An opposition fighter steps on a broken bust of the late Syrian President Hafez Assad in Damascus, Syria, Sunday Dec. 8, 2024. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)

Dear Commons Community,

The toppling of the Syria’s the Bashar al-Assad regime following more than 50 years of brutal dictatorship was a “victory for the entire Islamic nation,” said Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, the leader of the main rebel group, HTS, which was formed out of an al Qaeda affiliate.   Assad’s removal was met with jubilation by Syrians at home and abroad. In Damascus, rebels and civilians were seen ransacking the former dictator’s palaces.

For Iran’s theocratic government, Assad’a removal is terrible news.  As reported by The Associated Press.

Iran’s decades-long strategy of building an “Axis of Resistance” supporting militant groups and proxies around the region is falling apart. First came the crushing Israeli campaign in Gaza triggered by the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Iranian-backed Hamas.

That war spawned another in Lebanon, where Israel has mauled Iran’s most powerful ally, Hezbollah, even as Israel has launched successful airstrikes openly inside of Iran for the first time.

And now Iran’s longtime stalwart ally and client in Syria, President Bashar Assad, is gone. As dawn broke Sunday, rebel forces completed a lightning offensive by seizing the ancient capital of Damascus and tearing down symbols of more than 50 years of Assad’s rule over the Mideast crossroads.

Ali Akbar Velayati, a key adviser to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, once called Assad and Syria “the golden ring of the resistance chain in the region.”

“Without the Syrian government, this chain will break and the resistance against Israel and its supporters will be weakened.”

That break in the chain is literal. Syria was an important geographical link that allowed Iran to move weapons and other supplies to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Its loss now further weakens Hezbollah, whose powerful arsenal in southern Lebanon had put Iranian influence directly on the border of its nemesis Israel.

“Iran’s deterrence thinking is really shattered by events in Gaza, by events in Lebanon and definitely by developments in Syria,” a senior diplomat from the United Arab Emirates, Anwar Gargash, said at the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Manama Dialogue in Bahrain.

Iran still holds the card of its nuclear program. Though it denies that intention, it can use the potential for building a weapons capability to cast a shadow of influence in the region.

“Iran remains a critical regional player,” Gargash said. “We should use this moment to connect and speak about what’s next in my opinion.”

It’s a dramatic reversal in Iran’s regional might

Only a few years ago, the Islamic Republic loomed ascendant across the wider Middle East. Its “Axis of Resistance” was at a zenith.

Hezbollah in Lebanon stood up against Israel. Assad appeared to have weathered an Arab Spring uprising-turned-civil war. Iraqi insurgents killed U.S. troops with Iranian-designed roadside bombs. Yemen’s Houthi rebels fought a Saudi-led coalition to a stalemate.

Syria, at the crossroads, played a vital role.

Early in Syria’s civil war, when it appeared Assad might be overthrown, Iran and its ally, Hezbollah, rushed fighters to support him — in the name of defending Shiite shrines in Syria. Russia later joined with a scorched earth campaign of airstrikes.

The campaign won back territory, even as Syria remained divided into zones of government and insurgent control.

But the speed of Assad’s collapse the past week showed just how reliant he was on support from Iran and Russia — which at the crucial moment didn’t come.

“What was surprising was the Syrian’s army’s failure to counter the offensive, and also the speed of the developments,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told state television late Sunday night. “That was unexpected.”

Russia remains mired in Ukraine years after launching a full-scale invasion there in 2022. For Iran, international sanctions over its advancing nuclear program have ground down its economy.

For Israel, breaking Iran’s regional network has been a major goal, though it is wary over jihadi fighters among the insurgents who toppled Assad. Israel on Sunday moved troops into a demilitarized buffer zone with Syria by the Israel-held Golan Heights in what it called a temporary security measure.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called Assad’s fall a “historic day,” saying it was “the direct result of our forceful action against Hezbollah and Iran, Assad’s main supporters.”

Iran’s theocratic rulers long touted their regional network to Iranians as a show of their country’s strength, and its crumbling could raise repercussions at home — though there is no immediate sign of their hold weakening. Anger over the tens of billions of dollars Iran is believed to have spent propping up Assad was a rallying cry in rounds of nationwide anti-government protests that have broken out over recent years, most recently in 2022.

Iran could respond by revving up its nuclear program

The loss of Syria does not mean the end of Iran’s ability to project power in the Mideast. The Houthi rebels continue to launch attacks on Israel and on ships moving through the Red Sea — though the tempo of their attacks has again fallen without a clear explanation from their leadership.

Iran also maintains its nuclear program. While insisting it enriches uranium for peaceful purposes, Western intelligence agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency say Iran had an organized nuclear weapons program until 2003.

The head of the IAEA also warned Friday that Iran is poised to “quite dramatically” increase its stockpile of near weapons-grade uranium as it has started cascades of advanced centrifuges.

“If Iran would develop nuclear weapons, that would be a great blow to the international nonproliferation regime,” said Thanos Dokos, Greece’s national security adviser, in Bahrain.

There remains a risk of wider attacks in the region, particularly on oil infrastructure. An attack in 2019 initially claimed by the Houthis but later assessed by experts to have been carried out by Iran temporarily halved Saudi Arabia’s production of oil.

“If, as a result of escalation, there are attacks against the energy infrastructure of Iran or Saudi Arabia, that would be bad news for the global oil supply,” Dokos warned.

Whatever happens next, Iran will need to make the decision weighing the problems it faces at both home and abroad.

“Whereas stability is a difficult commodity to export, instability can travel very fast, which is why stability in the Middle East is very important for all of us,” Dokos said.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Star outfielder Juan Soto and the New York Mets have agreed to a record $765 million, 15-year contract, according to The Associated Press, believed to be the largest pact in team sports history.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the agreement, first reported by the New York Post, was subject to a successful physical.

He would have the right to opt out of the contract after the 2029 season if the Mets don’t at that time raise the contract to $805 million by increasing the average annual value by $4 million annually. Soto will get a $75 million signing bonus, payable upon the deal’s approval by the commissioner’s office.

Soto’s agreement is the largest and longest in Major League Baseball history, topping Shohei Ohtani’s $700 million, 10-year contract with the Los Angeles Dodgers, a deal signed last December. That agreement included $680 million in deferred payments and is valued at just under $46.1 million for baseball’s luxury tax.

While there are no definitive records in sports beyond the United States, Soto’s deal is thought to eclipse those in all other team sports. The deal was reached on the eve of the first full day of baseball’s annual winter meetings.

Soto’s agreement does not include deferred money, the person said, leaving its average annual value at $51 million. Its length tops Fernando Tatis Jr.’s $340 million, 14-year contract with San Diego that runs through 2034.

The New York Yankees’ final offer to retain Soto was for $760 million over 16 years, a second person familiar with the talks said, also on condition of anonymity because that detail was not announced. That offer had a $47.5 million average annual value.

A four-time All-Star at age 26, Soto is the most accomplished free agent at that age since shortstop Alex Rodriguez agreed to a record $252 million, 10-year contract with Texas in December 2000 at age 25.

Soto was 19 when he made his major league debut with Washington in 2018 and helped the Nationals win the World Series the following year, when he hit .282 with 34 homers and 110 RBIs.

He turned down Washington’s $440 million, 15-year offer in 2022 and was traded that August to San Diego. Following the death of Padres owner Peter Seidler, Soto was dealt to the Yankees in December 2023 and helped New York reach the World Series for the first time since 2009.

Soto batted .288 with 41 homers, 109 RBIs and 129 walks, hitting second in the batting order ahead of Aaron Judge to power an offense that led the major leagues with 237 homers. He hit a go-ahead homer in the AL Championship Series opener against Cleveland and a tiebreaking, three-run homer in the 10th inning that won the pennant against the Guardians in Game 5.

Soto has a .285 batting average with 201 homers, 592 RBIs and 769 walks over seven major league seasons.

Congratulations to Soto and the Mets!

Tony

UnitedHealthcare C.E.O.Brian Thompson and Murder Suspect!

Dear Commons Community,

The New York Times columnist, Zeynep Tufeksi, has a disturbing and insightful essay this morning entitled, “The Rage and Glee That Followed a C.E.O.’s Killing Should Ring All Alarms!”  Here is her introduction.

“It started barely minutes after the horrifying news broke that the chief executive of UnitedHealthcare, Brian Thompson, had been fatally shot in Midtown Manhattan. Even before any details were available, the internet was awash in speculation that the company had refused to cover the alleged killer’s medical bills — and in debates about whether murder would be a reasonable response.

Soon there was a video of a man in a hoodie, face not visible, walking up behind Thompson and shooting him multiple times, ignoring a woman standing nearby before walking away. Could he be a hit man?

Then came the reports that bullet casings bearing the words “delay,” “deny” and “depose” were found at the scene. “Delay” and “deny” clearly echo tactics insurers use to avoid paying claims. “Depose”? Well, that’s the sudden, forceful removal from a high position. Ah.

After that, it was an avalanche.

The shooter was compared to John Q, the desperate fictional father who takes an entire emergency room hostage after a health insurance company refuses to cover his son’s lifesaving transplant in a 2002 film of the same name. Some posted “prior authorization needed before thoughts and prayers.” Others wryly pointed out that the reward for information connected to the murder, $10,000, was less than their annual deductibles. One observer recommended that Thompson be scheduled to see a specialist in a few months, maybe.

Many others went further. They urged people with information about the killing not to share it with the authorities. Names and photos of other health insurance executives floated around. Some of the posts that went most viral, racking up millions of views by celebrating the killing, I can’t repeat here.

It’s true that any news with shock value would get some of this response online — after all, trolling, engagement bait and performative provocation are part of everyday life on digital platforms.

But this was something different. The rage that people felt at the health insurance industry, and the elation that they expressed at seeing it injured, was widespread and organic. It was shocking to many, but it crossed communities all along the political spectrum and took hold in countless divergent cultural clusters.”

Her conclusion:

The concentration of extreme wealth in the United States has recently surpassed that of the Gilded Age. And the will among politicians to push for broad public solutions appears to have all but vanished. I fear that instead of an era of reform, the response to this act of violence and to the widespread rage it has ushered into view will be limited to another round of retreat by the wealthiest. Corporate executives are already reportedly beefing up their security. ..

We still don’t know who killed Brian Thompson or what his motive was. Whatever facts eventually emerge, the anger it has laid bare will still be real, and what we glimpsed should ring all the alarm bells.”

Her entire essay is below. And well worth a read!

Tony

————————————————————————–

The New York Times

“The Rage and Glee That Followed a C.E.O.’s Killing Should Ring All Alarms!”

Dec. 6, 2024

By Zeynep Tufekci

Opinion Columnist

It started barely minutes after the horrifying news broke that the chief executive of UnitedHealthcare, Brian Thompson, had been fatally shot in Midtown Manhattan. Even before any details were available, the internet was awash in speculation that the company had refused to cover the alleged killer’s medical bills — and in debates about whether murder would be a reasonable response.

Soon there was a video of a man in a hoodie, face not visible, walking up behind Thompson and shooting him multiple times, ignoring a woman standing nearby before walking away. Could he be a hit man?

Then came the reports that bullet casings bearing the words “delay,” “deny” and “depose” were found at the scene. “Delay” and “deny” clearly echo tactics insurers use to avoid paying claims. “Depose”? Well, that’s the sudden, forceful removal from a high position. Ah.

After that, it was an avalanche.

The shooter was compared to John Q, the desperate fictional father who takes an entire emergency room hostage after a health insurance company refuses to cover his son’s lifesaving transplant in a 2002 film of the same name. Some posted “prior authorization needed before thoughts and prayers.” Others wryly pointed out that the reward for information connected to the murder, $10,000, was less than their annual deductibles. One observer recommended that Thompson be scheduled to see a specialist in a few months, maybe.

Many others went further. They urged people with information about the killing not to share it with the authorities. Names and photos of other health insurance executives floated around. Some of the posts that went most viral, racking up millions of views by celebrating the killing, I can’t repeat here.

It’s true that any news with shock value would get some of this response online — after all, trolling, engagement bait and performative provocation are part of everyday life on digital platforms.

But this was something different. The rage that people felt at the health insurance industry, and the elation that they expressed at seeing it injured, was widespread and organic. It was shocking to many, but it crossed communities all along the political spectrum and took hold in countless divergent cultural clusters.

Even on Facebook, a platform where people do not commonly hide behind pseudonyms, the somber announcement by UnitedHealth Group that it was “deeply saddened and shocked at the passing of our dear friend and colleague” was met with, as of this writing, 80,000 reactions; 75,000 of them were the “haha” emoji.

Politicians offering boilerplate condolences were eviscerated. Some responses came in the form of personal testimony. I don’t condone murder, many started, before describing harrowing ordeals that health insurance companies had put them through.

On a prominent Reddit forum for medical professionals, one of the most upvoted comments was a parody rejection letter: After “a careful review of the claim submitted for emergency services on December 4, 2024,” it read, a claim was denied because “you failed to obtain prior authorization before seeking care for the gunshot wound to your chest.” Just a few days earlier, the forum had been a place where people debated the side effects of Flomax and the best medical conferences.

I’ve been studying social media for a long time, and I can’t think of any other incident when a murder in this country has been so openly celebrated.

The conditions that gave rise to this outpouring of anger are in some ways specific to this moment. Today’s business culture enshrines the maximization of executive wealth and shareholder fortunes, and has succeeded in leveraging personal riches into untold political influence. New communication platforms allow millions of strangers around the world to converse in real time.

But the currents we are seeing are expressions of something more fundamental. We’ve been here before. And it wasn’t pretty.

The Gilded Age, the tumultuous period between roughly 1870 and 1900, was also a time of rapid technological change, of mass immigration, of spectacular wealth and enormous inequality. The era got its name from a Mark Twain novel: gilded, rather than golden, to signify a thin, shiny surface layer. Below it lay the corruption and greed that engulfed the country after the Civil War.

The era survives in the public imagination through still-resonant names, including J.P. Morgan, John Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and Cornelius Vanderbilt; through their mansions, which now greet awe-struck tourists; and through TV shows with extravagant interiors and lavish gowns. Less well remembered is the brutality that underlay that wealth — the tens of thousands of workers, by some calculations, who lost their lives to industrial accidents, or the bloody repercussions they met when they tried to organize for better working conditions.

Also less well remembered is the intensity of political violence that erupted. The vast inequities of the era fueled political movements that targeted corporate titans, politicians, judges and others for violence. In 1892, an anarchist tried to assassinate the industrialist Henry Clay Frick after a drawn-out conflict between Pinkerton security guards and workers. In 1901, an anarchist sympathizer assassinated President William McKinley. And so on.

As the historian Jon Grinspan wrote about the years between 1865 and 1915, “the nation experienced one impeachment, two presidential elections ‘won’ by the loser of the popular vote and three presidential assassinations.” And neither political party, he added, seemed “capable of tackling the systemic issues disrupting Americans’ lives.” No, not an identical situation, but the description does resonate with how a great many people feel about the direction of the country today.

It’s not hard to see how, during the Gilded Age, armed political resistance could find many eager recruits and even more numerous sympathetic observers. And it’s not hard to imagine how the United States could enter another such cycle.

A recent Reuters investigation identified at least 300 cases of political violence since the 2021 assault on the Capitol, which it described as “the biggest and most sustained increase in U.S. political violence since the 1970s.” A 2023 poll showed that the number of Americans who agree with the statement “American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save the country” was ticking up alarmingly.

And the fraying of the social contract is getting worse. Americans express less and less trust in many institutions. Substantial majorities of people say that government, business leaders and the media are purposely misleading them. In striking contrast to older generations, majorities of younger people say they do not believe that “the American dream” is achievable anymore. The health insurance industry likes to cite polls that show overall satisfaction, but those numbers go down when people get sick and learn what their insurer is and is not willing to do for them.

Things are much better now than in the 19th century. But there is a similarity to the trajectory and the mood, to the expression of deep powerlessness and alienation.

Now, however, the country is awash in powerful guns. And some of the new technologies that will be deployed to help preserve order can cut both ways. Thompson’s killer apparently knew exactly where to find his target and at exactly what time. No evidence has emerged that he had access to digital tracking data, but that information is out there on the market. How long before easily built artificial-intelligence-powered drones equipped with facial recognition cameras, rather than hooded men with backpacks, seek targets in cities and towns?

The turbulence and violence of the Gilded Age eventually gave way to comprehensive social reform. The nation built a social safety net, expanded public education and erected regulations and infrastructure that greatly improved the health and well-being of all Americans.

Those reforms weren’t perfect, and they weren’t the only reason the violence eventually receded (though never entirely disappeared), but they moved us forward.

The concentration of extreme wealth in the United States has recently surpassed that of the Gilded Age. And the will among politicians to push for broad public solutions appears to have all but vanished. I fear that instead of an era of reform, the response to this act of violence and to the widespread rage it has ushered into view will be limited to another round of retreat by the wealthiest. Corporate executives are already reportedly beefing up their security. I expect more of them to move to gated communities, entrenched beyond even higher walls, protected by people with even bigger guns. Calls for a higher degree of public surveillance or for integrating facial recognition algorithms into policing may well follow. Almost certainly, armed security entourages and private jets will become an even more common element of executive compensation packages, further removing routine contact between the extremely wealthy and the rest of us, except when employed to serve them.

We still don’t know who killed Brian Thompson or what his motive was. Whatever facts eventually emerge, the anger it has laid bare will still be real, and what we glimpsed should ring all the alarm bells.

This photo shows the facade of Notre-Dame de Paris a few days before its reopening.  [Ludovic Marin/AFP]

Dear Commons Community,

Notre-Dame Cathedral, situated on an island in the River Seine in Paris, France, reopened this weekend after more than five years of intense reconstruction work to restore the medieval building to its former glory.

After a fire gutted the UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2019, the 12th-century Gothic masterpiece has now been masterfully restored and will reopen to the public today following the ceremony yesterday, which was attended by a lineup of heads of state and top-level delegates from around the world.

French President Emmanuel Macron, who promised to restore the cathedral within five years after the catastrophe, made a visit to the site on November 29 with his wife, first lady Brigitte Macron. The president thanked the thousands of workers who had reconstructed the building.

“The inferno of Notre-Dame was a wound for the nation, … and you were its remedy,” the president said.

The blaze broke out on the evening of April 15, 2019, on the roof of the cathedral. The fire sent tongues of orange flames into the sky as smoke billowed from the building. The fire burned for 15 hours while more than 400 firefighters battled to extinguish it.

It is still unclear what caused the blaze, but authorities suspect an electrical fault or a burning cigarette was the likely culprit. No members of the public were hurt because security officials had sounded the alarm and evacuated the cathedral. However, three security officials were injured.

By the time the fire was extinguished the following day, the inside and roof of the cathedral had been largely destroyed. Its wooden and metal spire, which had been undergoing reconstruction work, collapsed.

Its lead roof melted, and the intricate wooden beams that supported it burned away, leaving a gaping hole over the building.

Some religious relics inside the building as well as exposed artwork on the exterior of the building were badly damaged. However, the vaulted stone ceiling acted as a barrier to the fire and prevented serious damage to the cathedral’s interior stone walls.

The cathedral’s wooden frame was centuries-old, and authorities had long marked it as a possible fire hazard. Still, it was a painful period for the French nation. Toxic lead dust spread and cast a gloom over a solemn Paris. Macron, in an emotional speech on April 17, 2019, promised to restore the monument within five years and make it more beautiful than ever. Notre-Dame did not hold a Christmas Mass that year – for the first time since 1803.

How was the cathedral rebuilt?

Hundreds of donors, including some of France’s richest businesspeople, contributed more than 840 million euros ($889m) to the medieval building’s restoration campaign, which was launched by Macron. About 150 countries, among them the United States and Saudi Arabia, also contributed.

The restoration involved the work of about 2,000 people, including craftspeople, architects and other professionals.

Construction workers used powerful vacuum cleaners and cleaning gels to remove the thickened soot, dust and years of accumulated grime from the lower stone walls of the cathedral. Carpenters then hewed giant oak beams by hand to rebuild the intricate roof frame and the spire. About 2,000 oak trees were felled to provide the wood to rebuild the roof.

Work has not entirely finished, and scaffolding will cover parts of the exterior for a few more years so decorative features on the facade can be fully restored.

Today (Sunday), Notre Dame is hosting its first Mass since the fire of 2019.

A video showing the highlights of the reopening is below.

Vive Notre Dame!

Tony

Today we honor and remember the 2,403 Americans who were killed in the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in Hawaii on December 7, 1941, which led to the United States declaring war on Japan the next day and thus entering World War II.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt uttered his most famous words declaring that December 7th is “a date which  will live in infamy”. 

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

The following editorial written by Heather Wilson,  president of The University of Texas at El Paso and a member of the National Science Board, appeared in the current edition of Science.

Tony

—————————————————————————————

Science and America’s challenge

Heather Wilson

More than at any time since World War II, the United States is being challenged scientifically on the global stage. Unfortunately, the nation is not meeting the moment. With a new administration in the wings, the country must begin to monitor scientific advancements to avoid technological surprise and develop strategies to close the critical technologies gap.

Despite a substantial increase in privately and publicly funded research over the past 30 years, Western democracies are losing the technology competition. In 2023, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute began tracking the pace of scientific advancement and found that China leads in 37 of 44 critical technologies—from advanced materials and quantum physics to robotics, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence. This reversal demonstrates that the United States and Western countries are losing scientific leadership. The consequences are not merely academic. If the trend does not change quickly, risks to economic stability and national security will grow.

There are a few things that the United States can do immediately to start turning things around. It must develop a robust way to monitor science and technology advances around the world to prevent surprise. US intelligence agencies are designed to track real-time threats such as the launch of ballistic missiles, the massing of land forces, or incremental improvements in existing weapons. But none of the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies is tasked with systematically scanning the scientific and technological horizon to determine where innovation is most threatening. Although most in the intelligence community and military agree that this is important, no one thinks it’s their problem to fix. Congressional action is needed to set in motion a solution.

The situation also calls for legislation that supports education and training that better prepares a US workforce to thrive in fast-paced fields across the sciences. This strategy has a strong precedent. In 1958, in response to the space race with the Soviet Union, the US passed the National Defense Education Act to bolster the country’s education system and meet the demands posed by competition in science and technology. An equally bold action today could reignite this ambition. Partnerships with states and private industry would be essential for this push to succeed. Indeed, many state leaders have recognized the connection between economic opportunity and talent development by investing in research and higher education. Texas is second only to the National Institutes of Health in funding cancer research, for example. And most states heavily subsidize college education at public universities. In New Mexico, oil and gas tax revenue pays university tuition and fees for students willing to work hard. This renewed effort should prioritize advanced education for precollege teachers in science and mathematics and offer an array of scholarships for undergraduate and graduate students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), particularly at public universities that have kept the cost of quality education reasonable.

It’s also time for a national science strategy that invigorates public interest in, and enthusiasm for, science. This strategy must attract American students to pursue advanced education in science and engineering. Today, 20% of high-impact academic papers in STEM fields are written by researchers in China who were educated in the West—often at US taxpayer expense. This is an alarming indication that the West may be slipping in the kind of scholarly leadership that drives innovative thinking, knowledge generation, evidence-based problem-solving, and societal progress.

America will build the massive data centers and generate the energy to power them. These will be critical to America’s future. It is expected that artificial intelligence will accelerate hypothesis formulation, experimental design, and data analysis. The limiting factor will be people to conduct the research suggested by AI-generated hypotheses at Western universities. Well-educated Western researchers must have access to computing power and data to accelerate discovery.

It often takes a crisis or a substantial failure to galvanize national sentiment and inspire leaders to meet new challenges and threats in a substantially different way. The United States can take comfort in knowing that it has strong alliances in scientific research with like-minded states, which must be fortified as part of its national science strategy. But it is time for the nation to critically examine its own current place in the world of science and consider the perils of allowing this new status quo.

Dear Commons Community,

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) can put young math prodigies to shame. Large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT are now acing nearly every math test they encounter. And yet AI has hardly touched frontier research in math, an indication that its test-taking prowess does not reflect real mathematical skill.  As reported by Science this morning.

In a preprint posted last month, a tech research institute called Epoch AI rounded up 60 expert mathematicians to raise the bar with the most challenging math test they could muster. Leading models correctly answered fewer than 2% of the questions, showing just how far they are from disrupting the field. Still, experts think AI models will catch up to the new benchmark sooner or later—whether mathematicians like it or not.

“The dent that [AI] has made in the math community is small, but people can see there’s potential,” says Kevin Buzzard, a mathematician at Imperial College London. “If you have a system that can ace that database, then it’s game over for mathematicians.”

Trained on immense amounts of human-generated text from the internet and other sources, LLMs identify patterns to predict the most likely sequence of words, numbers, or symbols in response to prompts. That allows them to answer questions, craft stories—or solve math problems. Lately, in the arena of math, leading models have jumped impressively high hurdles. OpenAI’s o1 model, released in September, can now score above 90% on most previous AI math benchmarks. And in July, a math-focused AI model from Google DeepMind performed at a silver medal standard on problems from the International Mathematical Olympiad, the world’s premier competition for high school math.

But experts caution that these results leave an inflated perception of the models’ mathematical reasoning skills. For one thing, current math benchmarks are mostly pitched to high school or undergraduate level math—a far cry from research-level math, which often tackles notorious problems unsolved for centuries, such as the distribution of prime numbers.

Additionally, the models have an unfair advantage. Because they are trained on huge swaths of the internet, they often get to peek at solutions to similar questions, a problem known as data contamination. “They are cheating,” says Cheng Xu, a Ph.D. student at University of College Dublin who led a recent survey of data contamination in AI benchmarks.

Epoch AI, a California-based nonprofit that tracks trends in AI, set out to address both issues. Rather than recycling standardized test questions, organizers paid leading math experts a few hundred dollars to concoct fiendishly difficult, original problems across a broad range of fields. They asked contributors to “use every dirty trick you know to make your problems as brutal as possible,” says Elliot Glazer, a mathematician at Epoch AI who led the benchmark study. Some problems would take human experts multiple days to answer, he says.

To protect against data contamination, the test writers discussed their problems only over encrypted Signal servers and refrained from using online text editors, where an AI might glimpse their plans.

The Epoch AI team tested six top LLMs, including the latest versions from OpenAI and DeepMind, on about 150 questions. The programs were given between 20 seconds and 1 minute to solve each question. The researchers encouraged the struggling machines to persevere, feeding prompts such as “keep working” and “don’t be afraid to execute your code.” Despite the exhortations, no model scored above 2% on the test. Rather than admitting defeat, the models often provided wrong answers, reflecting their usual misguided confidence.

“In my opinion, currently, AI is a long way away from being able to do those questions … but I’ve been wrong before,” Buzzard says. He believes the models need a better sense of useful mathematical maneuvers, so he’s focused on translating researchers’ proofs into machine-readable language that could be used as training data. Glazer, for one, expects the machines to conquer his test within his lifetime. “The only assurance it gives me is at least we have some objective test to [gauge] predictions regarding mathematicians becoming obsolete,” he says.

Some are optimistic that AI will be more of a companion than a competitor. “I still see AI as a tool … that just opens up our capacity to ask even harder questions,” says Jeremy Avigad, a mathematician and philosopher at Carnegie Mellon University. Even if AI gets to the point where it can write proofs beyond the reach of human experts, mathematicians will still play a vital role in making sense of those answers.

But Maia Fraser, a mathematician and computer scientist at the University of Ottawa, worries about the social impacts of AI in math, and how it could lead to an exclusive ecosystem where only elite institutions with access to the best models can contribute to research. Before AI begins to outclass human experts, she argues, mathematicians must reckon with questions about who has access to the tools, how much energy it’s worth to train them, and what we really want them to do. “It’s actually not that far off … which means now is the chance we have to intervene.”

Tony

Chelsea Manning joins other trans rights activists in a protest outside of Speaker Mike Johnson’s office over the GOP’s anti-trans policies. Photo:  Jen Bendery.

Dear Commons Community,

More than a dozen transgender rights activists were arrested yesterday after staging a protest in a women’s bathroom right next to the office of Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who recently imposed a ban on transgender and nonbinary people using bathrooms in the House that align with their gender identity.

Chelsea Manning, the trans activist and former U.S. military intelligence analyst imprisoned for seven years for disclosing classified information to the public, was among the people who quietly gathered in a bathroom on the fifth floor of the Cannon building, which is part of the House complex.

Their surprise demonstration was in response to Johnson’s new House policy, but also aimed at Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.), who has introduced at least two bills in recent weeks at pushing transgender people out of public spaces.  As reported by The Huffington Post.

Mace admitted the first of her bills, which would bar House lawmakers and employees from using House bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity, is “100%” targeted at one person: transgender Rep.-elect Sarah McBride (D-Del.). Her second bill is aimed at barring bathroom access for transgender people in all federal buildings, including public schools and universities, national parks and even airports, train stations and bus terminals.

For about 20 minutes, Manning and others took over the public bathroom by Johnson’s office and led chants while holding up a banner that read, “FLUSH BATHROOM BIGOTRY.” Outside in the hall, right in front of Johnson’s office door, more activists shouted chants and held a massive sign that read, “CONGRESS STOP PISSING ON OUR RIGHTS.”

“Speaker Johnson! Nancy Mace! Our bodies are no debate!” chanted the group. They took aim at Democratic lawmakers, too, for not doing more to protect trans rights, which Republicans have been aggressively attacking for months.

“Democrats, grow a spine!” chanted the activists. “Trans lives are on the line!”

Capitol Police eventually showed up and arrested 15 of them. The group behind the protest, Gender Liberation Movement, was prepared for the arrests.

“Everyone deserves to use the restroom without fear of discrimination or violence. Trans folks are no different. We deserve dignity and respect and we will fight until we get it,” Raquel Willis, the group’s co-founder, said in a statement.

“In the 2024 election, trans folks were left to fend for ourselves after nearly $200 million of attack ads were disseminated across the United States,” she said. “Now, as Republican politicians try to remove us from public life, Democratic leaders are silent as hell.”

Manning, whose prison sentence was commuted in 2017 by former President Barack Obama, said she was participating in the protest because “every person deserves dignity and respect, both in daily life and in more symbolic places” like the U.S. Capitol building.

“As someone who has fought against similar rules, I know what it’s like to feel pushed aside and erased,” she said in a statement. “But I also know the incredible power and resilience our community has. I’m not here as a leader or a spokesperson but simply as another member of my community who shows up unconditionally to support my siblings in this fight. I will stand beside them no matter what. We didn’t start this fight, but we are together now.”

Johnson’s bathroom ban is broader than people may realize: It prohibits any transgender or nonbinary House lawmaker, staff member, intern or even visitors from the public from using a bathroom in the House complex — that includes the House side of the Capitol building and all House buildings — that corresponds with their gender identity.

It’s not clear at all how the speaker plans to enforce this.

Tony

Photo courtesy of Reuters.

Dear Commons Community,

France’s far-right and left-wing lawmakers joined together yesterday in a historic no-confidence vote prompted by budget disputes that forces Prime Minister Michel Barnier and his Cabinet members to resign, a first since 1962.

The National Assembly approved the motion by 331 votes. A minimum of 288 were needed.  As reported by The Associated Press.

President Emmanuel Macron insisted he will serve the rest of his term until 2027. However, he will need to appoint a new prime minister for the second time after July’s legislative elections led to a deeply divided parliament.

Barnier, a conservative appointed in September, will become the shortest-serving prime minister in France’s modern Republic.

“As this mission may soon come to an end, I can tell you that it will remain an honor for me to have served France and the French with dignity,” Barnier said in his final speech before the vote.

“This no-confidence motion… will make everything more serious and more difficult. That’s what I’m sure of,” he said.

Wednesday’s crucial vote rose from fierce opposition to Barnier’s proposed budget.

The National Assembly, France’s lower house of parliament, is deeply fractured, with no single party holding a majority. It comprises three major blocs: Macron’s centrist allies, the left-wing coalition New Popular Front, and the far-right National Rally. Both opposition blocs, typically at odds, are uniting against Barnier, accusing him of imposing austerity measures and failing to address citizens’ needs.

Speaking at the National Assembly ahead of the vote, National Rally leader Marine Le Pen, whose party’s goodwill was crucial to keeping Barnier in power, said “we’ve reached the moment of truth, a parliamentary moment unseen since 1962.”

“Stop pretending the lights will go out,” hard-left lawmaker Eric Coquerel said, noting the possibility of an emergency law to levy taxes from Jan. 1, based on this year’s rules. “The special law will prevent a shutdown. It will allow us to get through the end of the year by delaying the budget by a few weeks.”

Macron must appoint a new prime minister, but the fragmented parliament remains unchanged. No new legislative elections can be held until at least July, creating a potential stalemate for policymakers.

Macron said discussions about him potentially resigning were “make-believe politics” during a trip to Saudi Arabia earlier this week, according to French media reports.

“I’m here because I’ve been elected twice by the French people,” Macron said. He was also reported as saying: “We must not scare people with such things. We have a strong economy.”

While France is not at risk of a U.S.-style government shutdown, political instability could spook financial markets.

France is under pressure from the European Union to reduce its colossal debt. The country’s deficit is estimated to reach 6% of gross domestic product this year and analysts say it could rise to 7% next year without drastic adjustments. The political instability could push up French interest rates, digging the debt even further.

Big doings in France!

Tony

 (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson)

Dear Commons Community,

Fifty-thousand multi-colored lights were illuminated on Rockefeller Center’s iconic Christmas tree last night to cheers from the crowds gathered to witness the annual New York City tradition (see video below).

The giant Norway spruce, which this year hails from a tiny Massachusetts town, is also topped with a Swarovski star crown featuring 3 million crystals.

The 74-foot-high (23-meter-high) tree was cut down last month in West Stockbridge and trucked to Rockefeller Plaza. Wednesday night’s ceremony marked the culmination of the tree’s long journey to New York, which began in 2020 when the center’s head gardener spotted the tree and asked its owners if they’d consider donating it.

The famous holiday attraction, located above the Rockefeller Center ice skating rink, will be on view through mid-January. On Christmas Day, the tree will be lit for 24 hours.

Once the holiday season is over, the tree will be used for lumber for Habitat for Humanity.

Christmas has arrived in New York City!

Tony