World
‘Optical illusion’: Key takeaways from COP29
Rich countries have pledged to contribute $300bn a year by 2035 to help poorer nations combat the effects of climate change after two weeks of intense negotiations at the United Nations climate summit (COP29) in Azerbaijan’s capital, Baku.
While this marks a significant increase from the previous $100bn pledge, the deal has been sharply criticised by developing nations as woefully insufficient to address the scale of the climate crisis.
This year’s summit, hosted by the oil and gas-rich former Soviet republic, unfolded against the backdrop of a looming political shift in the United States as a climate-sceptic Donald Trump administration takes office in January. Faced with this uncertainty, many countries deemed the failure to secure a new financial agreement in Baku an unacceptable risk.
Here are the key takeaways from this year’s summit:
‘No real money on the table’: $300bn climate finance fund slammed
While a broader target of $1.3 trillion annually by 2035 was adopted, only $300bn annually was designated for grants and low-interest loans from developed nations to aid the developing world in transitioning to low-carbon economies and preparing for climate change effects.
Under the deal, the majority of the funding is expected to come from private investment and alternative sources, such as proposed levies on fossil fuels and frequent flyers – which remain under discussion.
“The rich world staged a great escape in Baku,” said Mohamed Adow, the Kenyan director of Power Shift Africa, a think tank.
“With no real money on the table, and vague and unaccountable promises of funds to be mobilised, they are trying to shirk their climate finance obligations,” he added, explaining that “poor countries needed to see clear, grant-based, climate finance” which “was sorely lacking”.
The deal states that developed nations would be “taking the lead” in providing the $300bn – implying that others could join.
The US and the European Union want newly wealthy emerging economies like China – currently the world’s largest emitter – to chip in. But the deal only “encourages” emerging economies to make voluntary contributions.
Failure to explicitly repeat the call for a transition away from fossil fuels
A call to “transition away” from coal, oil, and gas made during last year’s COP28 summit in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, was touted as groundbreaking – the first time that 200 countries, including top oil and gas producers like Saudi Arabia and the US, acknowledged the need to phase down fossil fuels. But the latest talks only referred to the Dubai deal, without explicitly repeating the call for a transition away from fossil fuels.
Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev referred to fossil fuel resources as a “gift from God” during his keynote opening speech.
New carbon credit trading rules approved
New rules allowing wealthy, high-emission countries to buy carbon-cutting “offsets” from developing nations were approved this week.
The initiative, known as Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, establishes frameworks for both direct country-to-country carbon trading and a UN-regulated marketplace.
Proponents believe this could channel vital investment into developing nations, where many carbon credits are generated through activities like reforestation, protecting carbon sinks, and transitioning to clean energy.
However, critics warn that without strict safeguards, these systems could be exploited to greenwash climate targets, allowing leading polluters to delay meaningful emissions reductions. The unregulated carbon market has previously faced scandals, raising concerns about the effectiveness and integrity of these credits.
Disagreements within the developing world
The negotiations were also the scene of disagreements within the developing world.
The Least Developed Countries (LDCs) bloc had asked that it receive $220bn per year, while the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) wanted $39bn – demands that were opposed by other developing nations.
The figures did not appear in the final deal. Instead, it calls for tripling other public funds they receive by 2030.
The next COP, in Brazil in 2025, is expected to issue a report on how to boost climate finance for these countries.
Who said what?
EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hailed the deal in Baku as marking “a new era for climate cooperation and finance”.
She said the $300bn agreement after marathon talks “will drive investments in the clean transition, bringing down emissions and building resilience to climate change”.
US President Joe Biden cast the agreement reached in Baku as a “historic outcome”, while EU climate envoy Wopke Hoekstra said it would be remembered as “the start of a new era for climate finance”.
But others fully disagreed. India, a vociferous critic of rich countries’ stance in climate negotiations, called it “a paltry sum”.
“This document is little more than an optical illusion,” India’s delegate Chandni Raina said.
Sierra Leone’s Environment Minister Jiwoh Abdulai said the deal showed a “lack of goodwill” from rich countries to stand by the world’s poorest as they confront rising seas and harsher droughts. Nigeria’s envoy Nkiruka Maduekwe called it “an insult”.
Is the COP process in doubt?
Despite years of celebrated climate agreements, greenhouse gas emissions and global temperatures continue to rise, with 2024 on track to be the hottest year recorded. The intensifying effects of extreme weather highlight the insufficient pace of action to avert a full-blown climate crisis.
The COP29 finance deal has drawn criticism as inadequate.
Adding to the unease, Trump’s presidential election victory loomed over the talks, with his pledges to withdraw the US from global climate efforts and appoint a climate sceptic as energy secretary further dampening optimism.
‘No longer fit for purpose’
The Kick the Big Polluters Out (KBPO) coalition of NGOs analysed accreditations at the summit, calculating that more than 1,700 people linked to fossil fuel interests attended.
A group of leading climate activists and scientists, including former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, warned earlier this month that the COP process was “no longer fit for purpose”.
They urged smaller, more frequent meetings, strict criteria for host countries and rules to ensure companies showed clear climate commitments before being allowed to send lobbyists to the talks.
World
AI notetakers promise easy meeting recaps, but some professionals question their use
NEW YORK (AP) — Launching an artificial intelligence tool to take notes and summarize important information from a virtual meeting can be alluring. Seconds after one of the agents attends an hour-long video conference, it can deliver a recap of key points and outline a to-do list for all the participants.
But the way popular AI notetakers accomplish those tasks makes some people avoid using them. The technology turns everything said during meetings into data. Confidential personnel information, corporate strategies, trade secrets and remarks that could later be seen as incriminating — all of it could end up in the wrong hands.
“There are huge risks to the organization on AI notetakers,” Amy Dufrane, the chief executive of human resources training and certification provider HRCI, said. “I don’t think companies should use it at all.”
An AI notetaker is a software application or device that uses artificial intelligence, speech recognition and large language models to record, transcribe and summarize conversations. The tools are intended to save time and improve participation, but professionals in a number of fields say there are reasons to be wary.
This article is part of AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health. Read more Be Well.
Chief among them is uncertainty about where the collected data is stored and for how long. Privacy advocates worry the companies behind the AI notetakers are creating voiceprints without consent. Voiceprints — a type of biometric profile similar to a fingerprint but tuned to the unique intonations and characteristics of one’s voice — can be used to access restricted or confidential information, including the contents of bank accounts.
Some tech companies resell data from the notetaking tools they created or use confidential meeting transcripts and recordings to train their AI models. There’s also the risk that conversations between an attorney and client could become fair game in legal proceedings; a New York federal judge in February ordered a criminal defendant to provide prosecutors with documents he created for his lawyers because it already had been shared with a third party, which was Anthropic’s Claude.
“People who use AI notetakers, they don’t always know where the data goes,” said Justin Daniels, an Atlanta-based corporate attorney at law firm Baker Donelson. “And in my context, if the data goes anywhere else and they’re not aware of it, that attorney-client-privileged conversation may not be attorney-client-privileged anymore.”
Here are some tips on the etiquette of kicking an AI notetaker out of a meeting, the risks of using one and how to protect yourself.
The first step when you join a meeting is check for bots
When you join a meeting, make it a habit to check whether an AI notetaker is present. It might appear as a meeting attendee, often labeled as an AI notetaker, or a pop-up message on the screen informing participants the meeting is being recorded. The latter could signal the presence of an AI notetaker.
Virtual meeting platforms such as Zoom and Google Meet let users know when recording is underway, but some meeting software does not make it clear when a notetaker is present, according to Thorin Klosowski, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s senior security and privacy analyst.
Participants also may use personal notetaking devices that are separate from the meeting platform, in which case the other attendees wouldn’t necessarily know a discussion was being recorded and transcribed.
“You hope the other person would tell you that they’re doing that,” Klosowski said. “Asking everyone for consent before doing a sensitive meeting would be the most polite approach to take.”
If you’re unsure whether someone has deployed an AI notetaker, you can ask. You can also state at the beginning that a meeting is not authorized for recording.
A polite way to establish such a boundary is to say, “Our company policy is that this meeting cannot be recorded,” Dufrane suggested. This relieves the employee, such as a salesperson who wants to make a good impression, of having to be the “bad guy,” putting the onus on the company instead, she said.
Another option is to allow the notetaker for part of the gathering but turn if off at the end to dedicate time for more delicate topics.
“I won’t start talking about anything substantive until it’s shut off, because I just don’t want to take the risk,” Daniels said.
Assert your privacy rights to protect voiceprints
Many AI notetakers determine unique acoustic signatures, or voiceprints, for each speaker in the room, said Chris Pluymers, associate attorney at The Dillon Law Group in East Lansing, Michigan. That’s how the companies distinguish one speaker from another, labeling them with monikers “Speaker 1” or “Speaker 2.”
One way voiceprints are used is to verify the identities of bank account holders over the phone. If bad actors got ahold of a person’s vocal signature, they could use it to access files, commit fraud or take over accounts, he said.
Laws in some states govern how voiceprints can be created and stored and provide rights that individuals can assert to object to the use of an AI notetaker during meetings they attend.
In Illinois, voiceprints are considered biometric identifiers, similar to fingerprints, and are covered under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act, which requires written notice and informed consent before an AI notetaker or other agent collects voiceprints. The law also mandates a documented data retention schedule and destruction policy, Pluymers said. But most companies using the tools have none of those systems in place, Pluymers said.
“In the world of AI, the world of data and privacy, the world of biometric identification, I don’t think you can have such a lax approach to it,” Pluymers said. “I think getting out ahead of it is crucial.”
Under the Illinois law, employees can say they don’t want to attend a meeting with an AI notetaker until they have assurances of where and why the data is being stored, and when it will be deleted, Pluymers said. They can also ask if there is a policy and written consent form to sign.
If an AI notetaker shows up at a meeting unexpectedly, a participant could say, “I prefer we keep this meeting without AI recording or transcript tools and I’d be happy to take my own notes and share a recap if that’s helpful,” Pluymers suggested. “Just being warm and genuine about it and asking them to respect your wishes.”
Know where your data goes
When working with AI notetaking apps, find out whether the companies that built them retain recordings, transcripts or metadata indefinitely or use them to train AI models, said Danielle Kays, a partner at Fisher Phillips who represents businesses on privacy and employment law matters.
“If there is some sort of speaker ID or voice recognition, really understand what that is and how it works,” Kays said.
Even when content is deleted, metadata about meetings can remain stored with the vendor, meaning sensitive business information could influence how the model behaves and in some cases could be memorized or reproduced, she said.
AI notetakers generate text, and that’s easier for outsiders to search through than video or audio files, according to EFF.
“Storing a bunch of video isn’t easy, it’s costly and hard to look through, but text is much easier to search and cheaper to store,” said Klosowski of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
___
Share your stories and questions about workplace wellness at [email protected]. Follow AP’s Be Well coverage, focusing on wellness, fitness, diet and mental health at https://apnews.com/hub/be-well
World
Argentinian flight instructor jumps to death from plane, 22-year-old student forced to land alone
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A flight instructor jumped to his death out of a small aircraft over Argentina, forcing the student pilot he was teaching to land the plane herself.
Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, 42, was on board a two-seat Cessna 150G on Saturday when he made the decision to jump out over the province of Córdoba, according to CNN, which cited its Argentinian affiliate TN.
“He made this tragic decision on board an aircraft with another person by his side,” Eduardo Álvarez, director of the Flying Parrot Córdoba flying school where Bertazzo worked, told TN. “It’s impossible to think about it or understand it, but the human mind is so complex.”
An undated photo of Leandro Andrés Bertazzo, a 42-year-old pilot who jumped to his death from a plane on Saturday, July 4 in Argentina. (Instagram/Leandro Bertazzo)
PILOT DECLARES MAYDAY BEFORE SEAPLANE COMES DOWN IN NEW YORK CITY’S EAST RIVER
Rosario, the 22-year-old student, later told authorities that Bertazzo told her, “You know what you have to do, carry on,” before taking off his gear, opening the door and leaping out, according to Álvarez.
Opening the door of a plane midair is incredibly difficult. Álvarez said it would be akin to trying to open the door of a car traveling 124 miles per hour.
Cessna 150m FRA150M climbing out after take-off with flaps deployed and hills behind. (aviation-images.com/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
FRANTIC SEARCH UNDERWAY FOR CREW AFTER BOEING 737 WRECKAGE FOUND BY OFFICIALS
Álvarez said that Rosario managed to land the plane safely, despite being in “complete shock.” There was no damage to the plane, according to TN.
Álvarez noted that Bertazzo had gone on a flight with another student earlier in the day.
A view from the main road of the flight school Bertazzo worked at, Flying Parrot Córdoba. (Google Maps)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Álvarez also told TN that Bertazzo had visited a psychiatric institute, something that was only known by his family prior to his death.
Prosecutors in Córdoba will lead the investigation into Bertazzo’s death. The plane he jumped from is now in police custody.
World
Former US Olympian pleads not guilty in DC reflecting pool vandalism case
Former Olympic canoeist David Hearn denies damaging US President Donald Trump’s Washington, DC reflecting pool renovation.
Published On 9 Jul 2026
A former US Olympian has pleaded not guilty to vandalising the newly renovated Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, in a case that has drawn national attention amid accusations that the administration of US President Donald Trump is trying to shift blame for a troubled renovation.
David “Davey” Hearn, a 67-year-old three-time Olympic canoe racer, entered his plea in federal court on Thursday after prosecutors accused him of “maliciously” damaging the “American flag blue” lining installed at the bottom of the reflecting pool at Trump’s request ahead of celebrations taking place at Washington’s National Mall for the 250th anniversary of the United States’ independence on July 4.
list of 4 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
Federal prosecutors allege Hearn pulled at the liner on June 19, causing more than $1,000 in damage. He has been charged with destruction of government property, an offence that carries a maximum prison sentence of 10 years.
Hearn denied the allegations. He admitted he stopped at the pool during a bike ride, reached inside and touched a section of lining that was already peeling away, but that he did not remove or damage it. He told The Associated Press he let go when a park employee told him to stop.
Hearn’s lawyers argue the prosecution is an attempt by the Trump administration to deflect attention from what they describe as a botched renovation project.
“This indictment reflects the administration’s effort to shift blame for their own failures,” they said in a statement. “The justice system exists to determine facts, not to provide political cover.”
The 620-metre (2,030-foot) reflecting pool reopened in June after Trump ordered the new liner to be installed across the bottom. He said he was compelled to go ahead with the $14.7m renovation after a friend visiting from Germany called the pool dark and disgusting.
But within days, algae began to spread across the surface, the water turned chartreuse green, and sections of the liner began peeling away.
Experts have explained that the dark new coat of paint at the bottom of the pool would elevate the temperature and allow algae to grow, and that algae blooms in water are common at this time of year, especially in shallow, stagnant water like that of the pool.
Trump blamed the issues on vandals, claiming without evidence that “corrosive and destructive chemicals” were poured into the pool and that vandals “took some form of knife or blade” and put a long “gash into the beautiful facade”, although no one has been charged over those alleged acts.
The US president warned that anyone who allegedly damaged the pool could face long prison terms. “Please remember that there is a 10 year prison sentence for the destruction, or even the attempted destruction, of such things — Which will be fully enforced!” he wrote on Truth Social.
Last week, US Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro announced the indictment against Hearn, accusing him of intentionally damaging the liner.
The US Department of the Interior has said that at least six people were arrested on suspicion of vandalising the pool in the weeks after it reopened. National Guard troops and US Park Police were deployed to protect the site, which was fenced off during July 4 celebrations.
Thursday’s hearing drew a packed courtroom, with dozens of supporters waiting outside after Hearn entered his plea.
The reflecting pool’s problems have continued, with Trump acknowledging it will need to be drained again so the damaged liner can be repaired.
-
Seattle, WA5 minutes ago
Widower of pregnant woman who was shot to death in Seattle sues homelessness authority
-
San Diego, CA8 minutes agoTerrifying moment huge sea lions chase tourists off popular California beach
-
Milwaukee, WI20 minutes agoMilwaukee leaders condemn ICE arrests as agency ignores City mask ordinance
-
Atlanta, GA23 minutes agoGeorgia Secretary of State opens investigation into voter registration mailers sent to deceased residents
-
Minneapolis, MN28 minutes agoMinneapolis chief communications officer Adam Fetcher out amid possible criminal charges
-
Indianapolis, IN35 minutes agoIndiana Workforce Pell Grant options limited so far
-
Pittsburg, PA38 minutes agoPennsylvania leaders take new approach to cracking down on robocalls
-
Augusta, GA43 minutes agoAugusta domestic violence shelter faces shortfall after Georgia funding veto