory-farmed corn across the country.

But this abundant crop has a dark side. Industrial farming with advanced technology has done far more harm than good to the planet, farmers, cattle, and workers. There are even questions about the health impacts and safety of Big AG corn.

The way America farms corn puts the entire industry and our food supply at risk. There are many things that the corn industry does not want you to know.

Read more: Mistakes You're Making With Your Corn On The Cob

Corn Farming Methods Increase Air Pollution

tractor and corn crops - Fotokostic/Shutterstock

Right off the bat, corn farming was recently found to be one of the top causes of air pollution. Studies show that 16% of all pollution caused by humans can be attributed to industrial farming processes including fertilization, seeding, and harvesting. These processes cause small, toxic particles to enter the atmosphere that we can actually inhale.

Recently, some researchers wanted to explore this problem in more depth. In the first study of its kind, the journal Nature Sustainability published a 2019 report that broke down each process involved with industrial corn farming and how they contribute to air pollution. They looked at the entire pre-harvest process around the U.S., from farming to fertilizer manufacturers. By combining corn production and emission models with what is known about how pollution impacts human health, they discovered that corn farming could be responsible for a stunning 4,300 premature human deaths per year.

GMO Corn May Be Bad For You

inspector looking at corn crop - Casarsaguru/Getty Images

Most corn in the U.S. today is produced by Big AG. These companies use genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to create herbicide-resistant corn. Bt corn is a GMO that carries a pesticide to ward off pests. The health hazards of this product are hotly debated. GMO foods have been accused of being an allergy trigger even though research shows that they are no more likely to cause an allergic reaction than their non-GMO counterparts.

Another accusation links GMOs to cancer and other health conditions. While the American Cancer Society has said there is no evidence linking the GMO pesticide, glyphosate, to cancer, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization (WHO), called GMOs a potential carcinogen in 2015. The WHO dismissed the study, calling it tainted, but the agency disagrees. That said, many other studies are calling the safety of glyphosate into question. For example, new research has linked it to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Another challenge of GMO crops is that it allows for the rise of super pests. In Canada, the corn borer -- a moth that can devastate crops -- adapted to resist genetic modifications. Over time, according to some researchers, a similar resistance could become widespread among moth populations. If crops are at risk from pesticide-resistant pests, stronger -- and potentially more harmful -- solutions may be developed to protect corn.

Industrial Corn Farming Creates Toxic Algae

toxic algae in water - mivod/Shutterstock

Most of us understand that our oceans are polluted by many byproducts of modern convenience. Corn is no exception. Across America, our watershed resources are falling victim to toxic algae. This issue is primarily caused by industrial corn farming. These algae blooms come from the runoff of the phosphorus and nitrogen found in corn fertilizer. Algae outbreaks force authorities to shut off water supplies, which can cause water shortages.

Ironically, these fertilizers were promoted as an eco-friendly way to farm. The U.S. Farm Bill has authorized programs in the past that encouraged fertilizer runoff. Although they are not harmful themselves, they create a toxic form of algae in the water. Even the Environmental Protection Agency recognizes "nutrient pollution" as one of the country's worst problems contributing to climate change.

The issue is so prevalent that NASA recently designated satellite tools to track these algae blooms, which can clearly be seen from space. They estimate that nearly 2,000 tons of marine life have been killed due to these blooms, including fish, sea turtles, and marine mammals. And that damage is not just limited to wildlife. When algae come ashore at beaches, harmful toxins are released into the air that can cause respiratory problems in humans.

Corn-Based Ethanol Could Be Even Worse For The Environment Than Gasoline

ethanol factory blowing pollution - Simplycreativephotography/Getty Images

A recent study shows that ethanol, derived from corn, contributes far more to global warming [Note: That's a fairly well disguised misinformation site, hence the slide exclusion.] than regular gasoline. The research was published in February of 2022 and was partly funded by the National Wildlife Federation and the U.S. Department of Energy. The study concluded that ethanol releases far more carbon into the atmosphere than gasoline derived from petroleum. The main culprit here? Once again, industrial farming deserves the credit.

This study examined the U.S. renewable fuel standard, which has regulated fuel standards since 2005. The regulation requires all fuel produced in the U.S. has renewable fuel mixed into it. In other words, all standard gasoline available today has ethanol mixed in. Since then, the corn industry has grown and greatly profited from this regulation.

The Renewable Fuels Association accuses the study of faulty methods and incorrect assumptions. In 2019, the U.S. Department of Agriculture performed its own study, which claimed that the carbon emission of ethanol was far below gasoline. The debate continues, but with climate change at the forefront of politics, the corn industry needs to answer for its process.

Corn Crops Are One Of The Most Wasteful

man irrigating corn crops - Simonskafar/Getty Images

Factory-farmed corn is an incredibly wasteful crop. First, it requires a large amount of water to thrive. Because the corn industry is so immense -- comprising about a third of all industrial farming in America -- that the need for water during dry seasons and periods of drought is high. Irrigation must be employed, but as of 2017, corn uses more irrigation water than any other crop in the U.S. with some 12 million acres of irrigated farmland. Some systems are inefficient, too. The increased need for irrigation also leads to more fertilizer runoff and nutrient pollution.

Plus, much of the harvested crop ends up as waste. Only about a third of America's corn harvest is used for food today; the rest is split equally between ethanol and livestock feed. Nearly 50% of harvested plants are tossed aside and burned by many corn producers, including stalks, leaves, husks, and cobs. Researchers are now seeking ways to repurpose this corn waste into activated carbon rather than add more injury to the environment with these fires.

Corn Is Harmful To Ecosystems Around The Globe

man inspecting corn crop - Casarsaguru/Getty Images

From the U.S. to Brazil to the Amazon rainforest, the demand for corn has led to a loss of natural ecosystems. Factory-grown corn relies on monocropping, which destroys the beneficial biodiversity found in nature.

In traditional farming, land and crops are rotated. This is key to keeping the soil healthy, ensuring a plentiful harvest every season. Industrial farming, on the other hand, employs monocropping -- the process of exhausting the land by planting the same thing over and over. How did it become so popular?

Decades ago, global leaders wanted to create solutions to combat hunger. They believed that monoculture was the best way to increase crop yields. By creating large industrial farms dedicated to a single crop, they saved time and money.

However, with monocropping, when a crop fails -- as it might during a drought or when pests successfully work their way through the field -- it fails spectacularly.

But it gets worse. Countries around the world are destroying their native ecosystems to plant this monocrop. For example, Brazil's increase in corn production has increased deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest. And in Africa, water resources in areas at risk of drought are being depleted by corn irrigation. Such widespread loss of natural biodiversity and resources leaves us at serious risk of a global environmental disaster.

Industrial Corn Farming Creates New Risks

corn borer on corn cob - Bigc Studio/Shutterstock

Industrial corn farming also can breed new diseases. Scientists are already warning that a new pandemic danger could arise that impacts high yield crops instead of people. Once again, monocropping is at the root of the issue. When so many acres of farmland are dedicated to a single crop, the risk of a virus or bacteria wiping out much of the yield is comparatively high.

It's happened before. In the 1970s, a fungus swept through the U.S. Corn Belt, devastating 15% of the anticipated harvest. And today? Recently, a new bacterial disease spread through corn fields in one of those corn belt states: Texas. This fungus cost some farms up to 90% of their crops. The pathogen first struck in 2021 during a fungicide trial and in 2021 at seven farms. The corn industry could look for ways to re-introduce biodiversity to farming methods to protect both crops and the affected ecosystems.

Corn Crops Cause Soil Degradation

field soil degradation - Meryll/Shutterstock

There is yet another ecological challenge of industrial corn farming: Soil degradation. In 2021, satellite imaging demonstrated that the American Corn Belt has lost at least a third of its topsoil, with some farms losing as much as 50%.

That poorer soil quality means worse yields of corn, which could be quite a blow since this region produces 75% of corn in the U.S. And soil degradation is costing farmers millions of dollars in fertilizer to compensate for increasingly infertile soil. In other words, more and more nitrogen- and phosphorus-rich fertilizer is required, which contributes to greenhouse gas emissions and toxic algae in a vicious eco-cycle.

The farming industry must seriously consider rethinking its processes to maintain crop yield while protecting the environment; the current paradigm does not appear remotely sustainable. Better tools such as regenerative agriculture can help restore soil integrity and reduce costs, but will the corn industry listen?

Corn Feed Harms Cattle

Doctor looking over cattle - Tomazl/Getty Images

As mentioned, one-third of all factory-farmed corn is used for livestock feed. Unfortunately, this feed can lead to pain, illness, and death for livestock. Cattle are natural grazers. Their bodies are designed to ingest and process grass and other fiber-based foods. This helps maintain the microorganisms in their stomach system and aids in digestion, keeping the animals healthy.

Unfortunately, cattle grazing is more expensive for farmers than feeding them grain. Since corn is overproduced, it's cheaply available as feed. Feeding cattle grain is also more convenient for monocropping than grazing. It makes cattle gain weight faster, which is good for the beef industry.

Despite these benefits, eating grain is harmful to cattle. These animals have a unique stomach system adapted to eating grass, not grains. Eating grains causes gas buildup, making them bloat. This leads to inflammation that stresses their lungs, which can get so bad that cattle may slowly die of asphyxiation.

Besides this agonizing death, corn feed can cause other health issues in cattle, including abscess, tumors, and acidosis, which are prevalent among factory-farmed cattle.

Industrial Corn Farming Is Killing Small Farms

father and son on farm - Maksim Shmeljov/Shutterstock

Small- and medium-sized family farms are being gradually pushed toward extinction. The numbers prove it. In a 12-month period, farm bankruptcies increased 50% in the Northeast and 12% in the Midwest, in 2019. While several factors contribute to this phenomenon, the rise of factory farming, especially from products like corn, is the prominent cause.

How did this happen? In the '70s, the government pushed smaller farms to massively increase production. Many complied, but in 10 years, overproduction led to skyrocketing costs. This put many farms upside-down in debt. Some went bankrupt, leading corporations to sweep in to pick up the slack. These corporate farms make CAFOs -- short for "concentrated animal feeding operations." Today, CAFOs are the only way to run a farm and still earn a profit. Most small farms were forced to change from traditional farming, including dairy or livestock, to corn and soybean farming to stay alive. The crop is then sold as cattle feed for Big AG companies.

Some farmers claim that companies game the system by intentionally keeping prices low, hiring cheap labor, and preventing the remaining farmers from earning more. This caused many Midwestern farming towns to die out or slide into poverty as the CAFO companies turned a big profit.

Most Corn Is Grown On Farm Subsidies

female farmer with tablet - Simonskafar/Getty Images

Once the continual overproduction of corn became a reality, farmers needed subsidies supported by American taxes. This is another hotly debated issue, but many small farmers believe they have done more harm than good.

One point of contention is the problem of who truly benefits from farm subsidies. They should benefit farmers, but if they did, why would so many farms go bankrupt? However, there is conflicting information on this topic. The Cato Institute states that corn, soybeans, and wheat farmers get 70% of subsidies. Yet in 2018, Forbes found that the top 10 subsidy recipients earned over $150 million from their farms. Most commonly, subsidies go to the landowners. However, most working farmers today rent and, thus, do not receive any subsidies.

Subsidies encourage and support the proliferation of factory farming, which can harm the environment, cattle, towns, and people. And since they are regulated under the U.S. Farm Bill, which is reviewed by Congress every few years, this regulation can come with political strings attached, further muddying the integrity of the corn industry.

Corn Farms Exploit Laborers

worker with corn plant - encierro/Shutterstock

Most people know that many farm workers come to America from Mexico and other Central and South American countries to find jobs. You might not know how these workers are treated at industrial corn farms. They are hired by factory farms and paid very little, often less than the low wages they are promised.

As if that wasn't bad enough, some workers are actually trafficked. Workers are lied to about where they will work and then relocated to other farms. Housing conditions can be deplorable, with issues ranging from lice and roach infestations to broken water and bathroom facilities. But that's nothing compared to how they are treated.

One worker speaking to The Guardian revealed the details of a farm trafficking ring in Georgia. He was forced to work 12-hour days for 15 days straight for a total of $225. After that, he was moved to another farm to work for free and eventually returned to Mexico. Other migrants harmed by this ring claimed they were abused, tortured, or raped, and two workers died. Fortunately, this trafficking program was discovered and at least 24 defendants were indicted.

Unfortunately, investigation into this type of trafficking by the U.S. Department of Labor has significantly dropped over the years. This can lead to many more criminal trafficking organizations preying on migrant workers.

Mashed

SEE

 LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BIOFUEL 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BIOFUELS 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for CORN 

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for ETHANOL 

Opinion: Yes, there was global warming in prehistoric times. But nothing in millions of years compares with what we see today

Michael E. Mann
Sun, September 24, 2023 

A Columbian mammoth on exhibit at Los Angeles' La Brea Tar Pits, which preserved the remains of some ancient megafauna that went extinct during a period of global warming thousands of years ago. (Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)

“The climate is always changing!” So goes a popular refrain from climate deniers who continue to claim that there’s nothing special about this particular moment. There is no climate crisis, they say, because the Earth has survived dramatic warming before.

Republican presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy recently exemplified misconceptions about our planet’s climate past. When he asserted that “carbon dioxide as a percentage of the atmosphere is still at a relative low through human history,” he didn’t just make a false statement (carbon dioxide concentrations are the highest they’ve been in at least 4 million years). He also showed fundamentally wrong thinking around the climate crisis.

Read more: Levels of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in atmosphere hit another peak and show no signs of slowing

What threatens us today isn’t the particular concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere or the precise temperature of the planet, alarming as those two metrics are. Instead, it’s the unprecedented rate at which we are increasing carbon pollution through fossil fuel burning, and the resulting rate at which we are heating the planet.

Consider the warming event that paleoclimatologists point to as the best natural comparison for the rapid greenhouse-driven trend we’re seeing now. The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum happened 56 million years ago, roughly 10 million years after the demise of the dinosaurs, which itself was caused by climate change (a massive asteroid impact event led to a global dust storm and, in turn, rapid cooling). The PETM warming resulted from an unusually large and rapid injection of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere from volcanic eruptions in Iceland. Global temperatures increased by approximately 10 degrees Fahrenheit in as little as 10,000 years, rising from an already steamy baseline of 80 degrees Fahrenheit possibly up to a sauna-like 90 degrees Fahrenheit.

That warming rate of about 0.1 degree Fahrenheit per century is extremely rapid by geological standards. But it’s still roughly 10 times slower than the warming today.

Read more: Opinion: On the climate crisis, it's time to lean into pessimism

The impact event and Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum were, ironically, fortuitous for humans: They paved the way for our ancestors. The extinction of the dinosaurs (except the ancestors of birds) created a new niche for early mammals, and the stifling conditions of the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum selected for small, arboreal mammals, including the oldest primate identified clearly by fossil materials, a primitive lemur-like creature named Dryomomys. Without either of these two events, our species likely wouldn’t have arrived at this moment — in contrast to the current warming, which plenty of evidence shows is a threat to our existence.

Extinctions followed another warming period in our more recent past, when the last ice age ended about 18,000 years ago. Driven by Earth’s changing orbit relative to the sun, and boosted by a heightened greenhouse effect as warming oceans gave up their carbon dioxide in the same way an open bottle of warm soda loses carbonation, the planet warmed by about 10 degrees Fahrenheit over the subsequent 8,000 years.

That rate of warming — which, again, was about 10 times slower than the warming today — was rapid enough to wipe out entire species. Gone were the magnificent woolly mammoths and mastodons, giant ground sloths and saber-toothed cats that had roamed the plains of North America. A combination of climate change and overhunting by paleo-Americans did them in. A few of them got stuck in tar pits and are preserved — some at the La Brea Tar Pits in Los Angeles.

Read more: How bad the climate crisis gets is still up to us. We just have to act

In the fall of 2017, I participated in a climate change forum at the tar pits museum, which is at the center of those ancient pools of asphalt — the viscous, evaporated remains of crude oil that seeped to the surface from deep below. I couldn’t help but see further irony there: Crude oil from beneath Earth’s surface threatens us today because we’re ensnared by it politically rather than physically.

Paleo-humans survived the end of the ice age because of the resilience afforded by our big brains, which gave us the behavioral plasticity to adapt to the changing climate. But that same intelligence has gotten us into trouble today. We’ve used it to create a global energy system dependent on the burning of fossil fuels. The great Carl Sagan once commented on the absurdity of our plight: “Our civilization runs by burning the remains of humble creatures who inhabited the Earth hundreds of millions of years before the first humans came on the scene. Like some ghastly cannibal cult, we subsist on the dead bodies of our ancestors and distant relatives.”

Our societal infrastructure — upon which more than 8 billion people now depend — was built around a global climate that was stable for thousands of years. The viability of that infrastructure depends on the climate remaining close to what it was, or at least changing slowly enough that the rates of environmental change don’t exceed our adaptive capacity as a species and a civilization. What finished off the dinosaurs and the mastodons was a climate that shifted too rapidly away from what they were adapted to, in the first case cooling and the other case warming. That’s our challenge today.

Read more: Op-Ed: The world population hit 8 billion — but with a peak in sight. What lessons does that have for climate change?

Can our big brains save us this time? They can if we make proper use of them and learn the lessons offered by Earth’s past. Paleoclimate data characterizing past episodes of natural climate change, such as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum and peak of the last ice age, allow us to test the models that we use to project future warming. Our models pass these tests, reproducing the paleodata from historical periods when driven by the estimated changes in greenhouse gases and sunlight during those periods. The paleodata, in turn, help us refine the models.

The end result is that we can trust these models to peer into our climate future. They tell us that we can avoid a catastrophic trajectory for our global climate if we reduce carbon emissions substantially over the next decade. So this fragile moment in which we find ourselves is in fact a critical juncture.

As Sagan said: “We are at a crossroads in human history. Never before has there been a moment so simultaneously perilous and promising.” The choice between peril and promise is ultimately still ours.

Michael E. Mann is presidential distinguished professor and director of the Center for Science, Sustainability and the Media at the University of Pennsylvania. He is the author of the forthcoming book “Our Fragile Moment: How Lessons from Earth's Past Can Help Us Survive the Climate Crisis.”

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

THAT OTHER MICHAEL MANN

Punjab's Sikhs fear Canada-India row threatens them at home, abroad


Himmat Singh Nijjar, 79, uncle of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar, sits inside his house after an interview with Reuters at village Bharsingpura


Himmat Singh Nijjar, 79, uncle of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar, arranges the family pictures inside a room at Nijjar's house at village Bharsingpura


A sticker is pasted on the gate of the Dal Khalsa, a radical Sikh group, office in Amritsar


Himmat Singh Nijjar, 79, uncle of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar, takes a pause during an interview with Reuters at village Bharsingpura

A member of the Dal Khalsa, a radical Sikh group, takes a nap inside their office in Amritsar

Sun, September 24, 2023 
By Manoj Kumar

BHARSINGHPURA, India (Reuters) - A bitter row between India and Canada over the murder of a Sikh separatist is being felt in Punjab, where some Sikhs fear both a backlash from India's Hindu-nationalist government and a threat to their prospects for a better life in North America.

Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a plumber who left the north Indian state a quarter-century ago and became a Canadian citizen, was shot dead in June outside a temple in a Vancouver suburb where he was a separatist leader among the many Sikhs living there.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said last week Ottawa had "credible allegations" that Indian government agents may be linked to the killing.

India, which labelled Nijjar a "terrorist" in 2020, angrily rejected the allegation as "absurd", expelled the chief of Canadian intelligence in India, issued travel warnings, stopped visa issuance to Canadians and downsized Canada's diplomatic presence in India.

Sikhs make up just 2% of India's 1.4 billion people but they are a majority in Punjab, a state of 30 million where their religion was born 500 years ago. Outside of Punjab, the greatest number of Sikhs live in Canada, the site of many protests that have irked India.

DREAM OF CANADA

An insurgency seeking a Sikh homeland of Khalistan, which killed tens of thousands in the 1980s and '90s, was crushed by India, but embers from the flame of the independence drive still glow.

In the village of Bharsinghpura, there are few memories of Nijjar, but his uncle, Himmat Singh Nijjar, 79, said locals "think it was very brave of Trudeau" to accuse Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government of potential involvement in the killing.

"For the sake of one ordinary person, he did not need to take such a huge risk on his government," the uncle told Reuters, sitting on a wooden bench by a tractor in his farmhouse, surrounded by lush paddy fields and banana trees.

Still, though, the elder Nijjar said he is worried about deteriorating diplomatic relations with Canada and declining economic prospects in Punjab.

The once-prosperous breadbasket of India, Punjab has been overtaken by states that focussed on manufacturing, services and technology in the last two decades.

"Now every family wants to send its sons and daughters to Canada as farming here is not lucrative, said the elder Nijjar.

India is the largest source for international students in Canada, their numbers jumping 47% last year to 320,000.

'ATMOSPHERE OF FEAR'

"We now fear whether Canada will give student visas or if the Indian government will create some hurdles," said undergraduate Gursimran Singh, 19, who wants to go to Canada.

He was speaking at the holiest of Sikh shrines, the Golden Temple in Amritsar, where many students go to pray for, or give thanks for, for student visas.

The temple became a flashpoint for Hindu-Sikh tension when then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi allowed it to be stormed in 1984 to flush out Sikh separatists, angering Sikhs around the world. Her Sikh bodyguards assassinated her soon afterward.

Ties between Sikh groups in Punjab and Prime Minister Modi's Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government have been strained since Sikh farmers led year-long protests against farm deregulation in 2020 and blocked the capital, forcing Modi to withdraw the measure in a rare political defeat for the strongman.

Modi's government has created "an atmosphere of fear", especially for young people, said Sandeep Singh, 31, from Nijjar's village.

"If we are doing a protest, parents wouldn’t like their child to participate because they are afraid their children can meet the same fate" as Nijjar in Canada, he said.

Kanwar Pal, political affairs secretary for the radical separatist Dal Khalsa group, said, "Whosoever fights for Khalistan fights for right to self-determination, rights for plebiscite in Punjab. India perceived those Sikhs as their enemies and they target them."

A BJP spokesperson declined to comment on the accusations.

Senior BJP leaders have said there was no wave of support in Punjab for independence and that any such demands were a threat to India. At the same time, the party says no one has done as much for the Sikhs as Modi.

Listen to the Reuters World News podcast episode, "How the killing of a Sikh plumber in Canada led to a diplomatic war with India."

(Reporting by Manoj Kumar in Bharsinghpura; Editing by YP Rajesh and William Mallard)

India had been riding a geopolitical high. But it comes to the UN with a mess on its hands

KRUTIKA PATHI
Sun, September 24, 2023 

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is welcomed at the Bharatiya Janata Party headquarters, where he was felicitated a day after the women's reservation bill was passed by the Indian Parliament in New Delhi, Friday, Sep. 22, 2023.

 (AP Photo/STR)

 Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, walks past Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi as they take part in a wreath-laying ceremony at Raj Ghat, Mahatma Gandhi's cremation site, during the G20 Summit in New Delhi, Sunday, Sept. 10, 2023. Trudeau said that Canada wasn't looking to escalate tensions, but asked India on Tuesday, Sept. 19, to take the killing of a Sikh activist seriously after India called accusations that the Indian government may have been involved absurd.

(Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press via AP, File)

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau takes part in a bilateral meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the G20 Summit in New Delhi, India on Sunday, Sept. 10, 2023. On Monday, Sept. 18, Canada expelled a top Indian diplomat as it investigates what Trudeau called credible allegations that India’s government may have had links to the assassination in Canada of a Sikh activist. Trudeau told Parliament that he brought up the slaying with Modi at the G-20. 

(Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press via AP)

 Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi welcomes Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau upon his arrival at Bharat Mandapam convention center for the G20 Summit, in New Delhi, India, Saturday, Sept. 9, 2023. Canada has expelled a top Indian diplomat on Monday, Sept. 18, 2023, as it investigates what Prime Minister Trudeau called credible allegations that India’s government may have had links to the assassination in Canada of a Sikh activist.

 (AP Photo/Evan Vucci, File)



NEW DELHI (AP) — The Group of 20 Summit, hosted by India earlier this month, couldn’t have gone better for Prime Minister Narendra Modi. His pledge to make the African Union a permanent member became reality. And under his leadership, the fractured grouping signed off on a final statement. It was seen as a foreign policy triumph for Modi and set the tone for India as a great emerging power.

Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar was expected to seize on India’s geopolitical high in his speech at the United Nations on Tuesday. But circumstances have changed — quite abruptly — and India comes to the General Assembly podium with a diplomatic mess on its hands.

On Monday, Canadian leader Justin Trudeau made a shocking claim: India may have been involved in the killing of a Sikh Canadian citizen in a Vancouver suburb in June.

Trudeau said there were “credible allegations” of links to New Delhi, which India angrily rejected as absurd. It has been a free fall since: Each expelled a diplomat, India suspended visas for Canadians, and Ottawa said it may reduce consulate staff over safety concerns. Ties between the two once-close countries have sunk to their lowest point in years.

“In the immediate term, this will bring New Delhi back down to Earth. It has a crisis that it needs to work through, quickly but carefully,” said Michael Kugelman, director of the Wilson Center’s South Asia Institute.

TENSIONS WERE ALREADY SIMMERING

On the last day of the G20 summit, Trudeau posed and smiled with Modi as world leaders paid respects at Mahatma Gandhi’s memorial. Behind the scenes though, tensions were high.

Trudeau skipped an official dinner hosted by the Indian president, and local media reported he was snubbed by Modi when he got a quick “pull aside” instead of a bilateral meeting. To make things worse, a flight snag saw him stranded in New Delhi for 36 hours. Finally back in Canada, Trudeau said he had raised the allegations with Modi at the G20.

As India heads to the United Nations, the allegations have “thrown cold water on India's G20 achievements," said Happymon Jacob, founder of the New Delhi-based Council for Strategic and Defense Research.

India has long sought greater recognition at the United Nations. For decades, it has eyed a permanent seat at the Security Council, one of the world’s most prestigious high tables. But it has also been critical of the global forum, partly because it wants more representation that’s in line with its rising soft power.

“The U.N. Security Council, which is the core of the United Nations system, is a family photo of the victors of the Second World War plus China,” Jacob said. India believes “it simply does not reflect the demographic, economic and geopolitical realities of today,” he added. Others in the elite group include France, Russia, Britain and the United States.

In April, Jaishankar said India, the world’s most populous country with the fastest growing economy among major nations, couldn’t be ignored for too long. The U.N. Security Council, he said, “will be compelled to provide permanent membership."

The United States, Britain and India’s Cold War-era ally Russia have voiced support for its permanent membership over the years. But U.N. bureaucracy has stopped the council from expanding. And even if that changes, China — India's neighbor and regional rival — would likely block a request.

INSTEAD OF THE UN, INDIA MAKES SOME END RUNS

Kept out of the U.N.’s most important body, Modi has made sure that his country is smack at the center of a tangled web of global politics. On one hand, New Delhi is part of the Quad and the G20, seen as mostly Western groups. On the other, it wants to expand its influence in the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, where Russia and China dominate.

The deft juggling of the West and the rest has come to define India’s multipolar foreign policy.

Its diplomatic sway has only grown over its reluctance to condemn Russia for its war in Ukraine, a stance that resonated among many developing countries that have also been neutral. And the West, which sees an ascendant India as crucial to countering China, has stepped up ties with Modi. By doing so, it looks past concerns of democratic backsliding under his government.

In the immediate aftermath, the first reaction from Canada’s Western allies — including its biggest one, the United States — was tepid. But as the row deepens, the question likely worrying Indian officials is this: Will the recent international fiasco jeopardize its surging ties with the West?

After an initial muted response, the White House has intensified its concerns. “There’s not some special exemption you get for actions like this, regardless of the country,” security adviser Jake Sullivan said. On Friday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. was deeply concerned about the allegations and that “it would be important that India work with the Canadians on this investigation.”

While there's been no public evidence, a Canadian official told The Associated Press that the allegation of India’s involvement in the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Sikh separatist, is based on surveillance of Indian diplomats in Canada — including intelligence provided by a major ally. On Friday, the U.S. ambassador to Canada confirmed this, saying information shared by the intelligence-sharing ‘Five Eyes’ alliance helped link India to the assassination.

At the United Nations, where he held a news conference and meetings but will not be speaking for his nation on Tuesday, Trudeau told reporters that he doesn’t want to cause problems but said his decision was not made lightly. Canada, he said, had to stand up for the rule of law and protect its citizens.

For New Delhi, the U.N. meeting may present a possible opportunity. Indian and Canadian diplomats could meet on the sidelines to try to lower temperatures with a potential assist from Washington, Kugelman said. Canada's delegation chair, Robert Rae, is delivering the country's remarks 10 spots after India.

Jaishankar could also hold face-to-face meetings with other key partners to minimize the damage. Since arriving, he’s held chats with ministers from Australia, Japan and Britain.

“Let’s be clear: We’re not going to see foreign leaders avoid or isolate Jaishankar at the U.N. General Assembly,” Kugelman said.

But it could also lead to more fireworks if they bring the spat to the U.N. podium and the global audience of leaders it tends to command. Ultimately, though, India “doesn’t want the Canada row to be a sideshow here, and especially not one that moves to the center stage,” Kugelman said. “That would take attention away from the achievements it hopes to publicize on one of the world’s biggest global platforms.”

Sikh groups ask Canadian political parties to present 'united front' against India

The Canadian Press
Sat, September 23, 2023 

THE CONSERVATIVES FAILED TO SHOW UP FOR THE EMERGENCY PARILAMENTARY DEBATE ON THE ISSUE


Two groups in the Canadian Sikh diaspora are calling for Canada's political parties to "present a united front" on India after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a "potential link" between the shooting death of a local leader and the Indian government.

In a joint statement, the Ontario Gurdwaras Committee and the British Columbia Gurdwaras Council say that "Canadian parties of all stripes must be unequivocally clear" about their opposition to possible foreign interference relating to the death of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in June.

Trudeau revealed in Parliament on Sept. 18 that Canadian intelligence services were investigating possible ties between the Indian government and the fatal shooting of Nijjar in Surrey, B.C., outside of the Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara.

India, which had issued an arrest warrant against Nijjar for his advocacy for an independent Sikh state, has denied the accusation as "absurd and motivated."

Federal leaders have spoken out against possible Indian involvement in Nijjar's death, with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre saying shortly after Trudeau's announcement that Canada "must be united for our home and for each other" while asking the prime minister to present "more facts" surrounding the case.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who is himself a Sikh, said he has written directly to Quebec Court of Appeal Justice Marie-Josee Hogue to ask for the inclusion of India in Canada's inquiry into foreign interference.

Hogue is leading the 16-month inquiry that is expected to delve into alleged meddling into Canadian affairs by countries such as China and Russia.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 23, 2023.

The Canadian Press

AI is on the world's mind. Is the UN the place to figure out what to do about it?

Sun, September 24, 2023



UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Just a few years ago, artificial intelligence got barely a mention at the U.N. General Assembly's convocation of world leaders.

But after the release of ChatGPT last fall turbocharged both excitement and anxieties about AI, it's been a sizzling topic this year at diplomacy's biggest yearly gathering.

Presidents, premiers, monarchs and cabinet ministers convened as governments at various levels are mulling or have already passed AI regulation. Industry heavy-hitters acknowledge guardrails are needed but want to protect the technology's envisioned benefits. Outsiders and even some insiders warn that there also are potentially catastrophic risks, and everyone says there's no time to lose.

And many eyes are on the United Nations as perhaps the only place to tackle the issue at scale.

The world body has some unique attributes to offer, including unmatched breadth and a track record of brokering pacts on global issues, and it's set to launch an AI advisory board this fall.

“Having a convergence, a common understanding of the risks, that would be a very important outcome,” U.N. tech policy chief Amandeep Gill said in an interview. He added that it would be very valuable to reach a common understanding on what kind of governance works, or might, to minimize risks and maximize opportunities for good.

A CONVERSATION THAT IS GAINING MOMENTUM

As recently as 2017, only three speakers brought up AI at the assembly meeting’s equivalent of a main stage, the “ General Debate.” This year, more than 20 speakers did so, representing countries from Namibia to North Macedonia, Argentina to East Timor.

Secretary-General António Guterres teased plans to appoint members this month to the advisory board, with preliminary recommendations due by year's end — warp speed, by U.N. standards.

Lesotho’s premier, Sam Matekane, worried about threats to privacy and safety, Nepalese Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal about potential misuse of AI, and Icelandic Foreign Minister Thórdís Kolbrún R. Gylfadóttir about the technology “becoming a tool of destruction.” Britain hyped its upcoming “AI Safety Summit,” while Spain pitched itself as an eager host for a potential international agency for AI and Israel touted its technological chops as a prospective developer of helpful AI.

Days after U.S. senators discussed AI behind closed doors with tech bigwigs and skeptics, President Joe Biden said Washington is working “to make sure we govern this technology — not the other way around, having it govern us.”

And with the General Assembly as a center of gravity, there were so many AI-policy panel discussions and get-togethers around New York last week that attendees sometimes raced from one to another.

“The most important meetings that we are having are the meetings at the U.N. — because it is the only body that is inclusive, that brings all of us here,” Omar Al-Olama, the United Arab Emirates' minister for artificial intelligence, said at a U.N.-sponsored event featuring four high-ranking officials from various countries. It drew such interest that a half-dozen of their counterparts offered comments from the audience.

Tech industry players have made sure they're in the mix during the U.N.'s big week, too.

“What’s really encouraging is that there’s so much global interest in how to get this right — and the U.N. is in a position to help harmonize all the conversations” and work to ensure all voices get heard, says James Manyika, a senior vice president at Google. The tech giant helped develop a new, artificial intelligence-enabled U.N. site for searching data and tracking progress on the world body's key goals.

LOTS OF PEOPLE TALKING, BUT PERHAPS A SLOW PROCESS

But if the United Nations has advantages, it also has the challenges of a big-tent, consensus-seeking ethos that often moves slowly. Plus its members are governments, while AI is being driven by an array of private companies.

Still, a global issue needs a global forum, and "the U.N. is absolutely a place to have these conversations,” says Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group, a political risk advisory firm.

Even if governments aren't developers, Gill notes that they can “influence the direction that AI takes.”

“It’s not only about regulating against misuse and harm, making sure that democracy is not undermined, the rule of law is not undermined, but it’s also about promoting a diverse and inclusive innovation ecosystem" and fostering public investments in research and workforce training where there aren't a lot of deep-pocketed tech companies doing so, he said.

The United Nations will have to navigate territory that some national governments and blocs, including the European Union and the Group of 20 industrialized nations, already are staking out with summits, declarations and in some cases regulations of their own.

Ideas differ about what a potential global AI body should be: perhaps an expert assessment and fact-establishing panel, akin to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or a watchdog like the International Atomic Energy Agency? A standard-setting entity similar to the U.N.'s maritime and civil aviation agencies? Or something else?

There's also the question of how to engender innovation and hoped-for breakthroughs — in medicine, disaster prediction, energy efficiency and more — without exacerbating inequities and misinformation or, worse, enabling runaway-robot calamity. That sci-fi scenario started sounding a lot less far-fetched when hundreds of tech leaders and scientists, including the CEO of ChatGPT maker OpenAI, issued a warning in May about “the risk of extinction from AI.”

An OpenAI exec-turned-competitor then told the U.N. Security Council in July that artificial intelligence poses “potential threats to international peace, security and global stability” because of its unpredictability and possible misuse.

Yet there are distinctly divergent vantage points on where the risks and opportunities lie.

“For countries like Nigeria and the Global South, the biggest issue is: What are we going to do with this amazing technology? Are we going to get the opportunity to use it to uplift our people and our economies equally and on the same pace as the West?” Nigeria's communications minister, Olatunbosun Tijani, asked at an AI discussion hosted by the New York Public Library. He suggested that “even the conversation on governance has been led from the West.”

Chilean Science Minister Aisén Etcheverry believes AI could allow for a digital do-over, a chance to narrow gaps that earlier tech opened in access, inclusion and wealth.

AN INTRICATE PATH FORWARD, BUT WITH CLEAR UPSIDES

But it will take more than improving telecommunications infrastructure. Countries that got left behind before need to have “the language, culture, the different histories that we come from, represented in the development of artificial intelligence,” Etcheverry said at the U.N.-sponsored side event.

Gill, who's from India, shares those concerns. Dialogue about AI needs to expand beyond a “promise and peril” dichotomy to “a more nuanced understanding where access to opportunity, the empowerment dimension of it ... is also front and center,” he said.

Even before the U.N. advisory board sets a detailed agenda, plenty of suggestions were volunteered amid the curated conversations around the General Assembly. Work on global minimum standards for AI. Align the various regulatory and enforcement endeavors around the globe. Look at setting up AI registries, validation and certification. Focus on regulating uses rather than the technology itself. Craft a “rapid-response mechanism” in case dreaded possibilities come to pass.

From Dr. Rose Nakasi's vantage point, though, there was a clear view of the upsides of AI.

The Ugandan computer scientist and her colleagues at Makerere University's AI Lab are using the technology to streamline microscopic analysis of blood samples, the gold-standard method for diagnosing malaria.

Their work is aimed at countries without enough pathologists, especially in rural areas. A magnifying eyepiece, produced by 3D printing, fits cellphone cameras and takes photos of microscope slides; AI image analysis then picks out and identifies pathogens. Google's charitable arm recently gave the lab $1.5 million.

AI is “an enabler” of human activity, Nakasi said between attending General Assembly-related events.

“We can’t be able to just leave it to do each and every thing on its own," she said. "But once it is well regulated, where we have it as a support tool, I believe it can do a lot.”

Jennifer Peltz, The Associated Press