one of Austria's most distinguished climate scientists Prof. Kromb-Kolb and the head of the environmental committee of the Austrian Parliament Lukas Hammer www.da-vienna.ac.at/en/Events#Ev... /2

I know quite a few academics working as arbitrators as well.

One of the causes of disagreement might be the definition of practice. Does the odd legal advice and case count? Or the change of functions in and out of practice? Many of my academic friends do some form of practice. Few are prolific in both fields.

If you want to have a good evening, I strongly advise you not to read
- the Ukraine "peace plan"
- the UN Security Council Resolution on Gaza
- the UN Security Council Resolution on Western Sahara.
I instead recommend reading Dr. No by Percival Everett...

Make non-scientific non-sense sound sexy again.

And just in case you were wondering: usually the mediator is a neutral third party. Sometimes the mediator is chosen because he's not neutral, but has particular sway over one of the parties. But the mediator is a third party, not one of the two parties to the dispute.

Source www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11...

That would be great - indeed it would be interesting to see as well what the court does to become more resilient. Beyond changing its software.

3) And even if you try to be good - the fact that it is trained with tons of data stemming from times where a lot of unacceptable prejudice was touted as "facts" means it perpetuates existing biases anyways.

2) trying to consciously influence their dataset, "grooming". By pushing tons of biased information onto data that you know is used for training (or "the internet").

1) consciously programming them to be biased. That is what Musk does with his programs, which apparently are now explaining why he is physically more fit than LeBron James.

Source www.congress.gov/bill/119th-c...