An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In a preprint research paper titled "Does GPT-4 Pass the Turing Test?", two researchers from UC San Diego pitted OpenAI's GPT-4 AI language model against human participants, GPT-3.5, and ELIZA to see which could trick participants into thinking it was human with the greatest success. But along the way, the study, which has not been peer-reviewed, found that human participants correctly identified other humans in only 63 percent of the interactions -- and that a 1960s computer program surpassed the AI model that powers the free version of ChatGPT. Even with limitations and caveats, which we'll cover below, the paper presents a thought-provoking comparison between AI model approaches and raises further questions about using the Turing test to evaluate AI model performance.

In the recent study, listed on arXiv at the end of October, UC San Diego researchers Cameron Jones (a PhD student in Cognitive Science) and Benjamin Bergen (a professor in the university's Department of Cognitive Science) set up a website called turingtest.live, where they hosted a two-player implementation of the Turing test over the Internet with the goal of seeing how well GPT-4, when prompted different ways, could convince people it was human. Through the site, human interrogators interacted with various "AI witnesses" representing either other humans or AI models that included the aforementioned GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and ELIZA, a rules-based conversational program from the 1960s. "The two participants in human matches were randomly assigned to the interrogator and witness roles," write the researchers. "Witnesses were instructed to convince the interrogator that they were human. Players matched with AI models were always interrogators."

The experiment involved 652 participants who completed a total of 1,810 sessions, of which 1,405 games were analyzed after excluding certain scenarios like repeated AI games (leading to the expectation of AI model interactions when other humans weren't online) or personal acquaintance between participants and witnesses, who were sometimes sitting in the same room. Surprisingly, ELIZA, developed in the mid-1960s by computer scientist Joseph Weizenbaum at MIT, scored relatively well during the study, achieving a success rate of 27 percent. GPT-3.5, depending on the prompt, scored a 14 percent success rate, below ELIZA. GPT-4 achieved a success rate of 41 percent, second only to actual humans. "Ultimately, the study's authors concluded that GPT-4 does not meet the success criteria of the Turing test, reaching neither a 50 percent success rate (greater than a 50/50 chance) nor surpassing the success rate of human participants," reports Ars. "The researchers speculate that with the right prompt design, GPT-4 or similar models might eventually pass the Turing test. However, the challenge lies in crafting a prompt that mimics the subtlety of human conversation styles. And like GPT-3.5, GPT-4 has also been conditioned not to present itself as human."

"It seems very likely that much more effective prompts exist, and therefore that our results underestimate GPT-4's potential performance at the Turing Test," the authors write.

America's census bureau looked at how many people relocated into each state from another state, compared to the total number of people making a move in that state. The state with the lowest "inmigration" ratio? California.

From 2021 through 2022, "California's inmigration rate was 11.1% last year..." reports SFGate. "For comparison, nearby Oregon had a inmigration rate of 21%."

But the census bureau cautions that California — America's most populous state — "also had a relatively large base of movers overall" — over 4 million — which could help explain its low ratio in several statistics. SFGate reports: California's outmigration rate — defined as the "number of people moving out of a state as a share of that state's total number of movers" — was also below the national migration average. Texas had the country's lowest outmigration rate, at 11.7%, according to the Census Bureau's analysis.
California and Texas are America's two most populous states. (The total population of California is 39 million — roughly 11.7% of America's population — while Texas has another 30 million. Oregon's population is just 4,240,137.) Interestingly, most people moving to California arrived from... Texas. (44,279). At the same time, 102,422 people moved from California to Texas, with another 74,157 moving from California to Arizona.

New York state also lost 91,201 people to Florida, and another 75,103 people to New Jersey. The second-highest number of people (31,225) who moved from a different state to California came from New York...

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, California saw a net loss of 340,000 residents between 2021 and 2022, with most of the people who left heading to Florida or Arizona.

The office sector's credit crunch is intensifying. By one measure, it's now worse than during the 2008-09 global financial crisis. From a report: Only one out of every three securitized office mortgages that expired during the first nine months of 2023 was paid off by the end of September, according to Moody's Analytics. That is the smallest share for the first nine months of any year since at least 2008 and well below the nadir reached in 2009, when 47% of these loans got paid off. That share is also well below the rate before the pandemic, when more than eight out of every 10 maturing securitized office mortgages were paid back in some years.

While the numbers cover only office mortgages packaged into bonds -- so-called commercial mortgage-backed securities -- they reflect a broader freeze in the lending market for office buildings. Many office owners can't pay back their old loans because they can't get new mortgages. Remote work and rising vacancies have hit building profits, making it harder to pay interest. Higher interest rates have pushed debt costs up and building values down. That combination is fueling a rise in defaults. The share of office CMBS loans that are delinquent has tripled over the past year to 5.75%, according to Trepp. It doesn't help that many banks no longer issue new office loans and that many insurance companies and debt funds have become more cautious.

David L. Chandler reports via MIT News: In recent years, some researchers have been puzzled upon finding that water in their experiments, which was held in a sponge-like material known as a hydrogel, was evaporating at a higher rate than could be explained by the amount of heat, or thermal energy, that the water was receiving. And the excess has been significant -- a doubling, or even a tripling or more, of the theoretical maximum rate. After carrying out a series of new experiments and simulations, and reexamining some of the results from various groups that claimed to have exceeded the thermal limit, a team of researchers at MIT has reached a startling conclusion: Under certain conditions, at the interface where water meets air, light can directly bring about evaporation without the need for heat, and it actually does so even more efficiently than heat. In these experiments, the water was held in a hydrogel material, but the researchers suggest that the phenomenon may occur under other conditions as well.

The phenomenon might play a role in the formation and evolution of fog and clouds, and thus would be important to incorporate into climate models to improve their accuracy, the researchers say. And it might play an important part in many industrial processes such as solar-powered desalination of water, perhaps enabling alternatives to the step of converting sunlight to heat first. The new findings come as a surprise because water itself does not absorb light to any significant degree. That's why you can see clearly through many feet of clean water to the surface below. The findings have been published in the journal PNAS.

Accelerated ice melt in west Antarctica is inevitable for the rest of the century no matter how much carbon emissions are cut, research indicates. The implications for sea level rise are "dire," scientists say, and mean some coastal cities may have to be abandoned. From a report: The ice sheet of west Antarctica would push up the oceans by 5 metres if lost completely. Previous studies have suggested it is doomed to collapse over the course of centuries, but the new study shows that even drastic emissions cuts in the coming decades will not slow the melting. The analysis shows the rate of melting of the floating ice shelves in the Amundsen Sea will be three times faster this century compared with the previous century, even if the world meets the most ambitious Paris agreement target of keeping global heating below 1.5C above pre-industrial levels.

Losing the floating ice shelves means the glacial ice sheets on land are freed to slide more rapidly into the ocean. Many millions of people live in coastal cities that are vulnerable to sea level rise, from New York to Mumbai to Shanghai, and more than a third of the global population lives within 62 miles (100km) of the coast. The climate crisis is driving sea level rise by the melting of ice sheets and glaciers and the thermal expansion of sea water. The biggest uncertainty in future sea level rise is what will happen in Antarctica, the scientists say, making planning to adapt to the rise very hard. Researchers said translation of the new findings on ice melting into specific estimates of sea level rise was urgently needed.

More than 40% of Antarctica's ice shelves have shrunk since 1997 with almost half showing "no sign of recovery," a study has found, linking the change to the climate breakdown. From a report: Scientists at the University of Leeds have calculated that 67tn tonnes of ice was lost in the west while 59tn tonnes was added to the east between 1997 and 2021, resulting in a net loss of 7.5tn tonnes. Warm water on the western side of Antarctica has been melting ice, whereas in the east, ice shelves have either stayed the same or grown as the water is colder there. The ice shelves sit at the end of glaciers and slow their rate of flow into the sea. When they shrink, glaciers release larger amounts of freshwater into the sea which can disrupt the currents of the Southern Ocean.

Dr Benjamin Davison, an expert in Earth observation and the study's lead, said: "There is a mixed picture of ice-shelf deterioration, and this is to do with the ocean temperature and ocean currents around Antarctica. The western half is exposed to warm water, which can rapidly erode the ice shelves from below, whereas much of east Antarctica is currently protected from nearby warm water by a band of cold water at the coast." Scientists measured year-by-year changes to the ice using satellites that can see through the thick cloud during long polar nights.

A scientist has observed a "gravitational anomaly" in certain star systems that could potentially upend a fundamental assumption about the universe, according to a new study. Motherboard reports: Kyu-Hyun Chae, an astronomer at Sejong University, has now put these models to the test by analyzing the accelerations of stars in 26,500 wide binaries located within about 650 light years of Earth using imagery captured by the European Space Agency's Gaia observatory. Scientists have previously searched for signs of modified gravity in these systems, but Chae took the next step by developing a new code that could account for special details, like the occurrence rate of so-called "nested" binaries in which the loosely orbiting stars also have close stellar companions. The new data suggests that when the gravitational accelerations of these stars slip below one nanometer per second squared, they begin to move in ways that are more aligned with MOND models than by the standard model. Chae said the findings offer "direct evidence for the breakdown of standard gravity at weak acceleration" and reveal "an immovable anomaly of gravity in favor of MOND-based modified gravity," according to a recent study published in The Astrophysical Journal.

In the new study, Chae reports what he calls "clear evidence" that the movements of binaries at points of weak acceleration seem to sync up with a particular MOND prediction known as AQUAL, according to the study. This discovery suggests that the standard view of gravity cannot account for these motions at low accelerations, which may inspire scientists to rethink aspects of Newton's inverse square law of gravity and Einstein's general relativity, as well as the necessity of dark matter. "Because a large amount of dark matter -- six times the baryonic or ordinary matter based on the standard model -- was required by assuming that general relativity was valid in the low acceleration limit, such a need for a large amount of dark matter is no longer valid," Chae explained. "This does not necessarily preclude the possibility that new particles, such as sterile neutrinos, could not be found. But, it is clear that there is no need for as much dark matter as required by general relativity." "When the results started to show up from my new and more reliable code, my initial reaction was that it was unbelievable," Chae said in an email to Motherboard. "I was feeling like I was dreaming. It seemed so unreal. This is because my results did not match any previous results."

"Several previous results even claimed that the standard gravity was preferred by wide binaries data including Gaia DR3. One group has been claiming an anomaly for some time, but the anomaly seemed not to match well the predictions of existing modified gravity theories. However, those previous studies did not self-calibrate or fully take into account the amount of hidden nested binaries."

The Lenovo ThinkPhone by Motorola is being launched today in the U.S. for $699. It's the first co-branded phone from Motorola that arrives nine years after Lenovo purchased the Motorola brand for $2.91 billion. According to The Verge, the smartphone offers "a suite of productivity features designed to work with ThinkPad laptops." From the report: The ThinkPhone has a lot of the same stuff as a mainstream flagship phone, even though it's priced just below the likes of the $799 Samsung Galaxy S23. It comes with a big 6.6-inch 1080p OLED with up to 144Hz refresh rate. Build quality is quite sturdy with an aluminum frame, Gorilla Glass on the front panel, and Lenovo's signature textured aramid fiber back panel for a softer touch. The whole device is IP68 rated for strong dust and water resistance, and it's also MIL-STD-810H compliant to protect against falls and more extreme conditions.

In addition to the ThinkPad-like look and feel, there's a red key on the side of the phone in a nod to Lenovo's classic keyboard nub. You can customize it to a degree: a double-press can be assigned one of the phone's ThinkPad integration features, while a single-press can act as an app shortcut. Some apps will even let you launch certain features -- mapping it to the "Pay" screen of the Starbucks app could save you a lot of embarrassing fumbling at the register, for example. The ThinkPhone is available first to enterprise customers, with general availability on April 28th via Motorola.com.

While medical textbooks teach that our movements are controlled solely by the brain's motor cortex — that may be wrong, reports NPR, with another area keeping track of the entire body.

"Scientists at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis have found that previously overlooked areas of the brain's motor cortex appear to link control of specific muscles with information about the entire body and brain." As a result, the act of, say, reaching for a cup of coffee can directly influence blood pressure and heart rate. And the movement is seamlessly integrated into brain systems involved in planning, goals and emotion. Textbooks, though, still portray a motor cortex in which "the region that controls your finger is not going to be connected to a region [that asks], 'what am I going to do today?' " says Dr. Nico Dosenbach, an author of the study and an associate professor of neurology and radiology.

But the MRI data leaves little doubt that "there is this interconnected system," says Evan Gordon, an assistant professor of radiology and the study's first author. "It always was there, but we had not perceived it because of our training, because of the things we learned in the first neuroscience class that we ever took...." There's two interleaved systems," Dosenbach says. So right below an area controlling the fingers, for example, the team would find an area involved in "whole body integrative action...."

The new view of primary motor cortex may help explain how the brain solves a difficult problem, says Peter Strick, chair of neurobiology at the University of Pittsburgh. "Even simple movements require nuanced control of all organ systems," he says. "You have to control heart rate. You have to control blood pressure. You have to control so called fight and flight responses...." A system that weaves together movement and mental states also could explain why our posture changes with our mood, or why exercise tends to make us feel better.

"How you move can have an impact on how you feel. And how you feel is going to have an impact on how you move," Strick says. "You know, my mother would tell me, 'stand up straight, you'll feel better.' And maybe that's true."
Thanks to Slashdot reader Tony Isaac for sharing the article.

An anonymous reader shares a report: We know from natural events in the past that increasing the amount of iron in these seas can dramatically increase the growth of phytoplankton. When iron-rich ash from volcanic eruptions has fallen on the ocean's surface, it has triggered phytoplankton blooms large enough to see from space. This knowledge led oceanographer John Martin to put forth something called the "iron hypothesis," which suggests that "fertilizing" the ocean with iron could increase the amount of carbon-sucking phytoplankton -- theoretically enough to cool the entire Earth. "Give me a half tanker of iron, and I will give you an ice age," he famously quipped during a lecture in 1988.

In 1993, shortly after Martin's death, his colleagues at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories tested the hypothesis by increasing the concentration of iron over 64 square kilometers of the Pacific Ocean. They then observed the area for 10 days and saw the amount of plant biomass double. "All biological indicators confirmed an increased rate of phytoplankton production in response to the addition of iron," they wrote in a paper detailing the experiment. More than a dozen other ocean fertilization experiments have been conducted since then, but even though they do appear to cause a bloom of plankton, it's still not clear whether the approach could actually help combat climate change.

In 2009, researchers from the Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory tracked the impact of a major ocean fertilization experiment in the Southern Ocean between New Zealand and Antarctica by measuring carbon particles 800 meters below the surface of the water in the area for a year -- and their findings were less than encouraging. "Just adding iron to the ocean hasn't been demonstrated as a good plan for storing atmospheric carbon," said researcher Jim Bishop. "What counts is the carbon that reaches the deep sea, and a lot of the carbon tied up in plankton blooms appears not to sink very fast or very far." While researchers are still trying to figure out why that is, there are a number of theories, including ones centered on the feeding habits of creatures that live off phytoplankton and the presence of iron-binding organic compounds in ocean water.

Kenneth Stephen (Slashdot reader #1,950) writes: As the world rolls back on using coal to extract energy, it leaves behind empty coal mines. The BBC reports that the UK is actively using these coal mines as a source of geothermal energy.
The BBC visits a wine warehouse in the northeast England town Gateshead, where old coal mines "could still have a role to play in heating homes — but this time, without burning fossil fuels." A new district heating system in Gateshead is poised to begin warming homes and buildings in the area at a cost 5% below market rate, using the clean heat from its mines 150m (490ft) below the ground.
The water in the mines is naturally heated in the surrounding rocks to 20 degrees C (68 degrees Fahrenheit), according to the video report — so a heat exchanger on the surface just repurposes the extracted heat for energy consumers. It's a technique that's also being adopted in the Netherlands. But it's especially applicable in the U.K., where a quarter of homes are above old coal fields (as are 9 of its 10 major urban centers).

The report points out that coal is the world's largest source of CO2 emissions, but now coal production in the UK has fallen by 94% in the last 10 years. "So what happens when the coal mines that used to power our cities are no longer used?"

An anonymous reader shares this report from the Washington Post: The exodus of people fleeing large urban areas during the height of the pandemic appears to be reversing, according to data from the Census Bureau released Thursday. Many workers who could telecommute abandoned crowded cities and counties for suburban or rural areas when covid struck, causing demographers and businesses to wonder whether the movement signified a permanent shift. But the overall patterns of population change are moving toward pre-pandemic rates, the bureau's Vintage 2022 estimates of population and components of change show.

Eleven of the 15 largest metro areas gained residents or lost fewer people compared with the previous year, including the D.C. metro area, New York City, the San Francisco Bay Area, and Seattle, according to an analysis by Brookings Institution senior demographer William Frey.... Among the most striking recorded shifts were in Manhattan and San Francisco, both of which lost population at a significant rate between 2020 and 2021. Manhattan, which shrank by 5.87 percent in 2021, grew by 1.11 percent last year. San Francisco lost 6.79 percent of its population in 2021 but shrank by only a third of a percentage point last year. Both are home to a large number of people who were able to work remotely during the pandemic. Covid rates in New York City were especially high early in the pandemic, and many Manhattan residents moved to outlying counties....

"Many counties with large universities saw their populations fully rebound this year as students returned," said Christine Hartley, assistant division chief for estimates and projections in the Census Bureau's population division.
The article also makes the point that immigration into America was temporarily restricted during the pandemic, so outflows never had a chance to be counterbalanced by inflows. And the exodus to the suburbs may have already peaked. Last year Manhattan gained 17,472 people, the article points out, while counties outside the city lost residents. The Census Bureau notes that was a pattern for 2022: "the smallest counties nationally, those with populations below 10,000, experienced more population loss (60.8%) than gains (38.3%); while the largest counties, having populations at or greater than 100,000, largely experienced population increases (68%)."

Beyond that, the executive director of the DC Fiscal Policy Institute argues that it's just too soon to know whether the pandemic-era outflow from cities was permanent. "We've just been through a major health and economic shock. There's been what I call a doomsday narrative about what's going to happen, with predictions of empty downtowns and city centers that wither and die." They believe the new census data "should give us pause in terms of declaring that we've arrived at a new normal. It's highly likely that some of the folks who left will come back, and we really don't know if it's going to be a lot of them or just a small portion."

Today a warning was published from the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle. "Experts say post-pandemic woes stemming from office workers staying home instead of commuting into the city could send San Francisco into a 'doom loop' that would gut its tax base, decimate fare-reliant regional transit systems like BART and trap it in an economic death spiral...." Despite our housing crisis, it was years into the COVID pandemic before our leaders meaningfully questioned the logic of reserving some of the most prized real estate on Earth for fickle suburbanites and their cars. Downtown, after all, was San Francisco's golden goose. Companies in downtown offices accounted for 70% of San Francisco's pre-pandemic jobs and generated nearly 80% of its economic output, according to city economist Ted Egan. And so we wasted generous federal COVID emergency funds trying to bludgeon, cajole and pray for office workers to return downtown instead of planning for change. We're now staring down the consequences for that lack of vision.

The San Francisco metropolitan area's economic recovery from the pandemic ranked 24th out of the 25 largest regions in the U.S., besting only Baltimore, according to a report from the Bay Area Council Economic Institute. In the first quarter of 2023, San Francisco's office vacancy rate shot up to a record-high 29.4% — the biggest three-year increase of any U.S. city. The trend isn't likely to end anytime soon: In January, nearly 30% of San Francisco job openings were for hybrid or fully remote work, the highest share of the nation's 50 largest cities. Amid lower property, business and real estate transfer taxes, the city is projecting a $728 million deficit over the next two fiscal years. Transit ridership remains far below pre-pandemic levels. In January, downtown San Francisco BART stations had just 30% of the rider exits they did in 2019, according to a report from Egan's office. Many Bay Area transit agencies, including Muni, are rapidly approaching a fiscal cliff.

San Francisco isn't dead; as of March, it was home to an estimated 173 of the country's 655 companies valued at more than $1 billion. Tourism is beginning to rebound. And new census data shows that San Francisco's population loss is slowing, a sign its pandemic exodus may be coming to an end. But the city can't afford to wait idly for things to reach equilibrium again. It needs to evolve — quickly. Especially downtown. That means rebuilding the neighborhood's fabric, which won't be cheap or easy. Office-to-housing conversions are notoriously tricky and expensive. Demolishing non-historic commercial buildings that no longer serve a purpose in the post-pandemic world is all but banned. And, unlike New York after 9/11, San Francisco is a city that can't seem to stop getting in its own way.
So what's the solution? The CEO of the Bay Area Council suggests public-private partnerships that "could help shift downtown San Francisco's focus from tech — with employees now accustomed to working from home — to research and development, biotech, medical research and manufacturing, which all require in-person workers."

And last week San Francisco's mayor proposed more than 100 changes to streamline the permitting process for small businesses, and on Monday helped introduce legislation making it easier to convert office buildings to housing, expand pop-up business opportunities, and fill some empty storefronts. This follows a February executive order to speed housing construction. The editorial points out that "About 40% of office buildings in downtown San Francisco evaluated in a study would be good candidates for housing due to their physical characteristics and location and could be converted into approximately 11,200 units, according to research from SPUR and the Urban Land Institute San Francisco."

But without some action, the editorial's headline argues that "Downtown San Francisco is at risk of collapsing — and taking much of the Bay Area with it."

Stack Overflow explored the "hype cycle" by asking thousands of real developers whether nascent tech trends have really proven themselves, and how they feel about them. "With AI-assisted technologies in the news, this survey's aim was to get a baseline for perceived utility and impact" of various technologies, writes Stack Overflow's senior analyst for market research and insights.

The results? "Open source is clearly positioned as the north star to all other technologies, lighting the way to the chosen land of future technology prosperity." Technologies such as blockchain or AI may dominate tech media headlines, but are they truly trusted in the eyes of developers and technologists? On a scale of zero (Experimental) to 10 (Proven), the top proven technologies by mean score are open source with 6.9, cloud computing with 6.5, and machine learning with 5.9. The lowest scoring were quantum computing with 3.7, nanotechnology with 4.5, and low code/no code with 4.6....

[When asked for the next technology that everyone will use], AI comes in at the top of the list by a large margin, but our three top proven selections (open source, machine learning, cloud computing) follow after....

It's one thing to believe a technology has a prosperous future, it's another to believe a technology deserves a prosperous future. Alongside the emergent sentiment, respondents also scored the same technologies on a zero (Negative Impact) to 10 (Positive Impact) scale for impact on the world. The top positive mean scoring technologies were open source with 7.2, sustainable technologies with 6.6 and machine learning with 6.5; the top negative mean scoring technologies were low code/no code, InnerSource, and blockchain all with 5.3. Seeing low code/no code and blockchain score so low here makes sense because both could be associated with questionable job security in certain developer careers; however it's surprising that AI is not there with them on the negative end of the spectrum. AI-assisted technology had an above average mean score for positive impact (6.2) and the percent positive score is not that far off from those machine learning and cloud computing (28% vs. 33% or 32%).

Possibly what we are seeing here as far as why developers would not rate AI more negatively than technologies like low code/no code or blockchain but do give it a higher emergent score is that they understand the technology better than a typical journalist or think tank analyst. AI-assisted tech is the second highest chosen technology on the list for wanting more hands-on training among respondents, just below machine learning. Developers understand the distinction between media buzz around AI replacing humans in well-paying jobs and the possibility of humans in better quality jobs when AI and machine learning technologies mature. Low code/no code for the same reason probably doesn't deserve to be rated so low, but it's clear that developers are not interested in learning more about it.

Open source software is the overall choice for most positive and most proven scores in sentiment compared to the set of technologies we polled our users about.
One quadrant of their graph shows three proven technologies which developers still had negative feelings about: biometrics, serverless computing, and rapid prototyping tools. (With "Internet of Things" straddling the line between positive and negative feelings.)

And there were two technologies which 10% of respondents thought would never be widely used in the future: low code/no code and blockchain. "Post-FTX scandal, it's clear that most developers do not feel blockchain is positive or proven," the analyst writes.

"However there is still desire to learn as more respondents want training with blockchain than cloud computing. There's a reason to believe in the direct positive impact of a given technology when it pays the bills."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: More than 1,000 "super-emitter" sites gushed the potent greenhouse gas methane into the global atmosphere in 2022, the Guardian can reveal, mostly from oil and gas facilities. The worst single leak spewed the pollution at a rate equivalent to 67m running cars. Separate data also reveals 55 "methane bombs" around the world -- fossil fuel extraction sites where gas leaks alone from future production would release levels of methane equivalent to 30 years of all US greenhouse gas emissions.

Methane emissions cause 25% of global heating today and there has been a "scary" surge since 2007, according to scientists. This acceleration may be the biggest threat to keeping below 1.5C of global heating and seriously risks triggering catastrophic climate tipping points, researchers say. The two new datasets identify the sites most critical to preventing methane-driven disaster, as tackling leaks from fossil fuel sites is the fastest and cheapest way to slash methane emissions. Some leaks are deliberate, venting the unwanted gas released from underground while drilling for oil into the air, and some are accidental, from badly maintained or poorly regulated equipment.

Fast action would dramatically slow global heating as methane is short-lived in the atmosphere. An emissions cut of 45% by 2030, which the UN says is possible, would prevent 0.3C of temperature rise. Methane emissions therefore present both a grave threat to humanity, but also a golden opportunity to decisively act on the climate crisis. [...] The methane super-emitter sites were detected by analysis of satellite data, with the US, Russia and Turkmenistan responsible for the largest number from fossil fuel facilities. The biggest event was a leak of 427 tonnes an hour in August, near Turkmenistan's Caspian coast and a major pipeline. That single leak was equivalent to the rate of emissions from 67m cars, or the hourly national emissions of France. Future methane emissions from fossil fuel sites -- the methane bombs -- are also forecast to be huge, threatening the entire global "carbon budget" limit required to keep heating below 1.5C. More than half of these fields are already in production, including the three biggest methane bombs, which are all in North America.

"Today San Francisco has what is perhaps the most deserted major downtown in America," reports the New York Times. "On any given week, office buildings are at about 40 percent of their prepandemic occupancy..." [T]he vacancy rate has jumped to 24 percent from 5 percent since 2019. Occupancy of the city's offices is roughly 7 percentage points below that of those in the average major American city, according to Kastle, the building security firm.

More ominous for the city is that its downtown business district — the bedrock of its economy and tax base — revolves around a technology industry that is uniquely equipped and enthusiastic about letting workers stay home indefinitely. In the space of a few months, Jeremy Stoppelman, the chief executive of Yelp, went from running a company that was rooted in the city to vacating Yelp's longtime headquarters and allowing its roughly 4,400 employees to work from anywhere in their country.

"I feel like I've seen the future," he said.

Decisions like that, played out across thousands of remote and hybrid work arrangements, have forced office owners and the businesses that rely on them to figure out what's next. This has made the San Francisco area something of a test case in the multibillion-dollar question of what the nation's central business districts will look like when an increased amount of business is done at home.... The city's chief economist, Ted Egan, has warned about a looming loss of tax revenue as vacancies pile up. Brokers have tried to counter that narrative by talking up a "flight to quality" in which companies upgrade to higher-end space. Business groups and city leaders hope to recast the urban core as a more residential neighborhood built around people as well as businesses but leave out that office rents would probably have to plunge for those plans to be viable.

Below the surface of spin is a downtown that is trying to adapt to what amounts to a three-day workweek.... On Wednesdays, offices in San Francisco are at roughly 50 percent of their prepandemic levels; on Fridays, they're not even at 30 percent.... In a typical downturn, the turnaround is a fairly simple equation of rents falling far enough to attract new tenants and the economy improving fast enough to stimulate new demand. But now there's a more existential question of what the point of a city's downtown even is.

"Rust is awesome, for certain things. But think twice before picking it up for a startup that needs to move fast," Matt Welsh, co-founder and chief executive of Fixie.ai and former Google engineering director, writes in a blog post. From the post: I hesitated writing this post, because I don't want to start, or get into, a holy war over programming languages. (Just to get the flame bait out of the way, Visual Basic is the best language ever!) But I've had a number of people ask me about my experience with Rust and whether they should pick up Rust for their projects. So, I'd like to share some of the pros and cons that I see of using Rust in a startup setting, where moving fast and scaling teams is really important. Right up front, I should say that Rust is very good at what it's designed to do, and if your project needs the specific benefits of Rust (a systems language with high performance, super strong typing, no need for garbage collection, etc.) then Rust is a great choice. But I think that Rust is often used in situations where it's not a great fit, and teams pay the price of Rust's complexity and overhead without getting much benefit.

My primary experience from Rust comes from working with it for a little more than 2 years at a previous startup. This project was a cloud-based SaaS product that is, more-or-less, a conventional CRUD app: it is a set of microservices that provide a REST and gRPC API endpoint in front of a database, as well as some other back-end microservices (themselves implemented in a combination of Rust and Python). Rust was used primarily because a couple of the founders of the company were Rust experts. Over time, we grew the team considerably (increasing the engineering headcount by nearly 10x), and the size and complexity of the codebase grew considerably as well. As the team and codebase grew, I felt that, over time, we were paying an increasingly heavy tax for continuing to use Rust. Development was sometimes sluggish, launching new features took longer than I would have expected, and the team was feeling a real productivity hit from that early decision to use Rust. Rewriting the code in another language would have, in the long run, made development much more nimble and sped up delivery time, but finding the time for the major rewrite work would have been exceedingly difficult.

So we were kind of stuck with Rust unless we decided to bite the bullet and rewrite a large amount of the code. Rust is supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread, so why was it not working so well for us? [...] Despite being some of the smartest and most experienced developers I had worked with, many people on the team (myself included) struggled to understand the canonical ways to do certain things in Rust, how to grok the often arcane error messages from the compiler, or how to understand how key libraries worked (more on this below). We started having weekly "learn Rust" sessions for the team to help share knowledge and expertise. This was all a significant drain on the team's productivity and morale as everyone felt the slow rate of development. As a comparison point of what it looks like to adopt a new language on a software team, one of my teams at Google was one of the first to switch entirely from C++ to Go, and it took no more than about two weeks before the entire 15-odd-person team was quite comfortably coding in Go for the first time.

Renewables are on track to generate more power than coal in the United States this year. But the question is whether they can grow fast enough to meet the country's climate goals. From a report: Supply chain constraints and trade disputes have slowed wind and solar installations, raising questions about the United States' ability to meet the emission reductions sought by the Inflation Reduction Act. The Biden administration is banking on the landmark climate law cutting emissions by 40 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. Many analysts think the United States will ultimately shake off the slowdown thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act's $369 billion in clean energy investments. But it may take time for the law's impact to be felt. Tax guidance needs to be finalized before developers begin plunking down money on new facilities, and companies now face headwinds in the form of higher interest rates and the looming threat of a recession.

The Inflation Reduction Act's emission reductions hinge on the country's ability to at least double the rate of renewable installations over the record levels observed in 2020 and 2021, said John Larsen, a partner at the Rhodium Group. "Every year we don't have capacity additions beyond the record is lost ground," he said. "It's going to be that much harder to make that up over time. There is a point where we don't get to the outcomes we projected because we blew the first few years of the transition." For now, U.S. renewable output is edging higher. Wind and solar output are up 18 percent through Nov. 20 compared to the same time last year and have grown 58 percent compared to 2019, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The government energy tracker predicts that wind, solar and hydro will generate 22 percent of U.S. electricity by the end of this year. That is more than coal at 20 percent and nuclear at 19 percent.

Most addresses holding bitcoin (BTC), the largest cryptocurrency, are now in the red, the first time that's happened since the start of the coronavirus-induced crash of March 2020. CoinDesk reports: Just over 51%, or 24.6 million addresses of the total 47.9 million, are below purchase price on their investments, according to data provided by blockchain analytics firm IntoTheBlock. About 45% are in the money, which means they are boasting unrealized gains, while the rest are roughly at break-even. IntoTheBlock defines out-of-the-money addresses as those that acquired coins at an average price higher than bitcoin's going market rate of $16,067.

The bearish momentum looks overdone, according to Lucas Outumuro, head of research at IntoTheBlock. Previous bear markets ended with the majority of addresses being out of-the money. The percentage of out-of-the-money addresses stood at 55% in January 2019. Bitcoin bottomed near $3,200 around the same time and began a bull run three months later. Further reading: Silence From Digital Currency Group's Genesis Spooks Crypto

The euro has dropped below parity with the U.S. dollar on Monday. According to Reuters, investors fear that "interest-rate hikes in the United States and Europe, aimed at curbing inflation, would weaken the global economy." From the report: Against a basket of currencies, the dollar rose 0.8% to a more than five-week high of 109.02 , not far from the two-decade peak of 109.29 touched in mid-July. The greenback has found support in recent sessions as several Federal Reserve officials reiterated an aggressive monetary tightening stance ahead of the Fed's Jackson Hole, Wyoming, symposium this week. The latest of these officials, Richmond Fed President Thomas Barkin, on Friday said the "urge" among central bankers was toward faster, front-loaded rate increases.

The euro fell following Russia's announcement late on Friday of a three-day halt to European gas supplies via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline at the end of this month. Investors worry that the halt could exacerbate an energy crisis that has weighed on the common currency in recent months.