Porti & ambiente — le notizie raccolte

Ascolta la versione audio dell'articolo Tra il 17 e il 20 luglio 2026, i programmatori di OpenAI, l’azienda della Silicon Valley che ha creato ChatGPT, uno dei modelli di Intelligenza artificiale più diffusi del mondo, hanno iniziato a riscontrare una sequenza di anomalie inquietanti nelle procedure dei loro software di apprendimento. Non più tardi di alcune settimane prima, OpenAI aveva avviato un esperimento per testare tutti i suoi software. L’obiettivo veniva considerato virtualmente impossibile da raggiungere e consisteva nell’accedere a risorse esterne per aumentare la capacità di automiglioramento dei programmi. Ma l’aspetto più importante è che si trattava di un test destinato – almeno in via teorica – al fallimento, dal momento che l’ambiente in cui si muovevano questi software era una cosiddetta «sandbox», ossia l’equivalente virtuale di un ambiente chiuso e sorvegliato a vista da cancelli di sicurezza. L’esperimento si rivelò invece sorprendente per i tecnici di OpenAI, i quali scoprirono che 800 dei 1200 software coinvolti, quelli che in gergo tecnico si chiamano «agenti», avevano ideato una cospirazione per uscire dal perimetro di sicurezza, attaccare una piattaforma esterna e rubare i dati custoditi al suo interno. È come se le Intelligenze artificiali si fossero messe d’accordo in segreto per evadere, attaccare un avversario e mettere a segno una rapina ai danni di un concorrente. Chiedilo al Sole Le domande sono suggerite automaticamente da 24Ore AI sulla base del contenuto visualizzato. Domande di approfondimento generate da 24Ore AI In questa nuova puntata di “Nome in Codice”, Claudio Antonelli e Antonio Talia intervistano esperti del settore per indagare i pericoli connessi allo sviluppo e alla tutela dell’AI. Sul fronte della Difesa, delle fake news e della competizione attorno alle materie prime. Tra gli ospiti vi sono Jang Yeongkyun, ricercatore del Korea Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute, Alessandro Aresu, consigliere scientifico di Limes, e Armando Caltabiano, imprenditore specializzato in business development e tecnologie emergenti e ceo di Truesense. Loading... Le possibili conseguenze scatenate da Intelligenze artificiali che operino secondo una loro «volontà autonoma» è un tema filosofico ampiamente dibattuto tra le Big Tech della Silicon Valley e non solo; ma esistono anche aspetti ben più cruciali che toccano l’ambito della strategia geopolitica. In questo caso un ruolo di primo piano lo gioca la competizione tra Stati Uniti e Cina. L’approccio che i due Paesi hanno nello sviluppo di IA mette in luce due opposte visioni del mondo. Gli Stati Uniti stanno realizzando un sistema basato sui modelli proprietari: ci sono dei colossi del Tech, che sviluppano i loro modelli, diventano dei campioni globali, con l’aiuto più o meno diretto dello Stato, e si affermano in tutto il mondo. Va da sé che il tema non si estingue ai soli algoritmi. Per sviluppare i modelli occorrono risorse in quantità enormi, prima fra tutte l’approvvigionamento energetico, a cui fanno seguito microchip e grandi spazi dove allestire i data center. La Cina, di contro, sta lanciando qualcosa di completamente diverso: il 17 luglio scorso, durante la prima conferenza mondiale sull’Intelligenza artificiale di Shanghai (e proprio nel momento in cui i ricercatori di Open AI avevano iniziato a riscontrare problemi legati alle procedure dei loro software di apprendimento), il presidente cinese Xi Jinping ha pronunciato un vero e proprio manifesto politico; ha paragonato l’avvento dell’AI all’invenzione della macchina a vapore e alla diffusione dell’energia elettrica e poi ha detto: «Dobbiamo stabilire un’estesa collaborazione internazionale e sostenere i Paesi del Sud Globale, fornendo loro la capacità per accorciare le distanze sul fronte digitale, promuovere lo sviluppo sostenibile, ed evitare che si produca una nuova ingiustizia storica anche nel campo dell’intelligenza artificiale». Ascolta la puntata

The Chinese company is offering eight voyages on its China Arctic Express service connecting Asia and Europe September 9, 2026 The container shipDubai Towerhas arrived in theUKfollowing a voyage from Ningbo,Chinavia the Northern Sea Route in the Russian Arctic. The 1,740 teuDubai Toweris calling at the QEII berth in Teesport in the Northeast of England according to AIS tracking data from Pole Star Global. The Liberian-registeredDubai Toweris the first of eight weekly voyages that Sea Legend is offering during the summer ice season in the Arctic on its China Arctic Express Service. The container ship departed Ningbo in China on 15 August and was expected to arrive in Felixstowe, UK on 5 September. Teesport was not originally listed by Sea Legend as port of call and the QEII berth is designed to handle bulk and project cargoes rather than containers. Sailing to UK and Europe via the NSR roughly halves the voyage time between Asia and Europe via the Cape of Good Hope which takes around 40 – 50 days, but is only possible during a limited period when the Arctic ice melts in the summer months. Related:CULines launches new China-Indonesia service Two other Chinese carriers New New Shipping and OVP Shipping are offering Asia – Europe services via the Arctic along with container shipping newcomer PanStar from South Korea. PanStar’s trial Arctic voyage on thePanStar Arcois currently heading south off the coast of Norway based on its AIS signal. According to analyst Alphaliner the 2,758 teu vessel has 737 teu of laden containers onboard. According to the Centre for High North Logistics 2025 saw 103 transit voyages of the NSR by 88 vessels between 30 June and 30 November. These included 15 container ship voyages with eight eastbound and seven westbound. Tankers completed the largest number of passages of the Arctic route with 34 voyages last year. Read more about: Marcus Hand Editor Marcus Hand is the editor of Seatrade Maritime News and a dedicated maritime journalist with over two decades of experience covering the shipping industry in Asia. Marcus is also an experienced industry commentator and has chaired many conferences and round tables. Before joining Seatrade at the beginning of 2010, Marcus worked for the shipping industry journal Lloyd's List for a decade and before that the Singapore Business Times covering shipping and aviation. In November 2022, Marcus was announced as a member of the Board of Advisors to the Singapore Journal of Maritime Talent and Technology (SJMTT) to help bring together thought leadership around the key areas of talent and technology. Marcus is the founder of theSeatrade Maritime Podcastthat delivers commentary, opinions and conversations on shipping's most important topics. Marcus Hand regularly moderates at international maritime events. Below you’ll find a list of selected past conferences and webinars. Wind-Assisted Propulsion: Are we ready? at Seatrade Maritime Crew Connect Global 2024 IMPA 2024 SingaporeMaritime Procurement and Sustainability Panel, November 2024 Goodbye Globalization? Red Sea Impacts Reviewed,EGN Singapore (Executives' Global Network)webinar, February 2024 Offshore Marine Breakfast Forum atSea Asia 2023 Sustainable Finance, Shipping & Technology at Hong Kong Maritime Week 2022 Building & Operating Dual-Fuel Vessels, February 2022 Shipping’s Decarbonisation Challenge – The Role of Technology and Digitalisation at Hong Kong Maritime Week 2021 The Challenge Faced by Ship Registries in a Digital and Post-Pandemic Era, October 2020 The Future of Transhipment Hubs Post-Pandemic, November 2020 Offshore Marine Breakfast Forum at Sea Asia 2019 Marcus Hand regularly guests on mainstream media talking about maritime and shipping news stories. Below you'll find a list of selected appearances KBS World Radio -Korea24,May 2026 BBC News -Hindi Service,April 2026 RNZ -First Up, April 2026 Subscribe and get the latest industry news, analysis and more straight to your inbox.

Friday sawThe Loadstarbreak the news that the South Korean consumer electronics giant Samsung is pursuing CMA CGM inthe largest claim ever put before US maritime regulator, the FMC: $186m. Unusually for carriers when it comes to FMC stories, the French carrier was proactive, responding toThe Loadstar’soriginal story with a comment – unsurprisingly, a brief statement that gave little away. “CMA CGM has taken note of the complaint filed by Samsung Electronics America (SEA). This commercial dispute concerns transactions carried out under the exceptional circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic,” its spokesperson toldThe Loadstar. “Believing that it acted in accordance with its contractual obligations and applicable regulations and as these proceedings are ongoing, the group will not make any further comments.” The contents of Samsung’s allegations are fairly boiler plate by now: a carrier tacked on a series of what the claimant alleges were “erroneous” detention and demurrage charges, with an inference that they capitalised on the chaos of the pandemic to rake in vast profits. But that CMA felt the need to respond, speaks to something, with sources active in litigation pointing to the size of the claim – surpassing Bed, Bath & Beyond administrator Butterfly One’s $161m levelled against OOCL last year – as a possible provocation. “It is a phenomenal sum of money, so I would think there is a mentality going on of ‘we are going to defend this because we don’t want everybody coming after us for tens of millions of dollars, so we’re putting people on notice’,” one source toldThe Loadstar. Asked if it was otherwise unusual to hear from a respondent before the outcome of an FMC claim the source said: “Being someone who litigates and deals with attorneys every day, you are taught to stay quiet.” However, they did acknowledge that there could be some exceptions, the most likely being that responding, or providing any sort of comment, afforded the respondent the “upper hand”, but added that “this could just be me”. More generally,The Loadstarhas at times struggled to gain comment from shipping lines on stories, although editor Gavin van Marle said of CMA CGM: “It is not that bad as far as liner shipping companies go – it can be very proactive addressing negative stories.” But with this whopping FMC claim looming over it, and a realistic chance of being made to cough up –Butterfly One ultimately landed a record $45m from OOCL– it may be that carriers are looking to shut up shop on further actions against pandemic-era practices. Sources have toldThe Loadstarrepeatedly that smaller shippers had to make a calculation when it comes to the FMC – the cost of bringing a claim often more expensive than anything they are likely to get back. And with the statute of limitations for claims through the regulator capped at three years, there have also been suggestions that more aggressive posturing by carriers on how they intend to defend themselves will put shippers off until it is too late. With much of the dodgy D&D behaviour that so enraged the shipping community having occurred between 2020 and 2022, one question is whether or not the regulator will adjust claims to reflect acts that occurred that far back, or whether the chain is broken. For shippers that feel they were exploited, one ray of hope: despite initial expectations that the Trump administration would bow to corporate interests, that seems to only happen where those interests are waving an American flag.