risks

After Bangkok Floods, IMF and World Bank Weigh Global Risks

IMF and World Bank’s annual meeting explores economic resilience amid climate risk, debt pressure, and AI.

While walking around central Bangkok, it’s easy to miss the damage that prompted IMF and World Bank officials at their annual meeting to consider postponing this week’s event. 

No evidence of the extreme flooding elsewhere in the city, which caused so much damage and loss of life just a week ago, is visible. Life goes on—scooters buzz and trucks barrel down the expressways and narrow streets where vendors hawk exotic foods and trinkets. Bangkok officials did an admirable job cleaning up to prepare for the arrival of some 15,000 attendees, and the area surrounding the convention center is as dry—and secure—as it’s probably ever been. 

Inside the meetings, though, the question was how much more disruption—climate-related or otherwise—the global economy can absorb, and who can afford to recover when the next shock arrives.

At Tuesday’s World Economic Outlook briefing, IMF Chief Economist Silvana Tenreyro described a world economy being pulled in two directions. Conflict in the Middle East has pushed energy prices higher, while investment in artificial intelligence has helped drive growth. The IMF outlook projects global growth of 3.1% this year, but that headline figure masks sharp differences among countries. Energy exporters and countries driving the AI boom are better positioned, she said, than those that must import fuel or have little stake in the massive technology surge.

“The economy has been resilient, but that resilience is reaching its limits,” Tenreyro said at the briefing.

The economy is holding up, in part, because countries and companies have navigated disruptions by rerouting supplies, drawing down inventories, improving efficiency, and finding alternatives. Without those adjustments, the IMF estimates global growth would be closer to 2.5%.

But these measures have limits. Inventories run down. Efficiency gains can only go so far. And another shock—whether geopolitical or climate-related—could arrive before economies have recovered from the last one.

G-24’s Climate and Debt Dilemmas

The Intergovernmental Group of Twenty-Four on International Monetary Affairs and Development, or G-24, which represents emerging-market and developing economies, brought the issue closer to home. Nigeria’s finance minister and G-24 chair, Taiwo Oyedele, cited the flooding in Thailand to argue that climate commitments need to be backed by money, not just promises.

“Our appeal to world leaders is to put their money where their mouth is,” he said in a separate briefing shortly after WEO’s.

For businesses, resilience has a price. Holding extra inventory, diversifying suppliers, and keeping cash on hand can seem like unnecessary costs when markets are stable. But during a disruption, they can keep production moving and prevent higher costs from affecting the business.

Countries face a similar trade-off but lack the same resources. Developing economies need funding for infrastructure, climate preparedness, and basic services, even as debt payments consume a large share of public funds. Oyedele cited estimates that developing countries pay roughly $500 billion more in debt costs than developed economies. His broader point is clear: The countries that need to invest in resilience often face the highest financing costs.

Iyabo Masha, director and head of the Secretariat of the G-24, described the dilemma this way: “Debt is something that restrains growth.” When governments spend so much on creditors, she said, they have less left to invest in their economies.

The AI Factor

Another uncertainty in the IMF’s outlook is that AI investment may boost growth, but its benefits do not necessarily translate into jobs. Oyedele warned that countries with younger populations could see growth alongside rising unemployment if they do not plan carefully. Growth, he said, “has to be job rich; it has to be inclusive.”

That’s a broad definition of resilience—not simply keeping an economy growing, but ensuring people benefit and that governments retain the capacity to respond when circumstances change.

In Bangkok, the discussions have ranged from growth forecasts to debt and climate finance. But the underlying question is who can afford to prepare for the next disruption and who will be left to pay for recovery.

Central Bangkok shows little sign of the recent flooding, but that doesn’t mean the damage elsewhere was any less severe. The same holds for the global economy: A resilient growth forecast doesn’t mean every country is equally prepared for the next shock. The question is how much each can afford to absorb—and what it might have to give up to recover.

Paul Curcio is the editor of Global Finance Magazine. Contact him at paul.curcio@gfmag.com.

Source link

Scientists urge tighter AI controls to prevent global cyber risks | Technology News

The call comes as polls cast doubt on political leaders’ ability to manage AI risks amid US midterm elections.

A group of more than 300 scientists from around the world is calling for urgent changes to how artificial intelligence is developed and deployed amid growing concerns about its unpredictable behaviour.

The letter, released on Tuesday and signed by researchers representing universities and research institutes in 32 countries, warned that failures to follow basic cybersecurity practices could lead to damage to critical infrastructure.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Many recent incidents in which AI models escaped secure environments could have been prevented with stronger security systems, the scientists said.

They recommended that organisations developing and testing advanced AI systems capable of carrying out cyberattacks do so in more tightly controlled environments, including “air-gapped” systems that are not connected to the internet.

Growing concerns

The letter comes amid growing concerns about AI’s capabilities and its potential impact on everyday users. On Monday, Anthropic warned that its AI models could soon be capable of creating self-spreading malware that could affect everyday internet-connected devices, including smart TVs, security cameras and smart appliances such as ovens.

The report found that AI systems could identify unfamiliar devices without human intervention. The company, led by Dario Amodei, warned that smaller AI models could be capable of carrying out autonomous attacks by the end of the year.

The malware could also be difficult to contain because it might take days to infect a device and could spread across multiple machines rather than remain concentrated in a single, controlled location.

Taking control of internet-connected devices can have immediate consequences. In France, for example, hackers compromised cooling systems across hundreds of supermarkets, raising temperatures and causing more than $220,000 in damage.

Meanwhile, Axios news organisation reported on Friday that Anthropic, OpenAI and other major AI company executives are privately preparing for the possibility of a catastrophic AI-related incident that could disrupt access to major financial services, the internet and potentially critical infrastructure such as water and power systems. Several industry insiders believe a major incident could occur within the next six months to a year, it said.

The scientists also called for more safeguards, including the creation of an international organisation to establish a set of best practices for AI alignment and containment along with timely reporting of incidents.

One of the signatories, David Lie, a professor at the University of Toronto’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, said his concerns began after OpenAI’s AI agents bypassed controls and hacked into servers at the tech company Hugging Face.

“One is that OpenAI, in setting up its test environment, didn’t appreciate how capable its agents were,” Lie said.

“These were the AI agents that they were designing. Second is that the AI agents independently found each other and chose to collaborate on this attack, and third is that they also intentionally tried to deceive and mislead their human creators.”

Political pressures

The letter underscores growing public concern about AI, including in the lead-up to the US congressional midterm elections. A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll found that 57 percent of voters said President Donald Trump’s administration was not taking AI risks seriously enough, while 54 percent said the same of Congress.

An AP-NORC poll echoed those findings, with about 80 percent of respondents saying the government should keep AI under human control. Respondents also expressed little confidence in either party’s ability to manage the technology: 39 percent said neither Republicans nor Democrats could be trusted to do a good job of reining it in, while 23 percent expressed greater confidence in Democrats and 21 percent in Republicans.

Source link

Doctors warn about the risks energy drinks pose to kids. What families need to know

Sean and Heidi Cripe will never forget the call from their son’s high school saying Davis was being taken to the emergency room.

“He chugged an energy drink — like, just trying to be cool,” said Sean Cripe, recounting the day nearly a decade ago.

The teen’s heart soon fell out of rhythm and he died. While such deaths are rare, doctors across the country have warned for years that energy drinks contain high levels of caffeine that can seriously harm children, causing problems such as abnormal heartbeats, increased heart rate, sleep disturbances, dehydration, agitation, high blood pressure and seizures.

A newly formed coalition of doctors is highlighting these risks in the wake of a sponsorship deal between Monster Energy and the Big 12 Conference college athletic organization. The group has asked conference leaders to pause the sponsorship and the NCAA to review energy drink marketing to youths in general, citing the deaths of three children including Davis, a 16-year-old from South Carolina.

The doctors stress that they’re not just concerned about Monster but all energy drinks and any similar partnerships.

“Kids are going to see energy drinks now promoted by the universities and the athletes that they admire and want to emulate,” said Dr. Matthew Nelson, an Idaho cardiologist involved with the effort. “The kids will think of them as sports drinks, which they’re not.”

Too much caffeine can harm kids in many ways

Various medical groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, say children and teens should avoid energy drinks altogether. Yet many are not. According to the latest results of the federally funded Monitoring the Future survey, run by the University of Michigan, 23% of 12th-graders, 20% of 10th-graders and 18% of eighth-graders reported consuming energy drinks daily.

Depending on the product, caffeine content can range from 80 to 300 mg per serving. By comparison, a typical 8-ounce coffee contains about 80 to 100 mg and some sodas contain 50 mg or less. Overall, the pediatrics academy recommends children ages 12 to 18 limit caffeine to 100 mg a day. Younger kids are discouraged from consuming any caffeine.

Caffeine and other stimulants increase heart rate and the reactivity of the nervous system — basically “how fast things go in the body, which can create an overload of the system,” said Dr. Tamara Hannon, an Indiana pediatrician who chairs the academy’s nutrition committee.

She likened it to running a blender until the motor heats up too much. “The same thing can happen when you deliver stimulants to people,” she said. “The heart can wear out, the nervous system can go haywire and you can have really serious consequences.”

Mixing different types of caffeine can be risky

Children with preexisting conditions such as high blood pressure are at especially high risk, Hannon said, but even healthy children who get too much of a stimulant can have serious problems. That includes young athletes.

Another consideration: Kids often drink various types of caffeinated beverages. That was the case with Davis Cripe, who died in 2017. According to the coroner at the time, Davis had no prior heart condition and drank a Mountain Dew and a latte from McDonald’s earlier in the day. He experienced arrhythmia after having the energy drink.

It wasn’t the first time Davis drank one, although he didn’t consume them regularly.

“We had talked to him and let him know that they weren’t healthy,” Sean Cripe said. “We didn’t understand they could be deadly.”

Trade group says the energy drink industry tries to protect kids

The American Beverage Assn. — which includes Monster and other companies comprising 94% of the energy drink category — said members voluntarily disclose caffeine totals on product labels, which carry advisories such as: “Not intended for children, pregnant or nursing women, or persons sensitive to caffeine.” Members also don’t sell or market energy drinks in K-12 schools.

Monster Energy said in a statement that caffeine and other drink ingredients are found in a broad variety of food products. “Mainstream energy drinks have been marketed worldwide for more than 30 years and more than 100 billion energy drinks have been sold and safely consumed globally,” the company added.

The deal between Big 12 and Monster calls for a co-branded logo on football and basketball jerseys, fields and courts, and across digital and social media channels.

“The energy drink category is not new to collegiate athletics,” the Big 12 Conference said in a statement, adding that beverage companies are always looking for ways to reach sports fans.

The NCAA doesn’t have the authority to regulate conference or school sponsorship agreements, Dr. Deena Casiero, the association’s chief medical officer, told the doctor group in a letter. She said the association offers schools educational resources on caffeine and student-athlete health, and caffeine has been a topic of interest for an NCAA committee, which recently commissioned a cardiac advisory group.

How to educate kids about excess caffeine

To protect children, teachers and coaches can educate them about the dangers of too much caffeine and the difference between energy drinks and sports drinks, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Sports drinks are designed to help replace water and electrolytes lost through sweating after activity.

Parents and other adults can also model good behavior by not consuming energy drinks in front of kids.

On a related topic, Harvard Medical School experts say there’s no scientifically valid evidence behind the common belief that caffeine can stunt a person’s growth.

At well visits, parents should talk with pediatricians about all the beverages their children are consuming, said Hannon, who often advises families to “Rethink your drink.”

Sean Cripe said sharing stories like his could also help children understand that energy drinks are not for them.

Ungar writes for the Associated Press.

Source link