[…]Humanity has failed to limit global heating to 1.5C and must change course immediately, the secretary general of the UN has warned.
In his only interview before next month’s Cop30 climate summit, António Guterres acknowledged it is now “inevitable” that humanity will overshoot the target in the Paris climate agreement, with “devastating consequences” for the world.
He urged the leaders who will gather in the Brazilian rainforest city of Belém to realise that the longer they delay cutting emissions, the greater the danger of passing catastrophic “tipping points” in the Amazon, the Arctic and the oceans.
“Let’s recognise our failure,” he told the Guardian and Amazon-based news organisation Sumaúma. “The truth is that we have failed to avoid an overshooting above 1.5C in the next few years. And that going above 1.5C has devastating consequences. Some of these devastating consequences are tipping points, be it in the Amazon, be it in Greenland, or western Antarctica or the coral reefs.
He said the priority at Cop30 was to shift direction: “It is absolutely indispensable to change course in order to make sure that the overshoot is as short as possible and as low in intensity as possible to avoid tipping points like the Amazon. We don’t want to see the Amazon as a savannah. But that is a real risk if we don’t change course and if we don’t make a dramatic decrease of emissions as soon as possible.”
The planet’s past 10 years have been the hottest in recorded history. Despite growing scientific alarm at the speed of global temperature increases caused by the burning of fossil fuels – oil, coal and gas – the secretary general said government commitments have come up short.
Fewer than a third of the world’s nations (62 out of 197) have sent in their climate action plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris agreement. The US under Donald Trump has abandoned the process. Europe has promised but so far failed to deliver. China, the world’s biggest emitter, has been accused of undercommitting.
António Guterres giving his speech at Cop29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November 2024. Photograph: Anatoly Maltsev/EPA
Guterres said the lack of NDC ambition means the Paris goal of 1.5C will be breached, at least temporarily: “From those [NDCs] received until now, there is an expectation of a reduction of emissions of 10%. We would need 60% [to stay within 1.5C]. So overshooting is now inevitable.”
He did not give up on the target though, and said it may still be possible to temporarily overshoot and then bring temperatures down in time to return to 1.5C by the end of the century, but this would require a change of direction at and beyond Cop30.
China’s new influencer law, which took effect on October 25, requires anyone creating content on sensitive topics, such as medicine, law, education, or finance, to hold official qualifications in those fields.
The Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) says the goal is to fight misinformation and protect the public from false or harmful advice. But, the move has also raisedconcerns about censorship and freedom of expression.
Under the new rules, influencers who talk about regulated topics must show proof of their expertise, such as a degree, professional license, or certificate. Platforms like Douyin (China’s version of TikTok), Bilibili, and Weibo must verify creators’ credentials and make sure their content includes proper citations and disclaimers.
For example, influencersmust clearly state when information comes from studies or when a video includes AI-generated material. Platforms are also required to educate users about their responsibilities when sharing content online.
The CAC has gone even further by banning advertising for medical products, supplements, and health foods to prevent hidden promotions disguised as “educational” videos.
However, critics warn that the law could harm creativity and limit freedom of speech. By controlling who can talk about certain topics, they argue, China might not only block misinformation but also restrict independent voices and critical debate.
Many worry that “expertise” will be defined too narrowly, giving authorities more power to silence people who question official narratives or offer alternative views.
Others, however, welcomed the move, saying that the new law would allow for well-informed content on important and sensitive topics. Many argued that only professionals in their field should be able to speak about and discuss said topic to prevent misinformation.
The rise of influencer culture has changed how people get information. Influencers are valued for being relatable and authentic, and being able to connect with audiences in ways traditional experts cannot. However, when these creators share misleading or inaccurate information, the effects can be serious, supporters of the new law argue.
Unfortunately, having people doing “research” by watching one Youtube video and then telling people that vaccines don’t work, or that 5G space bats cause covid and people want to inject chips into you has proven to be an absolute disaster, which prolonged a global pandemic and killed a lot of people.
These people should be jailed and it is a crying shame that a country like China is taking the lead in this, and not the EU.
[…]The programming non-profit’s deputy executive director Loren Crary said in a blog post today that the National Science Foundation (NSF) had offered $1.5 million to address structural vulnerabilities in Python and the Python Package Index (PyPI), but the Foundation quickly became dispirited with the terms of the grant it would have to follow.
“These terms included affirming the statement that we ‘do not, and will not during the term of this financial assistance award, operate any programs that advance or promote DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion], or discriminatory equity ideology in violation of Federal anti-discrimination laws,'” Crary noted. “This restriction would apply not only to the security work directly funded by the grant, but to any and all activity of the PSF as a whole.”
To make matters worse, the terms included a provision that if the PSF was found to have violated that anti-DEI diktat, the NSF reserved the right to claw back any previously disbursed funds, Crary explained.
“This would create a situation where money we’d already spent could be taken back, which would be an enormous, open-ended financial risk,” the PSF director added.
The PSF’s mission statement enshrines a commitment to supporting and growing “a diverse and international community of Python programmers,” and the Foundation ultimately decided it wasn’t willing to compromise on that position, even for what would have been a solid financial boost for the organization.
“The PSF is a relatively small organization, operating with an annual budget of around $5 million per year, with a staff of just 14,” Crary added, noting that the $1.5 million would have been the largest grant the Foundation had ever received – but it wasn’t worth it if the conditions were undermining the PSF’s mission.
The PSF board voted unanimously to withdraw its grant application.
The non-profit would’ve used the funding to help prevent supply chain attacks; create a new automated, proactive review process for new PyPI packages; and make the project’s work easily transferable to other open-source package managers. […]
[…] Software provider AppZen said fake AI receipts accounted for about 14 per cent of fraudulent documents submitted in September, compared with none last year. Fintech group Ramp said its new software flagged more than $1mn in fraudulent invoices within 90 days.
About 30 per cent of US and UK financial professionals surveyed by expense management platform Medius reported they had seen a rise in falsified receipts following the launch of OpenAI’s GPT-4o last year.
“These receipts have become so good, we tell our customers, ‘do not trust your eyes’,” said Chris Juneau, senior vice-president and head of product marketing for SAP Concur, one of the world’s leading expense platforms, which processes more than 80mn compliance checks monthly using AI.
Several platforms attributed a significant jump in the number of AI-generated receipts after OpenAI launched GPT-4o’s improved image generation model in March.
[…]Qualcomm said that both the AI200, which will go on sale in 2026, and the AI250, planned for 2027, can come in a system that fills up a full, liquid-cooled server rack.
, which offer their graphics processing units, or GPUs, in full-rack systems that allow as many as 72 chips to act as one computer. AI labs need that computing power to run the most advanced models.
Qualcomm’s data center chips are based on the AI parts in Qualcomm’s smartphone chips called Hexagon neural processing units, or NPUs.
[…]
Qualcomm said its chips are focusing on inference, or running AI models, instead of training, which is how labs such as OpenAI create new AI capabilities by processing terabytes of data.
The chipmaker said that its rack-scale systems would ultimately cost less to operate for customers such as cloud service providers, and that a rack uses 160 kilowatts, which is comparable to the high power draw from some Nvidia GPU racks.
Malladi said Qualcomm would also sell its AI chips and other parts separately, especially for clients such as hyperscalers that prefer to design their own racks.
[…]
The company declined to comment, the price of the chips, cards or rack, and how many NPUs could be installed in a single rack.
[…]
Qualcomm said its AI chips have advantages over other accelerators in terms of power consumption, cost of ownership, and a new approach to the way memory is handled. It said its AI cards support 768 gigabytes of memory, which is higher than offerings from Nvidia and AMD.
Paxos Trust Company, the blockchain infrastructure partner for PayPal’s stablecoin, has publicly admitted to a catastrophic “technical error” that led to the accidental creation of $300 trillion worth of PayPal USD (PYUSD) tokens. The mistake, which was identified and rectified within minutes, temporarily created a theoretical sum exceeding the entire global money supply. This incident immediately triggers intense scrutiny from financial regulators, including the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS), and casts a shadow over the operational integrityof the burgeoning stablecoin market. For PayPal, the error represents a significant reputational blow, challenging the perception of its carefully managed entry into digital assets.
This failure represents a stark vulnerability in the automated systems underpinning digital assets. While blockchain technology promises immutable and transparent transactions, Paxos is now confronting the reality that its risk managementprotocols were insufficient to prevent a near-infinite minting event. The company’s promise to be “much better than this” highlights the critical gap between theoretical blockchain security and the practical operational controlsrequired for regulated financial services. This matters because it demonstrates that for institutional adoption to proceed, the infrastructure must be as foolproof as the legacy financial systems it seeks to augment or replace, not a source of existential, self-inflicted risk.
For fintech executives and digital asset custodians, this is a critical warning. The forward-looking insight is clear: the path to mainstream stablecoin adoptionwill be paved with relentless focus on operational controls and third-party audits. This event will force a sector-wide review of minting and burning mechanisms, likely leading to more conservative, multi-signature requirements and real-time monitoring mandates from regulators. The most trusted players will be those who can transparently demonstrate ironclad technical and procedural safeguards, turning this public failure into an industry-wide mandate for bulletproof operational excellence.
Part of what is not mentioned, is that they revoked the value very quickly. The minting is one thing, but how trustworthy can any value store be when it the value can be revoked one-sidedly at any time by the press of a button?
