KILLER ROBOTS IN GAZA
Israel’s assault on Gaza has offered the first glimpse of AI-assisted genocide. The Israeli military has deployed multiple algorithmic targeting systems: it uses Lavender and The Gospel to identify suspected Hamas militants and generate lists of human targets and infrastructure to bomb, and Where’s Daddy to track targets to kill them when they’re home with their families. Israeli intelligence officials have acknowledged an error rate of around 10 per cent, but simply priced it in, deeming 15 to 20 civilian deaths acceptable for every junior militant the algorithm identifies and over 100 for commanders.
The depersonalisation of violence also creates an accountability void. When an algorithm kills the wrong person, who’s responsible? The programmer? The commanding officer? The politician who authorised deployment? Legal uncertainty is a builtin feature that shields perpetrators from consequences. As decisions about life and death are made by machines, the very idea of responsibility dissolves.
These concerns emerge within a broader context of alarm about AI’s impacts on civic space and human rights. As the technology becomes cheaper, it’s proliferating across domains, from battlefields to border control to policing operations. AI-powered facial recognition technologies are amplifying surveillance capabilities and undermining privacy rights. Biases embedded in algorithms perpetuate exclusion based on gender, race and other characteristics.
The Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems has met regularly since 2017, yet talks have been systematically stalled by major military powers — India, Israel, Russia and the USA — taking advantage of the requirement to reach consensus to systematically block regulation proposals. In September, 42 states delivered a joint statement affirming their readiness to move forward. It was a breakthrough after years of deadlock, but major holdouts maintain their opposition.
WHAT HAPPENED AT COP 30?
As usual lately, there was a disappointing conclusion at this year’s meeting of COP, the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Although the countries agreed on a sweeping package to scale up climate finance and accelerate implementation of the Paris Agreement, there was again no clear commitment to move away from fossil fuels.
Expectations had been high that COP30’s final decision would include explicit reference to phasing out fossil fuels. Indigenous groups staged blockades demanding stronger protections for the Amazon and more than 80 countries backed Brazil’s proposal for a formal ‘roadmap.’
A draft text had included it – until the final hours of talks. The adopted outcome refers only to the ‘UAE Consensus’, the COP28 decision calling for “transitioning away from fossil fuels.”
Before the final plenary, Brazilian scientist Carlos Nobre issued a stark warning: fossil fuel use must fall to zero by 2040 – 2045 at the latest to avoid catastrophic temperature rises of up to 2.5°C by mid-century. That trajectory, he said, would spell the near-total loss of coral reefs, the collapse of the Amazon rainforest and an accelerated melt of the Greenland ice sheet.
But, as Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said, “COPs are consensus-based – and in a period of geopolitical divides, consensus is ever harder to reach. I cannot pretend that COP30 has delivered everything that is needed.” Overshoot of 1.5°C is a stark warning: deep, rapid emission cuts and massive climate finance are essential. “COP30 is over, but the work is not,” he said. Mr. Guterres vowed to keep pushing for higher ambition and solidarity.
There were some significant benefits of the conference. For example, the “Tropical Forests Forever Fund” raised $5.5 billion and now includes 53 participating countries; at least 20 per cent of resources go directly to Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Also, the “Belém Health Action Plan,” a global initiative targeting climate-related health threats, was launched with $300 million from 35 philanthropic organizations.
GOOD NEWS FOR GENETIC DIVERSITY
Scientists have successfully used advanced gene-editing technology to improve the genetic diversity of species on the brink of extinction. One major success of this initiative is in boosting the genetic diversity of the northern white rhino, a species that has dwindled to just two known individuals in the wild.
Scientists have used CRISPR to insert genes from closely related species into the genome of embryos created in the lab, with the hope of breeding a new generation of healthier rhinos. This technique, though controversial, could potentially be applied to many other species suffering from genetic bottlenecks due to habitat destruction, climate change, and poaching.
Conservationists are cautiously optimistic about this breakthrough, emphasizing that while gene-editing is not a silver bullet, it provides a powerful tool in the fight to save species from extinction. The next steps involve scaling these efforts and ensuring ethical practices in the use of this technology.
DRINKING WATER AND HYDROGEN ENERGY
You already know about two of humanity’s biggest problems: the shortage of potable water and the shortage of sustainable energy that is not intermittent, as are solar and wind. But 2025 saw new breakthroughs that will help solve both of these problems.
Already about twothirds of the human population face water shortage, and the problem gets worse with urbanization and global warming. Multi-year droughts are becoming frequent.
Desalination is the obvious solution to this shortage of drinking water. For example, in Southern California a plant is turning enough saltwater into fresh water to cover 7 percent of San Diego county’s needs. But desalination is far from ideal. The main technique is called reverse osmosis, which forces salt water against a membrane, letting water molecules but not salt through. The pumps that do this require immense energy – usually from fossil fuel. Solar is fine, but at night desalination plants must shift back to grid power.
Here’s the breakthrough: Use the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of the ocean as an alternative energy source to power those pumps. Some Norwegian companies are placing the reverse osmosis plants at the bottom of the sea. This is not exactly a perfect solution, for it is inefficient to run cables out from land to power these pumps. Next solution: Place the undersea desalination plants near offshore wind turbines! Or, in the future, install underwater turbines that use ocean currents (which are not intermittent) to power the desalination.
Another negative effect of conventional desalination is that it sends about half of the water back into the ocean, containing 100 percent of the salt that was removed. This doubly salty brine sinks to the bottom, killing fish. But the undersea reverse osmosis plants can afford to desalinate only 10% of their water intake, which reduces the emissions of excess salt. Hurrah!
And China has a new discovery that solves both the water and energy shortage.Hydrogen can, as we know, be made from seawater while also removing the salt and yielding potable water. Unfortunately, all ‘conventional’ hydrogen now being produced uses enormous amounts of electricity and very pure water. This hydrogen costs a lot: about $10 per kilogram.
China’s new setup generates ‘green’ hydrogen directly from seawater without using freshwater at all. According to the South China Morning Post, a new facility in Shandong’s Rizhao city now converts seawater into both drinking water and clean fuel in a single process costing just $0.27 per cubic metre of water – cheaper than Beijing’s tap water. Within a decade, this technology may produce hydrogen at only $1 per kilogram.
The new installation is powered by low-grade waste heat from nearby steel and petrochemical plants. Such excess heat ordinarily is simply released into the air. However, the breakthrough is to capture that waste heat and redirect it to turn the ocean into a source of fresh water and clean fuel.
First, it produces drinking-grade water. Each year, 800 tonnes of seawater are processed to generate 450 cubic metres of ultra-pure water. Second, it produces green hydrogen, about 1,92,000 cubic metres every year. This clean fuel can power anything from buses to industrial plants. The downside? Inland cities cannot benefit from this technology for lack of seawater.
