test_data.csv

Text,Summary
"The best way to study martian rocks and soil would be to do it on Earth. While spacecraft-mounted instruments—such as the Curiosity rover's ChemCam that vaporizes surface material with a laser and then uses a spectrometer to determine the chemical composition—are invaluable to planetary scientists, they are no replacement for a sample in the lab. The amount of compositional and absolute age data that scientists can obtain with a laboratory full of state-of-the-art equipment and chemicals to test sample materials is unparalleled, as evidenced by research conducted on meteorites (including from Mars) and Apollo moon samples.



To continue this work, scientists need a pristine sample of martian rock and soil, which would help build a Rosetta Stone to unlock the history of the solar system. The potential knowledge to be obtained from such a sample ranges from the formation of Mars to the nature of the planet's ancient surface waters to possible habitability in the red planet's past, and in turn, perhaps the secret to the origin of life on Earth.

With so much to gain, both NASA and the Chinese national space agency are designing missions to retrieve a sample from Mars before the end of the 2020s. The missions are ambitious, incomplete, and reliant on yet-to-be developed technologies. They both start, however, with flights to Mars in 2020.

Scouting the Red Planet

Self-portrait of NASA’s Curiosity rover, taken at Namib Dune on January 19, 2016. NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

Both American and Chinese Mars sample-return ambitions require preliminary missions to scout the planet and locate the best place to drill into the rock and core out a sample. NASA plans to do this with the Mars 2020 rover, slated to launch on an Atlas V rocket in July of that year and land on Mars in February 2021. The Chinese National Space Science Center (NSSC), meanwhile, is planning an orbiter, as well as a lander that will deploy a small rover, known as the Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover, to launch on a Long March 5 rocket in July or August of 2020.



Both start with flights to Mars in 2020.

NASA's Mars 2020, a car-sized twin to the Curiosity rover with an upgraded instrument suite, will not only locate the best places to collect a sample, but will also core the sample into a receptacle tube and deposit it on the surface to be picked up by a later mission. The Mars 2020 team is still considering three possible landing sites: Columbia Hills in Gusev Crater, a mineral-rich region near the Spirit rover's old exploration site; Jezero Crater, where surface water is thought to have flooded and receded at least twice in the past; and NE Syrtis, an area once characterized by volcanic activity and hot spring flows.

The Mars 2020 team will continue to analyze surface composition data from orbiters such as the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) to ultimately select one of these sites based on mineralogy and the potential for habitability. Once Mars 2020 arrives, however, where to sample will be determined on the fly.

""We'll be exploration driven once we get on the surface, so we'll have to make decisions,"" Katie Stack Morgan, deputy project scientist for Mars 2020, told Popular Mechanics during a visit to NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in August. ""Okay, here's a rock outcrop, where would be the best place to sample? Or should we pass on this one and go to the next one?""



""That will be something we'll figure out on the surface.""

Once the rover has collected multiple samples in storage tubes, it will deposit the samples in a ""depot cache"" to be picked up by a yet-to-be-determined future mission. ""We will have a couple different, probably at least two, drop-off spots,"" says Morgan. As to what exactly Mars 2020 will sample, ""that will be something we'll figure out on the surface.""

Geological layers examined by NASA’s Curiosity rover on Mount Sharp, taken January 24, 2017. NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS

The NSSC's mission, on the other hand, will do most of the planet-scouting with China's first spacecraft to orbit Mars, or Huoxing in Chinese, meaning ""fire star."" Using data gathered from orbit, Chinese scientists plan to select a location for a follow-up sample return mission that could return to Earth before 2030.



According to Andrew Jones of the Planetary Society, who specializes in Chinese space program coverage, the current plan is to launch a large spacecraft that can carry out all phases of the mission, including atmospheric entry, descent and landing (EDL), sample collection, ascent from Mars, rendezvous in Mars orbit, and a flight back to Earth. Such a mission would require the super-heavy-lift Long March 9 rocket, which is to enter development in the near future, targeting a first flight in 2025.

Chinese Mars lander and rover concept. The country’s National Space Science Center hopes to launch the two spacecraft, as well as an accompanying orbiter, to Mars in 2020. Xinhua

The Chinese sample return mission has yet to receive formal approval, but national space officials and the NSSC's primary contractor, the China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC), which is building the 2020 Mars spacecraft, have been discussing the mission publicly, according to Jones. In addition, China published a white paper in 2016 that discusses ""key technological research on the bringing back of samples from Mars.""



While the 2020 missions to Mars are approaching final preparations, aiming to launch in just over two years, the sample return missions to follow are still in early planning stages, and a number of questions about the missions have yet to be addressed. As 2020 looms, however, we could see the space agencies of the two global powers start to drill down exactly how they plan to bring home the most valuable scientific sample ever collected.



Fourth Rock from the Sun

ESA/MPS/Rosetta OSIRIS Team

The sample caches deposited by the Mars 2020 rover will be one of the most significant aspects of that mission, but NASA has yet to figure out how to pick them up. ""All options are on the table,"" says Morgan. ""One concept is a fetch rover.""

""The question we're going to have to ask is, how important is that sample return?""

Thomas Zurbuchen, head of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, discussed possibilities for fast tracking the sample return mission at a National Academies space studies board meeting in August. In the meeting, Zurbuchen proposed a mission to launch as soon as 2026 to send a multi-phase mission to collect the samples. A lander would touch down on Mars and deploy a fetch rover to collect the samples and return to deposit them in the lander. Alternatively, the Mars 2020 rover could deliver samples directly to the lander.

NASA concept of a Mars sample return mission. NASA/JPL

Once secured in the lander, a small rocket called the Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) would launch to carry the samples to a rendezvous with another spacecraft in Mars orbit. That orbiting craft would then return to Earth with the rocks from Mars, or possibly fly to an orbit in cislunar space between Earth and the moon to be picked up by a future lunar mission.



To expedite the Mars sample return mission, however, NASA would likely need to postpone a new Mars telecommunications and reconnaissance orbiter, already funded by Congress and currently planned for a 2022 launch. Postponing the launch of a new Mars communications relay satellite would require NASA to figure out how to use existing orbiters to continue support for surface missions, possibly by changing the orbit of the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution Mission (MAVEN) and repurposing that atmospheric science spacecraft to serve as a telecommunications link.

""At the end, the question we're going to have to ask is, how important is that sample return?"" Zurbuchen said. ""Do we want to tunnel-vision focus on that piece, because of the fact that we think it's so critical?""

While NASA's challenges establishing a sample return mission are largely logistical—deciding which method is best and figuring out how to fund the mission among a multitude of high-priority interplanetary missions—the NSSC's challenges are mostly technical. The global success rate for missions to Mars is only about 50 percent, and to date, just one institution has successfully landed on the red planet: NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

Overview of NASA’s proposed Mars sample return mission. NASA

China's first attempt to launch an orbiter to Mars, Yinghuo-1, was lost after the Russian spacecraft it was hitching a ride with failed to conduct two engine burns to fly to Mars. The two craft were stranded in Earth orbit in late 2011 and burned up in the atmosphere a couple months later.

While NASA's challenges are mostly logistical, China's are mostly technical.

However, China's series of successful lunar missions provides reason to believe the country could pull off its ambitious Mars mission in 2020. Chinese missions Chang'e 1 and Chang'e 2 successfully orbited the moon in 2007 and 2010, respectively. Chang'e 3 successfully landed on the moon and deployed a small rover called Yutu (Jade Rabbit) in 2013, similar to the lander/rover design China plans to send to Mars.

The Chang’e 3 lander photographed by the small Yutu rover that it deployed. A blurred reflection of the rover is visible in the reflective surface of the lander. Chinese Academy of Sciences

The Chinese space program's next big test will come in 2018, when the People's Republic plans to launch Chang'e 4 to land and deploy a rover on the far side of the moon, a feat that has yet to be accomplished by humanity. Putting a lander and rover on the far side of the moon will require a telecommunications relay satellite to launch to an orbit beyond the moon about six months prior. The Chang'e missions will culminate with 5 in late 2018 or early 2019, the first lunar sample return mission since the Soviet's Luna 24 in 1976.

Racing to Mars and Back

A Long March 5 rocket at Wenchang Spacecraft Launch Center in June 2017. 篁竹水声/Wikimedia

The completion of the Chang'e program will be a vital test for crucial technologies required for both the Chinese 2020 Mars mission and a Mars sample return mission to follow. However, the biggest question mark on the Chinese schedule to Mars sample return is certainly the Long March 9 rocket. A Chinese Long March 5 heavy-lift rocket failed after launch earlier this year, postponing the Chang'e 5 mission. The even larger, more powerful Long March 9, which is still in early planning phases, will undoubtedly present a significant challenge to the Chinese space program. Rockets of this size and power, such as NASA's Space Launch System (SLS), are notorious for running up against schedule delays and high cost overruns.

If China pushes ahead with plans for a Mars sample return mission to launch on one rocket, it will need the Long March 9. However, it seems possible that the country could pivot to a multi-phase mission using the Long March 5, similar to NASA's current sample return mission outline.

The technical, logistical and budgetary challenges for either country to pull off a Mars sample return mission before 2030 are significant and manifold. The first step for both is successfully launching a flagship mission to Mars in 2020.

Diagram of science instruments on NASA’s Mars 2020 rover. NASA

However, at the breakneck pace that China's space program has been advancing, with multiple space stations and lunar missions launched in the past decade, the wealthy and powerful nation is clearly committed to aggressively advancing space sciences. As for NASA, you have to wonder how long the agency's scientists will be able to bear having martian samples carefully drilled out and stored in a receptacle on the surface of the planet, just waiting to be picked up.



If the two nations are starting to feel pressure to beat one another in the race to return home with a tantalizing sample of red planet rock, good. Getting a sample of Mars material into the hands of laboratory scientists on Earth could lead to some of the most profound scientific discoveries in the history of humankind. It's time to kick Mars sample return into high gear and bring that red dirt home.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io","NASA and China's national space agency are both aiming to retrieve samples from Mars for study on Earth by 2030. NASA's preliminary mission starts with the launch of its Mars 2020 rover, set to land in February 2021. The rover will core a sample, place it in a tube and leave it on the surface for collection by a later mission. Meanwhile, China's National Space Science Centre will scout the planet with its first spacecraft to orbit Mars. It will then use the data gathered from orbit to select a site for a follow-up sample return mission.
"
"The latest round of funding, led by Chicago-based Cultivian Sandbox Ventures, takes the total invested in Nuritas to date to around €25 million since the firms’ launch in 2014.

Emmet Browne, CEO of Nuritas told NutraIngredients the new funding will allow it scale the business and ‘grasp the huge opportunity’ that its unique platform has created.

“Predominantly we will use the funds to triple our workforce, progress our research and development and improve our rate of prediction,” said Browne – adding that it will allow the company to create the capacity “to deal with the huge levels of customer demand that is building up for what we do.”​

Nuritas, founder and chief scientific officer Dr Nora Khaldi added that the investment will not only help it accelerate routes to market, explore new disease areas and grow its team, “but it will also push us even further in extracting the great potential of what our technology is capable of creating.”​

Nick Rosa, managing director of Cultivian Sandbox and Co-founder of Sandbox Industries, which led the latest round of investment, said the company’s unique platform delivers ‘truly life-changing health benefits’

“We are very pleased to be involved in its growth – it’s a brilliant team and such an exciting technology,”​ he said. “We expect Nuritas to quickly emerge as one of the most innovative companies in the world, effecting real change.”​

‘Huge opportunity’​

Nuritas’ platform combines DNA analysis and artificial intelligence (AI) to predict, unlock, and validate peptides from natural sources. The Irish firm have grown rapidly and gained much attention in recent years, with a list of awards and big-name backers – with initial seed investments from Singapore-based New Protein Capital (NPC) and Silicon Valley investor Ali Partovi​ and further funding coming from Irish rock legends Bono and The Edge in December 2016​.

Headed-up by ex-Nestlé regional president Emmet Browne​, Nuritas was recently given a €3 million EU grant​ to continue working on an unnamed peptide said to be 'a major breakthrough' for diabetes prevention, and has entered into collaboration with international ingredients giant BASF​ for the discovery and commercialisation of functional peptides.

“In an effort to expand our health solutions, we searched the globe trying to find such an innovative discovery technology and we eventually found it with Nuritas,”​ commented Michael De Marco, Global Head, Research & Development Human Nutrition and Pharma Solutions, BASF SE.

Looking to 2018 … and beyond​

The partnership between Nuritas and BASF will see its first commercial launch in 2018 as a new anti-inflammatory ingredient is launched into the US market. Nuritas CEO Browne said the launch of the anti-inflammatory ingredient will be ‘pivotal’ for the firm in the next year.

“What is so exciting is that the inflammation ingredient launching in the U.S. next year is actually the first healthcare ingredient that has been fully discovered through the use of Artificial intelligence,” ​added Khaldi.

Meanwhile, BASF’s De Marco said the launch of the ingredient into the US market ‘is only the beginning’.

“Our collaboration is progressing and on track to yield more groundbreaking products in the future.” ​

Another key area of focus for Nuritas is diabetes. According to the International Diabetes Federation, an estimated 352 million individuals globally are living with pre-diabetes which is considered an early warning sign for the condition.

“Bioactive peptides are known to play a role in managing diabetes and many other areas, but the current methods of identifying those that may work is time-consuming, inefficient and expensive,” ​said Browne – noting that when compared to traditional discovery methods, the Nuritas platform has been shown to identify peptides ten times faster and 500 times more accurately while significantly reducing costs.

“Our artificial intelligence platform has already disrupted this antiquated process by targeting, predicting and unlocking peptides that can positively impact in conditions like pre-diabetes while reducing the cost and time needed to find them,”​ he said.

Commenting on the possibility of further investment and financing rounds, the CEO told NutraIngredients that Nuritas will continue to grow and expand, but that the ‘huge’ round of investment that has just closed will provide a good runway to operate from.

“We are now focussed firmly on using it to maximise the many opportunities before us,”​ he said.

However, Browne added that the company is also “fortunate that we already have a number of different options identified when it comes to bringing in new funding if and when the need may arise.”​","A Dublin-based biotech firm has raised €16m ($19.2m) in a series A funding round to support its work in discovering and making use of bioactive peptides to assist in the treatment of diseases. Nuritas, whose CEO is former Nestlé executive Emmet Browne, has now received a total of €25m since its launch in 2014, including $3m from the European Union for a project that explores using artificial intelligence (AI) to help to prevent diabetes. Bioactive peptides play a role in managing the condition, and the AI technology used by Nuritas speeds up the process of identifying those which may help. 
"
"Pew Research Center surveys have found that online harassment is a common phenomenon in the digital lives of many Americans, and that a majority of Americans feel harassment online is a major problem. Even so, there is considerable debate over what online harassment actually means in practice.

In an effort to examine more deeply where people “draw the line” when it comes to online harassment, the Center conducted a survey in which respondents were presented with fictional scenarios depicting different types of escalating online interactions. The survey then asked them to indicate which specific elements of the story they considered to be harassment.

Their answers indicate that Americans broadly agree that certain behaviors are beyond the pale. For instance, in various contexts most agree that online harassment occurs when people make direct personal threats against others. At the same time, the public is much more divided over whether or not other behaviors – such as sending unkind messages or publicly sharing a private conversation – constitute online harassment.

In two vignettes, respondents were asked if and when the social media platforms where the incidents were occurring should have stepped in and addressed the unfolding events. Again, majorities agree that the platforms should step in to address behaviors such as threatening messages. But public views are more split when it comes to the responsibilities of the platforms at other points in these incidents.

Scenario 1: A private disagreement between friends that becomes public and escalates in severity

People’s perceptions of online harassment incidents can often depend on who is involved in the conflict, as well as whether that conflict plays out publicly or in private. The first scenario in the survey presented respondents with an example of a private disagreement between a fictional character named “David” and his friend over a sensitive political issue. The conversation begins in a private messaging thread but then becomes public and escalates in severity:

“David and his friend are messaging privately about a sensitive political issue on which they disagree. David says something that offends his friend, who forwards the conversation to some people they know. One of those people shares the conversation publicly on a social media account, and David receives unkind messages from strangers. The original conversation is then reposted on an account with thousands of followers, and David receives messages that are vulgar. Eventually someone posts David’s phone number and home address online, and David starts to receive threatening messages.”

The vast majority of Americans (89%) agree that David does experience online harassment at some point in this conflict. Just 4% feel that he does not experience online harassment at least somewhere during the episode, and 7% say they are not sure if he was harassed or not. Although there are some modest demographic differences on this question, sizable majorities of Americans across a wide range of groups agree that this scenario as a whole does in fact involve online harassment.

When asked to identify which specific elements of the scenario they consider online harassment, only a small share of Americans (5%) think the initial disagreement when David offends his friend qualifies. The public is more evenly divided on the next two elements of the scenario: 48% think it constitutes online harassment when David’s friend forwards their private conversation to other people, while 52% do not deem it harassment. Similarly, 54% say it counts as harassment when someone then shares the conversation publicly on social media, while 46% think it does not.

There is relatively broad consensus on the remaining elements of the scenario. Substantial shares of Americans think David experiences online harassment when he begins to receive unkind messages from strangers (72%), when those messages become vulgar (82%), when his personal information is posted online (85%), and when he starts to receive threatening messages (85%).

Views of this scenario differ little based on the gender of the main character

The gender of the scenario’s lead character has little impact on Americans’ perceptions of whether online harassment did or did not occur in this situation. A separate group of respondents was given an identical scenario to consider but with a woman as the lead character instead of a man. Some 91% of Americans feel that the scenario involving a female protagonist qualifies as online harassment, compared with 89% in the scenario involving a man. And their responses to the specific elements of the story are also nearly identical in each version.

Scenario 2: Harassment involving sexism

The second scenario in the survey used a story involving a character named Julie to explore how Americans view online harassment issues involving sexism and sexual harassment:

“Julie posts on her social media account, defending one side of a controversial political issue. A few people reply to her, with some supporting and some opposing her. As more people see her post, Julie receives unkind messages. Eventually her post is shared by a popular blogger with thousands of followers, and Julie receives vulgar messages that insult her looks and sexual behavior. She also notices people posting pictures of her that have been edited to include sexual images. Eventually, she receives threatening messages.”

As was true in the preceding scenario, the vast majority of Americans (89%) agree that Julie does indeed experience online harassment at some point in this scenario. Another 6% feel that Julie was not harassed at any point in the encounter, while 5% say they are unsure if this scenario involves harassment or not.

And as was the case in the preceding scenario, the public has differing views on which aspects of this story represent online harassment. A very small share of Americans (3%) think Julie’s initial disagreement with her friends counts as online harassment. Some 43% consider it harassment when she begins to receive unkind messages, while around one-in-five (17%) consider it harassment when her post is shared by the popular blogger with thousands of followers. Meanwhile, substantial majorities of Americans think Julie is being harassed when she receives vulgar messages about her looks and sexual behavior (85%), when her picture is edited to include sexual images (84%), and when she receives threatening messages (85%).

Along with asking respondents to identify which specific elements of this scenario count as online harassment, this scenario included a second set of questions about when – if it all – people think the social media service where this incident was occurring should have stepped in to address the behaviors in question. These findings indicate that the public has a somewhat different standard for behaviors that constitute online harassment, as opposed to behaviors that necessitate a response from online platforms.

For example, some 43% of Americans consider it to be online harassment when Julie receives unkind messages from the people reading her post – but just 20% think that the platform should have stepped in to address that behavior when it occurred. The public’s attitudes diverge in similar ways on some of the more severe behaviors in the scenario. Most prominently, 85% of Americans think that Julie experiences online harassment when she begins to receive vulgar messages about her looks and sexual behavior. But substantially fewer (although still a majority at 66%) think that the social media platform has an obligation to step in and address that behavior.

Women are more likely than men to view certain behaviors in this scenario as harassing

The vast majority of both men and women feel that Julie does in fact experience online harassment in this scenario. But at the same time, men and women respond somewhat differently to some of the specific elements of the scenario. Most notably, women are roughly three times as likely as men to consider it online harassment when Julie’s post is shared on social media by the blogger (24% vs. 9%), and they are also substantially more likely to consider it harassment when Julie first begins to receive unkind messages (50% vs. 35%). And although roughly eight-in-ten men consider it harassment when Julie receives vulgar messages, when she sees people editing her picture to include sexual imagery, and when she receives threatening messages, in each case that point of view is shared by roughly nine-in-ten women.

Scenario 3: Harassment involving racism

The final scenario in the survey used a story involving a character named John to explore how Americans view online harassment issues in the context of racially motivated content. This scenario is nearly identical to the preceding one involving “Julie” and sexual harassment but with racial rather than sexual overtones:

“John posts on his social media account, defending one side of a controversial political issue. A few people reply to him, with some supporting and some opposing him. As more people see his post, John receives unkind messages. Eventually his post is shared by a popular blogger with thousands of followers, and John receives vulgar messages that make racial insults and use a common racial slur. He also notices people posting pictures of him that have been edited to include racially insensitive images. Eventually, he receives threatening messages.”

In many ways, Americans’ views on this scenario mirror those in the previous scenario involving sexual harassment. Fully 85% of adults believe John experiences online harassment in this scenario, while 6% feel he does not face harassment, and 10% are unsure if this scenario involves online harassment or not.

They also respond in largely similar ways when asked which specific elements of the story constitute harassment. Very few Americans think that John’s initial social media argument constitutes online harassment, but sizable majorities agree that John experiences harassment when he receives vulgar messages with racially insulting language (82%), when his picture is edited to include racially insensitive images (80%), and when he receives personal threats (82%).

And as with the case of the scenario involving sexual content, Americans have a somewhat different threshold for behavior that constitutes online harassment as opposed to behavior that deserves a response by the social media platform hosting that behavior. For instance, 80% of Americans think it constitutes online harassment when people begin posting pictures of John that include racially insensitive imagery, but 57% think that the social media service should have stepped in to address that behavior.

Slightly larger share of the public thinks social media platforms should step in for behaviors involving sexual harassment than for behaviors involving racial harassment

The scenarios involving “John” and “Julie” are generally identical in content, with the former involving explicitly racial content and the latter involving sexual content. Overall, similar shares of Americans view these scenarios as involving online harassment at some point. But slightly larger shares of the public – although a majority of Americans in each instance – think the social media platform should have stepped in at various times during the scenario involving Julie, as opposed to the scenario involving John:","The US public is divided over whether certain behaviours can be categorised as online harassment, according to a new survey by Pew. Although most respondents agreed that direct personal threats constituted harassment, opinion differed as to whether unkind messages, or the public sharing of a private conversation, met the requirements. The survey posed a series of fictional scenarios, asking those surveyed which actions depicted constituted harassment. The majority felt that social media platforms should intervene in the case of threats, though respondents were divided over the platforms’ responsibilities in other areas.
"
"Price falls that have hit London's most expensive property for years have slowed and rippled out to high-end family homes in the south-west of the capital, according to Savills.

The value of central London's 'prime' property, located in Westminster and Kensington & Chelsea, has been falling for three years, down 15pc since September 2014. Savills said that fall, sparked largely by a hike in stamp duty on homes worth more than £1m, appears to have bottomed out.

By contrast, increasingly fragile buyer sentiment due to uncertainty over Brexit and high property prices mean that these falls are accelerating in outer zones.

While prices of expensive property in the centre of the capital fell by 4pc last year, they sank by an average of 4.2pc in south-west London, in areas such as Barnes, Wandsworth and Clapham. This is the first time since June 2012 that such price falls in south-west London have outpaced those in the centre.","British property company Savills has predicted that the slump in London's prime housing market has slowed, but says a return to growth will be slow. Values of the most expensive homes in Westminster have fallen by 15% over the last three years, while in areas such as Wandsworth and Clapham, the decrease has been 7.3%. Savills predict it will be two years before prices start to rise again, due to uncertainty over Brexit, added to the previous effect of a stamp duty increase on properties over £1m ($1.4m)."
"The Canadian government is partnering with AI firm Advanced Symbolics to try to predict rises in regional suicide risk by monitoring social media posts. Advanced Symbolics will analyze posts from 160,000 social media accounts and will look for suicide trends. The company aims to be able to predict which areas of Canada might see an increase in suicidal behavior, which according to the contract document includes ""ideation (i.e., thoughts), behaviors (i.e., suicide attempts, self-harm, suicide) and communications (i.e., suicidal threats, plans)."" With that knowledge, the Canadian government could make sure more mental health resources are in the right places when needed.

Canada isn't the only one turning to technology in order to provide better support for those considering suicide or to prevent suicides from happening. In November, Facebook began a global rollout of its AI suicide prevention tools that reach out to users who post content that could be a sign of suicidal thought and allow other users to report content that they think might show signs of suicidal risk. Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, also released tools last year that allowed users to report live videos that showed signs of suicidal thought, which would prompt an offer of mental health resources to the person posting the content.

The project is scheduled to begin later this month and would initially end in June. During that time, Advanced Symbolics would monitor social media accounts for a period of three months as a pilot of the program. Afterwards, the Canadian government will determine if the program should be extended. It's authorized for up to five one-year extensions. The initial program period will cost the government just under $25,000 and if extended fully, would cost up to $400,000.

""To help prevent suicide, develop effective prevention programs and recognize ways to intervene earlier, we must first understand the various patterns and characteristics of suicide-related behaviours,"" a Public Health Agency of Canada spokesperson said to CBC in a statement. ""PHAC is exploring ways to pilot a new approach to assist in identifying patterns, based on online data, associated with users who discuss suicide-related behaviours.""

Canada residents suffering from suicidal thoughts can reach out to the Canadian Association for Suicide Prevention for help. US residents can call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-8255.","The Public Health Agency of Canada is partnering with artificial intelligence (AI) firm Advanced Symbolics on a three-month pilot programme to monitor social media posts for indicators of suicidal behaviour. The scheme, set to cost up to $400,000 if extended to five years, seeks to better deploy Canada's mental health resources. In November, Facebook launched its AI suicide prevention tools globally, following Instagram's release of tools enabling users to report videos that demonstrated signs of suicidal thoughts."
"To prepare for the coming General Data Protection Regulation, publishers have a new important role: data protection officers.

The Information Commissioner’s Office advised companies to hire DPOs last year, but unlike in Germany, where DPOs are now common at publishers, the U.K. has been far slower to embrace the role. News UK, which owns The Times and The Sun newspapers, was among the first to appoint a data protection officer. Haymarket has appointed one, and magazine publisher Future is planning to appoint one. Others have working groups comprised of staff across different parts of the business working on compliance. Ad tech companies and agencies are also bringing on data protection czars.

The DPO role comes with challenges. The ICO insists the DPO isn’t to be held accountable if decisions they make aren’t good for business.



“It’s the new important role at publishers, but it’s a strange role that’s virtually un-sackable,” said Paul Lomax, an independent publishing consultant and recently the chief technology officer at magazine group Dennis. “You can’t give them guidance on or take issue with how they approach it [GDPR compliance]. Basically you can’t fire them.”

Some publishers are simply choosing to expand current roles, such as privacy officers and heads of data. But with GDPR, the DPO cannot have any conflict of interest with other responsibilities across the business. So if it wasn’t a dedicated role before, it will have to be now, according to Lomax. In some cases, that may lead to some hasty job title changes, rather than investing in an unknown new hire.

Given GDPR is uncharted territory, real expertise and experience is thin on the ground. And with any role shortage, particularly in an area that requires senior, specialist skill sets, salaries are high. Industry sources have said DPO roles tend to be in the six-figure range.

In short, hiring a DPO is fraught with challenges. Whether or not a company must appoint one comes down to size and the extent to which they use data. Companies that have to renegotiate thousands of contracts with tech suppliers in order to ensure they’re compliant will likely already have a DPO or have plans to hire one. But for smaller businesses, outsourcing to external DPOs will be a more popular option.

Companies like Skimlinks, which provides affiliate link services to publishers, will likely outsource to a DPO in the spring, after the company has done the heavy lifting on its data mapping and other internal processes. The DPO will then just be tasked with auditing and validating all that’s happened, meaning the business can control and retain the expertise on how to comply with the law and then approaches an external DPO to rubber stamp its compliance as an unbiased partner. “That way it’s [GDPR knowledge] not all locked up in the mind of a DPO,” said Skimlinks co-founder Joe Stepniewski.","Data protection officers (DPOs) are becoming crucial hires for publishers, ad tech companies and agencies affected by the impending General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). DPOs reportedly command six-figure salaries due to the thin pool of GDPR expertise, and are virtually un-sackable. As publishing consultant Peter Lomax explains, the Information Commissioner’s Office has insisted that DPOs are not to be held accountable if their GDPR-related decisions hurt the business: ""You can’t take issue with how they approach [GDPR compliance]"". UK publishers News UK and Haymarket have filled DPO positions, though smaller publishers are likely to outsource in future.
"
"Since 2012, Britain has halved carbon emissions in the electricity sector making the power system the 4th cleanest in Europe and the 7th cleanest in the world. Meanwhile public support for renewable electricity production has hit record highs, with 82% of the UK public supporting green energy.

However, a lot more needs to be done to reduce our carbon emissions and tackle climate change. The UK is behind schedule to meet the 4th or 5th Carbon Budgets and there are no clear plans on how we are going to make up this shortfall.

2018 is the year of opportunity for clean energy, and is set to be even greener, but it must be backed up with Government action. Greater support needs to be given to renewable energy, to decarbonise our heat and make our buildings use less energy. On top of this greater ambition is needed to support electric vehicles by ending the sale of petrol and diesel cars by 2030. This will cut our carbon emissions, clean up our air and bolster the UK economy.","The UK had its greenest ever year in electricity production in 2017, breaking 13 different renewable energy records. Figures from BM Reports and Sheffield University showed that renewables produced more electricity than coal power stations on 315 days last year, and April saw the first day with no coal-fired power used in the UK. Coal now supplies less than 7% of the UK's electricity, and the government has a target to phase it out by 2025. The UK has halved carbon emissions in electricity production since 2012, and the increase in renewable power is expected to continue in 2018."
"Cacao plants are under threat of devastation thanks to warmer temperatures and dryer weather conditions.

Scientists at the University of California are teaming up with Mars company to try to save the crop before it's too late.

They're exploring the possibility of using the gene-editing technology CRISPR to make crops that can survive the new challenges.

Beyond the glittery glass-and-sandstone walls of the University of California’s new biosciences building, rows of tiny green cacao seedlings in refrigerated greenhouses await judgment day.

Under the watchful eye of Myeong-Je Cho, the director of plant genomics at an institute that's working with food and candy company Mars, the plants will be transformed. If all goes well, these tiny seedlings will soon be capable of surviving — and thriving — in the dryer, warmer climate that is sending chills through the spines of farmers across the globe.

It's all thanks to a new technology called CRISPR, which allows for tiny, precise tweaks to DNA that were never possible before. These tweaks are already being used to make crops cheaper and more reliable. But their most important use may be in the developing world, where many of the plants that people rely on to avoid starvation are threatened by the impacts of climate change, including more pests and a lack of water.

Cacao plants occupy a precarious position on the globe. They can only grow within a narrow strip of rainforested land roughly 20 degrees north and south of the equator, where temperature, rain, and humidity all stay relatively constant throughout the year. Over half of the world's chocolate now comes from just two countries in West Africa — Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana.

But those areas won't be suitable for chocolate in the next few decades. By 2050, rising temperatures will push today's chocolate-growing regions more than 1,000 feet uphill into mountainous terrain — much of which is currently preserved for wildlife, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Mars, the $35 billion corporation best known for Snickers, is aware of these problems and others presented by climate change.

In September, the company pledged $1 billion as part of an effort called ""Sustainability in a Generation,"" which aims to reduce the carbon footprint of its business and supply chain by more than 60% by 2050.

""We're trying to go all in here,"" Barry Parkin, Mars' chief sustainability officer, told Business Insider. ""There are obviously commitments the world is leaning into but, frankly, we don't think we're getting there fast enough collectively.""

Its initiative with Cho at UC Berkeley is another arm of that efforts. If all goes as planned, they could develop cacao plants that don’t wilt or rot at their current elevations, doing away with the need to relocate farms or find another approach.

Jennifer Doudna, the UC Berkeley geneticist who invented CRISPR, is overseeing the collaboration with Mars. Although her tool has received more attention for its potential to eradicate human diseases and make so-called “designer babies,” Doudna thinks its most profound applications won’t be on humans but rather on the food they eat.

Courtney Verrill

An avid tomato gardener, Doudna thinks her tool can benefit everyone from large food companies like Mars to individual hobbyists like herself.

”Personally, I’d love a tomato plant with fruit that stayed on the vine longer,” Doudna told Business Insider.

The research lab she oversees at UC Berkeley is called the Innovative Genomics Institute. Many of the efforts by graduate students there focus on using CRISPR to benefit small-holder farmers in the developing world. One such project aims to protect cassava — a key crop that prevents millions of people from starving each year — from climate change by tweaking its DNA to produce less of a dangerous toxin that it makes in hotter temperatures.

Doudna founded a company called Caribou Biosciences to put CRISPR into practice, and has also licensed the technology to agricultural company DuPont Pioneer for use in crops like corn and mushrooms.

Regardless of which crop the public sees CRISPR successfully used in first, the technology will be a key tool in a growing arsenal of techniques we'll need if we plan to continue eating things like chocolate as the planet warms.","Scientists at the University of California, Berkeley are using the DNA manipulation technology CRISPR to ensure the survival of the cacao plant as the planet experiences warmer temperatures. The research is being carried out with confectionery giant Mars, which has pledged $1bn towards reducing its carbon footprint 60% by 2050. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association, by 2050 rising temperatures will have forced chocolate growers to altitudes 1000ft higher than today, while also increasing pest numbers and reducing water supplies. It's hoped that seedlings created at Berkeley will be equipped to thrive in these tougher conditions.
"