Virginia Democrats Advocate for Data Centers to Secure State House Seat

JOrne McAuliffe, a 33-year-old entrepreneur and former public servant, stands as an unexpected Democratic contender in this month’s Virginia House of Representatives election, especially given a campaign approach that occasionally resembled that of his Republican opponents.

Recently, Mr. McAuliffe joined 13 Democrats who secured Congressional seats in Virginia during a significant electoral win for his party, granting them robust control over state governance. With victories in states like New Jersey and California, this outcome provides a renewed advantage for Democrats nationwide, following a disheartening setback against Donald Trump and the Republican Party the previous year.

The northern Virginia district he aimed to represent, characterized by residential areas, agricultural land, and charming small towns, hadn’t seen a Democratic representative in decades. Thus, McAuliffe campaigned door-to-door on his electric scooter, reaching out to constituents with a pledge to “protect their way of life.” He dismissed the label “woke” and attributed the “chaos” to Washington, D.C., located over an hour away.


One of his primary talking points was a widespread concern resonating with many Democrats today, but with a distinct angle: the adverse impacts of data centers on electricity costs.

“I spent a majority of the year visiting households I never imagined were Democratic,” McAuliffe recounted. “Independents, Republicans, and an occasional Democrat, yet many began shutting their doors on me.”

“However, once they voiced a desire to discuss data centers, it opened a dialogue. That allowed me to draw a contrast, which is rare.”

Loudoun County’s data centers occupy about half of Virginia’s 30th House District, known for its high per capita income, and handle more traffic than any other region globally. While essential for many Internet functions, McAuliffe argued—and many voters concurred—that their presence can be burdensome.

Sizeable as warehouses, these data centers loom over nearby neighborhoods, buzzing with the sounds of servers and machinery. Developers seek to establish facilities in Fauquier County, the district’s other Republican-leaning area, but McAuliffe mentioned that residents are apprehensive about construction on rural farmland, renowned for its scenic vistas. He noted receiving complaints regarding the impact of data centers on electricity bills across the board.

According to a 2024 report from the Virginia General Assembly’s Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee, the state’s energy demands are projected to double over the next decade, chiefly due to data centers and the substantial infrastructure required to cater to this demand.

The report also indicated that while Virginia’s electricity pricing structures are “appropriately” aligned with facility usage, “energy costs for all consumers are likely to rise” to cover new infrastructure expenses and necessary electricity imports. Earlier this month, Virginia’s public utility regulators approved a rise in electricity rates, though not to the extent Dominion Energy, the state’s primary provider, initially requested.

“The costs tied to infrastructure—the extensive transmission lines and substations—are being passed down to consumers,” McAuliffe explained from a co-working space in Middleburg, Virginia, where his campaign operates.

“These essentially represent taxes that we’ve wrongfully placed on ordinary Virginians to benefit corporations like Amazon and Google. While there may be some advantages for these communities, these companies are capable of affording them, and we must strive to better negotiate those benefits.”

McAuliffe’s opponent was Republican Geary Higgins, who had been elected in 2023. The battle between the two parties proved costly, with Democrats investing nearly $3 million and their adversaries spending just over $850,000, according to records from the Virginia Public Access Project.

This campaign encompassed more than just data centers; McAuliffe also spotlighted reproductive rights and teacher salary increases. Democrats have committed to codifying access to abortion if they gain full power in Virginia’s state government, and the governance in his district deteriorated under Democratic Party criticisms that Higgins failed to return contributions from controversial politicians.

Yet, McAuliffe chose to concentrate on data centers, believing their impacts presented “the most pressing issue we can address.” This focus surprised some of his consultants, and although he acknowledged it was a “somewhat niche topic,” data centers frequently emerged as a primary concern during his door-to-door visits.

To counter Higgins, his campaign even launched a website called data center geary, attempting to associate the Republican (a former Loudoun County Supervisor) with the spread of these facilities. Higgins and his family and allies condemned the efforts as misleading.

Mr. McAuliffe ultimately won with 50.9% of the votes, while Mr. Higgins gathered 49%. In response to a request for an interview, Higgins stated that McAuliffe’s “entire campaign was based on falsehoods regarding me and my history.”

“Thanks to an influx of external funding and high Democratic turnout, he was able to fabricate a misleading caricature of me and narrowly triumph,” Higgins remarked.

As Mr. Trump faced the polls nationwide last year, voters in conservative rural and suburban areas turned away from Democrats, resulting in the party’s loss of the presidency and Congressional control. McAuliffe’s victory leaves some party leaders pondering the lessons Democrats can glean from his campaign.

“In typically red regions, he identified common issues that resonated with both Republicans and Democrats while making a convincing case for solutions,” noted Democratic Rep. Suhas Subrahmanyam, who represents McAuliffe’s district.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin, who campaigned alongside McAuliffe, characterized him as “an extraordinary candidate who triumphed by focusing squarely on the relevant issues of his district.”

“Democrats are capable of winning in any setting, especially in suburbs and rural environments, when they have candidates who commit themselves to addressing the genuine needs of their community. Presently, what Americans require is the capability to manage their expenses,” stated Martin.

Chaz Natticomb, founder and executive director of Virginia’s nonpartisan election monitoring organization State Navigate, remarked that while McAuliffe may not have surpassed Democrat Abigail Spanberger’s standout gubernatorial victory, his success in garnering votes illustrates his appeal to some Republicans over Higgins.

“He outperformed everyone else, primarily because he gained the support of Republican-leaning voters,” Natticombe concluded.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan Advocate for a Ban on Superintelligent AI Systems Alongside Technology Pioneers

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have joined forces with AI innovators and Nobel laureates to advocate for a moratorium on the advancement of superintelligent AI systems.

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan are signatories of a declaration urging a halt to the pursuit of superintelligence. Artificial superintelligence (ASI) refers to as-yet unrealized AI systems that would surpass human intelligence across any cognitive task.

The declaration requests that the ban remain until there is a “broad scientific consensus” and “strong public support” for the safe and controlled development of ASI.

Notable signatories include AI pioneer and Nobel laureate Jeffrey Hinton, along with fellow “godfather” of modern AI, Yoshua Bengio, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, British entrepreneur Richard Branson, Susan Rice, former National Security Advisor under Barack Obama, former Irish president Mary Robinson, and British author Stephen Fry. Other Nobel winners, like Beatrice Finn, Frank Wilczek, John C. Mather, and Daron Acemoglu, also added their names.

The statement targets governments, tech firms, and legislators, and was sponsored by the Future of Life Institute (FLI), a US-based group focused on AI safety. It called for a moratorium on the development of powerful AI systems in 2023, coinciding with the global attention that ChatGPT brought to the matter.

In July, Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta (parent company of Facebook and a key player in U.S. AI development), remarked that the advent of superintelligence is “on the horizon.” Nonetheless, some experts argue that the conversation around ASI is more about competition among tech companies, which are investing hundreds of billions into AI this year, rather than signaling a near-term technological breakthrough.

Still, FLI warns that achieving ASI “within the next 10 years” could bring significant threats, such as widespread job loss, erosion of civil liberties, national security vulnerabilities, and even existential risks to humanity. There is growing concern that AI systems may bypass human controls and safety measures, leading to actions that contradict human interests.

A national survey conducted by FLI revealed that nearly 75% of Americans support stringent regulations on advanced AI. Moreover, 60% believe that superhuman AI should not be developed until it can be demonstrated as safe or controllable. The survey of 2,000 U.S. adults also found that only 5% endorse the current trajectory of rapid, unregulated development.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Leading AI firms in the U.S., including ChatGPT creator OpenAI and Google, have set the pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI)—a hypothetical state where AI reaches human-level intelligence across various cognitive tasks—as a primary objective. Although this ambition is not as advanced as ASI, many experts caution that ASI could unintentionally threaten the modern job market, especially due to its capacity for self-improvement toward superintelligence.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Renowned Chimpanzee Researcher and Animal Advocate Jane Goodall Passes Away at 91

Jane Goodall, a renowned researcher who studied chimpanzee behavior and social structures, later emerged as a prominent figure in the animal welfare movement, passed away on Wednesday.

At the age of 91, Goodall died of natural causes in California while on a speaking tour, as reported by the Jane Goodall Institute in a statement.

“Dr. Goodall’s contributions as an ethologist transformed scientific understanding, and she was an unwavering advocate for the preservation and rejuvenation of our natural world,” the statement added.

Jane Goodall participated in the TV special “Miss Goodall and The World of Chimpanzees” in 1965.
CBS via Getty Images File

Hailing from the UK, Goodall gained recognition in the 1960s for her groundbreaking research on chimpanzees in Tanzania. She meticulously documented their social interactions over several decades.

The foundation noted that she adopted an “unconventional approach” to chimpanzee research, “immersing herself in their environment to experience their intricate societies as neighbors rather than distant observers.”

Goodall’s research revealed that chimpanzees used sticks to fish for termites, challenging the prevailing notion that tool use was exclusive to humans. She also documented the chimps’ communication methods and complex social behaviors, including their meat-eating habits and occasional aggression.

“They are part of Elizabeth Freyman, a primate specialist and postdoctoral researcher at Brown University,” said:

Robert Seyfers, professor emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania who specialized in primate behavior, remarked that Goodall’s passing signifies “the end of an era.”

“Her thorough and detailed observations have resonated with our entire generation—myself included—and inspired many others interested in this scientific field,” Seyfers stated.

He noted that Goodall was among the first researchers to observe chimpanzees as individual beings with distinct personalities, unlike many of her contemporaries who lacked such observational training.

“Her insights into chimpanzee emotions were groundbreaking,” he conveyed, adding that Goodall was an “authentic chronicler” of animal behavior.

“Her goal was to help people comprehend chimpanzees in all their complexities,” Seyfers shared.

As Goodall’s career evolved, she became aware of the threats posed by habitat destruction and illegal trafficking to chimpanzee survival, leading her to prioritize conservation and animal welfare in her work.

The Jane Goodall Institute, which she founded in 1977, stated, “We entered the forest to study the extraordinary lives of chimpanzees, and she emerged from the forest to advocate for their protection.”

Jane Goodall in Paris during October 2024.
Joel Saaget/AFP via Getty Images

Ingrid Newkirk, the founder of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, stated that Goodall “played a pivotal role in helping the organization end the confinement of chimpanzees in desolate metal chambers for testing.”

At just 26 years old, Goodall embarked on her first journey to Tanzania to study chimpanzees. She began her career without any formal scientific training. Louis Leakey, a notable Kenyan and British anthropologist, recruited her to document her findings on chimpanzees. Goodall later attained her PhD from Cambridge University.

During an interview on this year’s podcast “Call Her Daddy,” Goodall recounted to host Alex Cooper that her initial expedition was funded through a shoestring budget provided by philanthropists.

With funding for six months, the first four months yielded little success, as primates were too wary for her to observe closely. However, one chimpanzee eventually became accustomed to her presence, leading to her groundbreaking discovery of their use of tools.

“This discovery was exhilarating because, at the time, it was believed in Western science that tool-making was a human-exclusive trait. We defined ourselves as the only tool-using species,” Goodall recollected. “So, when I wrote to my mentor, Louis Leakey, he was thrilled.”

That revelation captured the interest and support of National Geographic, ultimately altering the trajectory of Goodall’s career.

As Goodall rose to prominence, she leveraged her visibility to bolster public interest in animal welfare and scientific exploration. She authored numerous books about her experiences with chimpanzees, including several aimed at children.

Primate specialist Freyman reflected that he dressed as Goodall for Halloween in fourth grade. He later mentioned receiving fan mail from children while interning at the Jane Goodall Institute in Washington, D.C., at the age of 19.

“I became a primatologist because I had a hero I admired,” Freyman, now 29, shared.

Correction (October 1, 2025, 11:38pm ET): Due to an editing error, earlier versions of this article referred to primate specialist Elody Freyman using “he.” Freyman is a woman.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

Jane Goodall, Nature Advocate, Passes Away at 91

Jane Goodall researched chimpanzee behavior in Tanzania

Penelope Breese/Liaison

Renowned conservationist Jane Goodall has passed away at the age of 91. For decades, she dedicated her life to studying and advocating for chimpanzees, becoming a preeminent expert on our closest primate relatives and transforming our understanding of humanity. Her legacy is one of profound empathy and commitment to nature. She died from natural causes while on a speaking tour in California, as confirmed by the Jane Goodall Institute in a statement on October 1.

Goodall began her groundbreaking work with chimpanzees in Tanzania’s Gombe Stream National Park in 1960. Her studies made significant contributions to our understanding of their behavior and social structures. Over the next 65 years, she evolved into a passionate advocate and expert, enlightening the world on the similarities between humans and other primates and drawing attention to the challenges faced by chimpanzees and wildlife, including climate change, poaching, and habitat loss.

In 1977, she established the Institute bearing her name, a nonprofit focused on the study and protection of primates and their habitats while fostering a greater public understanding of nature. The institute’s mission has since broadened to include community health initiatives across Africa and conservation efforts aimed at protecting whales. Goodall also played pivotal roles in numerous other environmental projects.

She attributed her success to remarkable patience, stating, “There was a moment when I was feeling despondent and the chimpanzees were evading me, and I had plenty of time in the field. [But] If I had decided to give up, I would never have been able to forgive myself. I couldn’t live with that.” New Scientist 2022.

In her later years, Goodall focused her efforts on global conservation, traveling extensively to spread the message that chimpanzees and all animals share commonalities with humans. She persistently urged us to improve our treatment of the natural world.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Justice Department Attorneys Advocate for the Dissolution of Google’s Ad Technology.

On Friday, the Justice Department unveiled a strategy aimed at dismantling Google’s advertising technology empire. This marks the second time within a year that authorities are urging the company to divest parts of its business, potentially altering the landscape of the $2 trillion giant.

These comments were made during a hearing led by Judge Leonie M. Brinkema at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Last month, she determined that Google holds a dominant position in specific segments of the vast advertising system associated with its website. She is now tasked with deciding on a relief measure to address these concerns.

Lawyers from the Justice Department expressed hopes that the government will compel Google to force online publishers to sell their ad space exclusively to them. In the original lawsuit, the government had sought the court’s intervention to make Google enforce its ad technology acquired over the years.

“It’s frankly too risky to allow Google to control 90% of publishers,” stated Julia Tarver Wood, the lead attorney for the government.

In response, Google’s legal team argued that dissolving the company’s advertising division contradicts established legal precedents and threatens privacy and security measures.

The Justice Department’s request represents another blow to Google during an ongoing second hearing discussing its search monopoly in federal courts in Washington. In that instance, the government asked the judge to mandate the sale of Chrome, a widely-used browser, as part of various measures.

Collectively, if approved, these two governmental requests could signify the most significant restructuring of a powerful corporation since the 1980s, when AT&T was split into several companies as a result of an antitrust agreement with the Justice Department.

It remains uncertain whether the judges will impose such a breakup, which many antitrust experts deem the most extreme solution.

In the AD Tech lawsuit initiated in 2023, government attorneys contended that Google dominated the nearly invisible technology responsible for providing advertisements across the internet, conducting auctions for available ad spaces as web pages are loaded.

The government alleged that Google illegally controlled three critical aspects of its advertising system, namely the tools used by websites to display open ad spaces, the instruments that advertisers utilize to purchase these spaces, and the software that facilitates transactions between the two.

Last month, Judge Brinkema concluded that Google had violated the law to maintain its monopoly over publishing tools and the software that links sellers of ad spaces, referred to as Advertising Exchange. However, she noted that the government had not substantiated claims that Google monopolizes the tools used by advertisers.

During a hearing on Friday, Judge Brinkema indicated that she would reconvene in September to explore the relief package.

To address the issues, the Justice Department revealed plans to compel Google to divest its ad exchanges.

The government is also looking to create an open-source version of Google’s publisher advertising tools that manage auctions for available ad spaces, potentially allowing publishers and other ad tech firms to benefit. The hope is that Google will sell tools that support other functionalities for publishers, such as record-keeping.

Karen Dunn, Google’s lead attorney, argued that the proposed plan would not align with existing legal precedents. She further stated that even if the court seriously considers dissolving Google’s advertising technology division, the government’s recommendations are impractical.

There are limited buyers for this technology, with the few that could afford it being “massive tech companies.” Additionally, the essential security and privacy measures currently provided by Google would likely be lost.

“It’s highly probable that what they’re proposing is entirely unfeasible,” she remarked.

Instead, Google proposed that the company focus on amending or discarding certain practices identified by the court as solidifying its dominance, and take steps toward enhancing the transparency of its ad auction bidding system to benefit publishers.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Experts advocate for caution in using AI Deepseek in China

There has been significant attention on the quick adoption of China’s artificial intelligence platform DeepSeek by experts, leading to the spread of misinformation and raising concerns about the use of user data by Chinese entities.

This new low-cost AI has caused a $100 million drop in the major US high-tech index this week, becoming the most downloaded free app in the UK and US. Donald Trump referred to it as a “wake-up call” for high-tech companies.

The emergence of DeepSeek in the high-tech world has shocked many, showing that platforms like ChatGpt can achieve similar performance at lower costs.

Michael Urdridge, an AI Foundation professor at the University of Oxford, expressed concerns about potential sharing of data entered in the chatbot with the Chinese government.

He mentioned: “I don’t see an issue in asking about Liverpool Football Club’s performance or the history of the Roman Empire, but when it comes to sensitive, personal, or private information, it raises concerns… I’m unsure about the destination of the data.”

Dame Wendy Hall, a UN High-Level Advisory Group member, highlighted the importance of establishing clear rules on what can and cannot be shared.

When questioned about the UK’s stance on using AI from China, Downing Street did not specify a particular model but emphasized the need to remove barriers to innovation in AI.

DeepSeek is an open-source platform, allowing software developers to customize it for their needs. This has sparked hope for new AI innovations, challenging the dominance of US high-tech companies that heavily invest in microchips, data centers, and power supply.

Wooldridge mentioned that some users testing DeepSeek found that it avoided answering questions on sensitive topics like Tiananmen Square, instead echoing the Chinese Communist Party’s views on Taiwan.

Concerns were raised about the potential for misinformation with AI models like DeepSeek and ChatGpt, depending on the data used and how it’s interpreted. Users can verify these issues with the DeepSeek chatbot.

One user, Azeem Azhar, an AI expert, noted that DeepSeek struggled to provide information on the Tiananmen Square events, citing censorship as a factor.

Skip past newsletter promotions

However, AI clarified that the Tiananmen Square events are widely recognized as a crackdown on democracy protests, with the Chinese government responding violently.

People use AI models like DeepSeek and ChatGpt to analyze documents for personal and work purposes, but the data uploaded by the company’s owner can be used for AI training and other applications.

DeepSeek, based in Hangzhou, detailed in its privacy policy that user information is stored on secure servers in China.

They state that data usage is carried out to comply with legal obligations, perform tasks for public interest, or protect user and other essential interests, as per Chinese National Information Law guidelines.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Activists advocate for public transparency of ride-hailing app data to tackle exploitation and reduce emissions | Gig Economy

Activists are urging Uber and other ride-hailing apps to disclose data on their drivers’ workload to combat exploitation and reduce carbon emissions.

Analysis by Worker Info Exchange suggests that drivers for Uber and its competitors may have missed out on over £1.2 billion in earnings and expenses last year due to payment structures.

The report argues that these platforms are built on an oversupply of vehicles and the exploitation of workers, leading to financial struggles and debt.

Uber collects anonymized trip data in several North American cities and claims this covers around 40% of drivers’ miles before picking up passengers.

Despite Uber’s response that drivers earn money on other platforms during idle times, Worker Info Exchange maintains that better compensation and expense coverage could have resulted in an additional £1.29 billion industry-wide in 2023.

The report also highlights issues with monitoring drivers’ mileage, leading to potential exhaustion and safety hazards.

Similar concerns are raised about food delivery apps, with calls for more transparency in journey data.

Efforts in New York to limit vehicle licenses to support taxi drivers and reduce congestion have been noted, although recent changes exempt electric vehicles.

Uber’s carbon emissions in the UK are projected to surpass those of Transport for London, prompting calls for stricter control and transparency from regulators.

The ongoing debate around worker classification and rights in the gig economy is also highlighted, with promises from lawmakers to address issues of “false self-employment”.

Worker Info Exchange, founded by a key figure in the Uber Supreme Court case, aims to empower gig workers by providing more control over their data and decision-making processes.

Source: www.theguardian.com