300pc poker game set
NEW YORK — It’s almost that time of year: Spotify is gearing up to release its annual Wrapped, personalized recaps of users' listening habits and year in audio. Spotify has been giving its listeners breakdowns of their data since 2016. And each year, it’s become a bigger production — and internet sensation. Spotify said its 2023 Wrapped was the “biggest ever created,” in terms of audience reach and the kind of data it provided. So, what will 2024 have in store? Here’s a look at what to know ahead of this year’s Spotify Wrapped. What exactly is Spotify Wrapped? It’s the streaming service's annual overview of individual listening trends, as well as trends around the world. Users learn their top artists, songs, genres, albums and podcasts, all wrapped into one interactive presentation. The campaign has become a social media sensation, as people share and compare their Wrapped data with their friends and followers online. Past iterations have provided users with all kinds of breakdowns and facts, including whether they’re among an artist’s top listeners, as well as a personalized playlist of their top 100 songs of that year to save, share and listen to whenever they’re feeling nostalgic. Spotify also creates a series of playlists that reflect national and global listening trends, featuring the top streamed artists and songs. In 2023, Taylor Swift was Spotify's most streamed artist , unseating Bad Bunny who had held the title for three years in a row. Each year has something new in store. In 2019, Wrapped included a summary of users’ streaming trends for the entire decade. Last year, Spotify matched listeners to a Sound Town based on their artist affinities and how it lined up with those in other parts of the world. When is the expected release date? So far, the streaming platform has kept the highly anticipated release date of Wrapped under ... er, wraps. In past years, it’s been released after Thanksgiving, between Nov. 30 and Dec. 6. Each year, rumors tend to swell on social media around when Spotify stops collecting data in order to prepare their Wrapped results, and this year was no exception. Spotify quickly squashed those presumptions , assuring on social media that “Spotify Wrapped doesn’t stop counting on October 31st.” A representative for Spotify did not respond to a request for comment on when the company stops tracking data for Wrapped. Where can I find my Spotify Wrapped? When Wrapped is released, each user's Spotify account will prompt them to view their interactive data roundup. It can be accessed through the Spotify smartphone app, or by logging on to the Spotify website . Wrapped is available to users with and without Premium subscriptions. What else can I learn with my Spotify data? There are a handful of third-party sites that you can connect your Spotify account to that will analyze your Wrapped data. How Bad is Your Spotify is an AI bot that judges your music taste. Receiptify gives you your top songs on a sharable graphic that looks like, yes, a receipt. Instafest gives you your own personal music festival-style lineup based on your top artists. How NPRCore Are You assesses how similar your music taste is to NPR Music's. What if I don’t have Spotify? Other major streaming platforms such as Apple Music and YouTube Music have developed their own versions of Wrapped in recent years. Apple Music’s Replay not only gives its subscribers a year-end digest of their listening habits but monthly summaries as well — a feature that helps differentiate itself from the one-time Spotify recap. That's released at the end of the calendar year. YouTube Music, meanwhile, has a similar end-of-the-year release for its listeners, as well as periodic seasonal releases throughout the year. It released its annual Recap for users earlier this month.A Bull Market Is Here: 2 Brilliant Stocks Down 31% and 12% to Buy Right NowIn the early hours of the morning, a series of intense airstrikes rocked multiple locations in Syria, marking yet another violent escalation in the region. The strikes were carried out by Israeli forces, targeting various military sites across the country. This latest wave of attacks has triggered widespread concern and condemnation from the international community, as it further exacerbates the already volatile situation in the war-torn country.
Xiaomi Unveils Its First SUV Named YU7, Set to Launch Next SummerNoneThe allure of Chinese assets lies in the country's robust economic growth, expanding consumer market, and technological advancements. Despite various challenges, including regulatory scrutiny and geopolitical tensions, Wall Street funds have continued to bet heavily on the long-term potential of Chinese companies.The Miami Dolphins have set themselves up for a potential playoff push. After a 2-6 start and missing Tua Tagovailoa for a few weeks, the Dolphins looked dead in the water. They've flipped the narrative, winning their last two games against the Los Angeles Rams and Las Vegas Raiders . They still have some work to do if they want to reach the postseason, as Miami's currently slated as the No.9 seed in the AFC. The 5-6 Indianapolis Colts and 6-5 Denver Broncos stand in their way of capturing the final playoff spot. The Dolphins could very well sneak into the playoffs if their final seven games go as planned. ESPN's Jeremy Fowler believes that the Dolphins are the team that can make the most noise if they reach the playoffs. The Dolphins have woken up from a 2-6 slumber with back-to-back wins, having scored 111 points since Tua Tagovailoa returned from a concussion four weeks ago. The roster is talented enough to make a run, with playmakers galore on offense and a defense finding its rhythm. The remaining schedule is manageable, too: Houston and Green Bay are tough to beat, but the Jets (who are on the schedule twice), Patriots and Browns have proven to be the opposite. San Francisco in Week 16 seems like a winnable game based on the 49ers' current trajectory. They won't be able to compete with the Buffalo Bills for the AFC East, but the Dolphins look like a team on a mission to reach the playoffs by any means possible.
The China Golden Dragon Index Surges Over 8% with Foreign Funds Bullish on Chinese Assets
Romeu: against Liverpool, it is not just a match – it is a moment in history. And they are ready to seize it with all they have.
Overall, the "Snowy Aircraft Carrier" project at Harbin Engineering University was a true testament to the power of art, creativity, and patriotism. It brought together a diverse group of individuals, united them in a shared vision, and allowed them to express their love for their country in a truly unique and impactful way. As the snow sculpture glistened in the winter sun, it served as a beacon of inspiration and pride, a symbol of the indomitable spirit of the students and faculty members of HEU.
Jerry Jones: Mike McCarthy Extension 'Not Crazy At All'
5 Fast Facts On Turkey's Bayraktar TB3 UCAVNEW YORK, Nov. 22, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of AMMO, Inc. POWW between August 19, 2020 and September 24, 2024, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important November 29, 2024 lead plaintiff deadline. SO WHAT: If you purchased AMMO securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the AMMO class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=29426 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than November 29, 2024 . A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers. DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) AMMO lacked adequate internal controls over financial reporting; (2) there was a substantial likelihood AMMO failed to accurately disclose all executive officers, members of management, and potential related party transactions in fiscal years 2020 through 2023; (3) there was a substantial likelihood AMMO failed to properly characterize certain fees paid for investor relations and legal services as reductions of proceeds from capital raises rather than period expenses in fiscal years 2021 and 2022; (4) there was a substantial likelihood AMMO failed to appropriately value unrestricted stock awards to officers, directors, employees and others in fiscal years 2020 through 2022; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements about AMMO's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. To join the AMMO class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=29426 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm , on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/ . Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contact Information: Laurence Rosen, Esq. Phillip Kim, Esq. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 686-1060 Toll Free: (866) 767-3653 Fax: (212) 202-3827 case@rosenlegal.com www.rosenlegal.com © 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — Google, already facing a possible breakup of the company over its ubiquitous search engine , is fighting to beat back another attack by the U.S. Department of Justice alleging monopolistic conduct, this time over technology that puts online advertising in front of consumers. The Justice Department and Google made closing arguments Monday in a trial alleging Google's advertising technology constitutes an illegal monopoly. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, will decide the case and is expected to issue a written ruling by the end of the year. If Brinkema finds Google has engaged in illegal, monopolistic conduct, she will then hold further hearings to explore what remedies should be imposed. The Justice Department, along with a coalition of states, has already said it believes Google should be forced to sell off parts of its ad tech business, which generates tens of billions of dollars annually for the Mountain View, California-based company. After roughly a month of trial testimony earlier this year, the arguments in the case remain the same. During three hours of arguments Monday, Brinkema, who sometimes tips her hand during legal arguments, did little to indicate how she might rule. She did, though, question the applicability of a key antitrust case Google cites in its defense. The Justice Department contends Google built and maintained a monopoly in “open-web display advertising,” essentially the rectangular ads that appear on the top and right-hand side of the page when one browses websites. Google dominates all facets of the market. A technology called DoubleClick is used pervasively by news sites and other online publishers, while Google Ads maintains a cache of advertisers large and small looking to place their ads on the right webpage in front of the right consumer. In between is another Google product, AdExchange, that conducts nearly instantaneous auctions matching advertisers to publishers. In court papers, Justice Department lawyers say Google “is more concerned with acquiring and preserving its trifecta of monopolies than serving its own publisher and advertiser customers or winning on the merits.” As a result, content providers and news organizations have never been able to generate the online revenue they should due to Google’s excessive fees for brokering transactions between advertisers and publishers, the government says. Google argues the government's case improperly focuses on a narrow niche of online advertising. If one looks more broadly at online advertising to include social media, streaming TV services, and app-based advertising, Google says it controls as little as 10% of the market, a share that is dwindling as it faces increased and evolving competition. Google alleges in court papers that the government’s lawsuit “boil(s) down to the persistent complaints of a handful of Google’s rivals and several mammoth publishers.” Google also says it has invested billions in technology that facilitates the efficient match of advertisers to interested consumers and it should not be forced to share its technology and success with competitors. “Requiring a company to do further engineering work to make its technology and customers accessible by all of its competitors on their preferred terms has never been compelled by U.S. antitrust law,” the company wrote. Brinkema, during Monday's arguments, also sought clarity on Google’s market share, a number the two sides dispute, depending on how broadly the market is defined. Historically, courts have been unwilling to declare an illegal monopoly in markets in which a company holds less than a 70% market share. Google says that when online display advertising is viewed as a whole, it holds only a 10% market share, and dwindling. The Justice Department contends, though, that when focusing on open-web display advertising, Google controls 91% of the market for publisher ad servers and 87% of the market for advertiser ad networks. Google says that the “open web display advertising” market is gerrymandered by the Justice Department to make Google look bad, and that nobody in the industry looks at that category of ads without considering the ability of advertisers to switch to other forms of advertising, like in mobile apps. The Justice Department also contends that the public is harmed by the excessive rates Google charges to facilitate ad purchases, saying the company takes 36 cents on the dollar when it facilitates the transaction end to end. Google says its “take rate” has dropped to 31% and continues to decrease, and it says that rate is lower than that of its competitors. “When you have an integrated system, one of the benefits is lower prices," Google lawyer Karen Dunn said Monday. The Virginia case is separate from an ongoing lawsuit brought against Google in the District of Columbia over its namesake search engine. In that case, the judge determined it constitutes an illegal monopoly but has not decided what remedy to impose. The Justice Department said last week it will seek to force Google to sell its Chrome web browser , among a host of other penalties. Google has said the department's request is overkill and unhinged from legitimate regulation. In Monday's arguments, Justice Department lawyer Aaron Teitelbaum cited the search engine case when he highlighted an email from a Google executive, David Rosenblatt, who said in a 2009 email that Google’s goal was to “do to display what Google did to search," which Teitelbaum said showed the company's intent to achieve market dominance. “Google did not achieve its trifecta of monopolies by accident,” Teitelbaum said.
By Steve Holland and Nandita Bose WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's transition team has signed a memorandum of understanding with the White House that will allow Trump to formally begin his transition to power, his incoming chief of staff said on Tuesday, after weeks of delays. The move will allow Trump's team to coordinate directly with federal agencies and access documents. The unusual delay in signing the agreement after the Nov. 5 election had raised concerns among some critics about potential hiccups in government operations or conflicts of interest. "This engagement allows our intended Cabinet nominees to begin critical preparations, including the deployment of landing teams to every department and agency, and complete the orderly transition of power," Susie Wiles, Trump's chief of staff, said in a statement. Trump, a Republican, will take office on Jan. 20. His team had rejected entreaties from Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to quickly sign a memorandum of understanding and had objected to some elements of a traditional transition agreement, according to the White House. Under the agreement signed on Tuesday, Trump's team avoided signing a government ethics pledge, saying it has its own ethics plan that will "meet the requirements for personnel to seamlessly move into the Trump administration." The separate ethics pledge was later posted to the General Services Administration's website. It included promises that transition team members will avoid conflicts of interests, will safeguard classified information and will disqualify themselves from involvement in any matter if they have engaged in lobbying on the issue in the previous 12 months. However, it did not include a pledge that Trump would avoid conflicts of interest or that he hold only "non-conflicting assets," promises in the more standard agreement signed by Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate. Trump has a stake valued at $3.76 billion in Trump Media & Technology Group, which runs his Truth Social platform, as well as stakes in a cryptocurrency business, real estate properties and several foreign deals. The family real estate company, now run largely by Trump's son Eric, owns a portfolio of hotels, golf courses, resorts and New York City office space, retail operations and condominiums. The Trump pledge also did not include a promise to protect whistleblowers on his transition team, a promise in the Harris pledge. SECURITY CLEARANCES Separately, the Trump transition team has not entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Department of Justice to allow the FBI to conduct background checks of nominees, and it has not sent the FBI the names of prospective national security personnel who would have access to classified information. A White House official said while a Justice Department agreement has not been signed, progress has been made toward such an agreement. Circumventing background checks would buck a long-established norm in Washington, but the president has the final authority on whom he nominates and picks to conduct background checks. The transition said on Tuesday it already has existing security and information protections built in, "which means we will not require additional government and bureaucratic oversight." Trump's team also broke from tradition and did not sign an agreement with the General Services Administration that would provide the use of office space. The team said it did not want to waste taxpayer money by using government offices. White House spokesperson Saloni Sharma said the Biden administration did not agree with the Trump team's decision to forgo signing some of the usual agreements but the White House would go ahead with the transition process to avoid more delays. Trump's team said his transition will use private funding instead of government money to pay for transition costs. The team said donors to the transition will be disclosed to the public. (Reporting by Steve Holland, Nandita Bose, Heather Timmons and Eric Beech; Editing by Colleen Jenkins, Deepa Babington and Sonali Paul)No song in the history of pop has had an effect quite like Band Aid’s “Do They Know it’s Christmas?” The 1984 star-studded supergroup charity single raised £8m for famine relief in Ethiopia, becoming the second-biggest selling song of all time in the UK; the Band Aid Charitable Trust, set up in the song’s wake, has since raised £150m for charitable causes. Last week, the 40th anniversary “Ultimate Mix” of the song, an oddly moving but rather strange mash-up of three previous versions, featuring digitally enhanced duets between George Michael and Robbie Williams and three generations of Bono, was released – this time amid a fierce debate over its lyrics, messaging, and reductive portrayal of a primitive, homogenous “Africa”. Ed Sheeran had already made clear his thoughts on the use of his vocals from 2014’s Band Aid 30. “My approval wasn’t sought on this new Band Aid 40 release, and had I had the choice, I would have respectfully declined the use of my vocals,” Sheeran wrote on Instagram stories. “A decade on and my understanding of the narrative associated with this has changed.” This reflects the opinion that has been spreading in the public consciousness for years: that “Do They Know it’s Christmas?” shouldn’t be treated as a helpful little Christmas ditty, or even a well-meaning but of-its-time piece of pop philanthropy. No – with lyrics that claim Africa has no snow, rain or rivers, asks if Christian countries are aware that it’s Christmas and include Bono’s infamous line “well, tonight thank God it’s them instead of you”, the song displays an arrogance and ignorance of its subject. Add the project’s reliance on distressing images of nameless victims of famine to push its narrative, and the theory goes, Band Aid is in fact damaging and patronising, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and upholding colonial tropes. Read Next Why I want Gabriel Fauré played at my funeral Sheeran is by far from the first high-profile figure to speak out. He was responding to a comment from Fuse ODG, the British-Ghanian afrobeats artist who has been an avowed critic of Band Aid. “I recognised the harm that initiatives like it inflict on Africa,” Fuse ODG said. “While they may generate sympathy and donations, they perpetuate damaging stereotypes that stifle Africa’s economic growth, tourism and investment, ultimately costing the continent trillions and destroying its dignity, pride and identity.” Even Ethiopia’s prime minister, Abiy Ahmed, has weighed in, saying last weekend that it’s “frustrating to see our nation’s ancient history, culture and diversity and beauty reduced to doom and gloom”. Ahmed called the original track “admirable” but says “a good cause that has not evolved with the times might end up doing more harm than good”. It’s no shock that Bob Geldof, the song’s co-writer and Band Aid’s belligerent mastermind, gives such thought short shrift: he recently dismissed such concerns as a “wealthy-world argument”, which was more polite than what he called the claims to Times Radio in February: “The greatest load of bollocks ever.” In response to a critical article in The Conversation that pre-dated Sheeran’s comment, Geldof argued: “This little pop song has kept hundreds of thousands if not millions of people alive... ‘Colonial tropes’, my arse.” It is to be expected in our more enlightened times that “Do They Know...” should come under increased scrutiny – although in the context of the era, the song was a genuine, heartfelt expression of support with the best of intentions. The lyrics, written by Geldof and Band Aid partner Midge Ure of Ultravox, were in response to a shocking BBC Six O’Clock News feature by Michael Buerk in October 1984 that exposed the devastating Ethiopian “Biblical famine” to the nation with horrific images of death and starvation. Watching with his partner Paula Yates and their young daughter Fifi, Geldof was so distressed and angry – he later called what he’d witnessed a “monstrous human crime, a moral and intellectual absurdity” – that he sought to do something to help. As a pop star who’d enjoyed chart-topping success with Irish post-punkers The Boomtown Rats, he did what he knew how. And so Geldof, armed with the quickly-penned “Do They Know It’s Christmas?”, hastily called on the great and the good of 80s pop, cajoling 37 of the era’s biggest stars – including George Michael, Sting, Bono, Paul Young, Paul Weller, Duran Duran, Spandau Ballet, and Bananarama – to make history for a noble cause. The recording of the song itself has become a legendary pop tale, shown in a new BBC4 documentary restored from the archives of the Band Aid Trust: The Making of Do They Know It’s Christmas? . Using footage recorded in Notting Hill between 11am and 7pm one Sunday, it reveals a charming but chaotic process as Geldof and Ure try to steer a studio full of good-natured but egotistical pop stars to finish the song in time for Christmas. It was Geldof as a sheer force of nature – with his potent mix of charm, intelligence, wit, arrogance and righteousness – that turned Band Aid into a phenomenon. On the surface its charity-minded altruism seemed to fly in the face of the era’s growing capitalist, me-first attitude (“there’s no such thing as society” as then-prime minister Margaret Thatcher famously put it) – but actually its mix of individual star power, glamour, commercialism and corporate machinery (the single was launched on the front page of the Daily Mirror with the headline “Billion Dollar Band!”) chimed with the prevailing ethos. It worked beyond even Geldof’s imagination, and Band Aid fever swept the nation. Read Next 'We signed for £1m - then got £125 a week': The brutal reality of 90s boybands The success of Band Aid spawned Live Aid, the legendary 1985 multi-venue benefit concert that raised £114m for Ethiopia, as well as the charity single industry. Band Aid itself has been re-recorded three times to reflect modern pop trends: in 1989, Band Aid 2, with Kylie Minogue , Jason Donavan and Wet Wet Wet, was produced by hitmakers Stock, Aitken and Waterman; in 2004, when Band Aid 20, featuring Chris Martin, Robbie Williams, Thom Yorke and Dido, reached number one, there was little argument over the song’s content – the biggest controversy was over who got to sing Bono’s original line. The Darkness’s Justin Hawkins had sung it on the day of recording; the absent Bono flew into the studio at the last minute and pulled rank. But by 2014, the tide of public opinion was beginning to turn. When Band Aid 30 was recorded with a host of new stars such as Sheeran, One Direction and Sam Smith – this time to raise money for the Ebola crisis in Western Africa – criticism of the song was cranking up. Lily Allen refused to take part, calling the project “smug”; Damon Albarn suggested the song had a limited view of charity. Emelie Sande, who sang on the track, apologised for the lyrics, saying she and African superstar Angelique Kidjo had suggested new ones that hadn’t made the cut. Some lyrics were tweaked to be more sensitive: Bono now sang “well tonight we’re reaching out and touching you” instead of the original controversial words. Bono, who according to Geldof had been uncomfortable with the line since 1984, wrote in his 2022 memoir Surrender that Band Aid/Live Aid was disempowering and condescending, and admitted his own complicity in what he called “white saviour syndrome”. But Sheeran’s intervention, more high-profile, timely and direct in its criticism than any famous pop figure previously, has put the focus on the problematic nature of Band Aid like never before. Both Geldof and Ure have reiterated that, in Geldof’s words, “FFS, it’s a pop song” – as if a few rhyming couplets written in haste for a good cause 40 years ago should ever be taken so literally, and held to modern standards. Still, that Band Aid causes outright offence to an increasing number of people is undeniable. Geldof remains a true believer: he recently “put in a call” to Sheeran to convince him he’s wrong, and that the millions of lives saved and then improved through better education and healthcare – work that continues to this day – is Band Aid’s true legacy. Geldof’s gift of the gab and powers of persuasion are legendary – but it seems as though, 40 years on from his greatest achievement, he’s fighting a losing battle to convince people Band Aid hasn’t become a relic. Band Aid Trust: The Making of Do They Know It’s Christmas? is streaming on BBC iPlayer
Warner Music Group (WMG) Q4 2024 Earnings Call Transcript
An international symposium on 'Climate Change and Sustainable Energy: Strategies for Low-Carbon Transition,' organised by the Social and Economic Survey Research Institute (Sesri) at Qatar University (QU) brought together experts, researchers, and policymakers to address pressing climate challenges and explore innovative pathways toward sustainable energy solutions. The event took place against the backdrop of the 29th session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29), held in Baku, Azerbaijan, under the theme 'In Solidarity for a Green World.' The timing underscored the critical need for collaborative efforts to address the far-reaching impacts of climate change. In his opening remarks, Prof Aiman Erbad, vice president of Research and Graduate Studies at QU, emphasised the alignment of the event with Qatar's National Vision (QNV) 2030 and the broader Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) commitment to climate action. He highlighted ongoing initiatives across the region to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, promote economic diversification, and integrate sustainability into national development strategies. “QU has made climate change a top priority, embedding it across research, education, and training initiatives,” he noted. Engineer Abdullah Abdo Mohamed Salih al-Odani emphasised the critical nature of climate change as one of humanity’s most significant challenges. He outlined the Ministry of Municipality’s efforts in promoting eco-friendly urban planning, adopting green technologies, and supporting sustainable agricultural practices, all aligned with QNV 2030. Prof Kaltham al-Ghanim, director of Sesri, underscored the symposium’s role as a platform for meaningful dialogue among experts, researchers, and policymakers. She highlighted the urgency of developing renewable energy strategies to ensure the sustainability of natural resources, safeguard human and environmental health, and create evidence-based policies to address emerging challenges. Prof al-Ghanim also announced that the next symposium will focus on 'Climate Change and the Environment: The Role of Technology in Sustainable Food Security.' Dr Sana Abosen, associate researcher at Sesri, provided an overview of the symposium's objectives and structure. The symposium featured three key sessions addressing critical aspects of climate change and sustainable energy. The first session focused on energy efficiency and the role of behavioral insights in adopting low-carbon technologies. The second session explored national strategies for transitioning to renewable energy and reducing dependence on fossil fuels. The final session highlighted decarbonisation strategies and shared experiences from GCC countries, emphasising collaboration and practical approaches to energy efficiency and carbon reduction. Related Story Climate change awareness video contest for students Shura Council participates in Baku climate conference