Long-time Slashdot reader xetdog shared this report from IEEE Spectrum: High in the Andes mountains where the borders of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile intersect, white expanses of salt stretch for thousands of kilometers. Under these flats lie reservoirs of brine that contain upwards of 58% of the world's lithium. For decades, producers have extracted that lithium by pumping the water up to the surface and letting it evaporate until the lithium salts become concentrated enough to filter out. The process takes 12 to 18 months, leaving behind piles of waste containing other metals. It also evaporates nearly 2 million liters of local water resources, harming indigenous communities.

To keep up, many companies are now developing processes to chemically or physically filter out lithium from brines and inject the brine back underground. These direct lithium extraction (DLE) technologies take hours instead of months and could double the production of lithium from existing brine operations. Much as shale extraction did for oil, DLE is a "potential game-changing technology for lithium supply," because it could unlock new sources of lithium, according to a recent report by Goldman Sachs. But in contrast to shale's fracking risks, DLE brings environmental benefits, reducing land and water use, and waste...

In China, a handful of commercial projects already use Chinese DLE innovator Sunresin's technology.
More than 12 startups are pursuing new DLE processes, according to the article, "with the intent of commercial production as early as 2025."

And America's Department of Energy is also investing millions of dollars in new DLE tech "to extract lithium from geothermal brines in the U.S., such as the Salton Sea in California, which the National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates could provide over 24,000 metric tons of lithium a year."

Inc. reports that funding for Web3 startups in 2023 "declined 73% from 2022, according to new data from Crunchbase." In total, Web3 startups netted $7.8 billion in 2023, compared with the $21.5 billion raised in 2022. It's part of a broader and sobering comedown from the stratospheric highs of tech's pandemic boom time, in which investment flowed to startups at historic rates, valuations soared and unicorns emerged seemingly every week. Last year firmly belonged to AI, with $17.8 billion invested in the sector, according to Dealroom.

Even as some remain convinced of Web3's future, uncertainty lingers over certain stumbling blocks, including how the technology can be farmed out to a massive user base on par with today's biggest tech firms. "I haven't seen [a company] that screams to me, 'this is what's going to get people on board,'" says Jillian Grennan, a business and law professor at UC Berkeley who studies Web3. Web3 startups are failing to net the investment indicative of revolutionary tech as AI steals the show and the dough. The reasons vary: Many have pointed out that defining Web3 is tricky, and Grennan mentions that appetites for navigating digital worlds may have been dented by pandemic-born Zoom fatigue.

Beyond that, there's the question of how to regulate crypto — a marquee aspect of the Web3 universe--which may have given investors some pause. "In this next period, we're going to get some important regulatory clarity that we just haven't had," Richard Dulude, co-founder and partner at Underscore VC tells Inc. "A lot of people sit on the sidelines until they have that...."

Interest rate hikes and the bloated startup valuations of 2021 have meant VCs can't throw their weight behind exciting ideas alone, Dulude says. The sector is undergoing "this transition from chasing growth, and trying to grow at all costs to actually investing behind the growth," he says.... All the investment couldn't compensate for one vulnerability: The technology is hard to use... Macroeconomic factors are of course important, but an industry resurgence depends first on whether Web3 can become easier to navigate for average people and provide them with a reason to hang around. "It's still pretty cumbersome to interact with the technology," Dulude explains. "Until it's made usable, it's really hard to break out of the current market environment we're in."

Long-time Slashdot reader theodp writes: In the January 2024 Communications of the ACM, Rice University professor and former CACM Editor-in-Chief Moshe Y. Vardi minces no words in Computing, You Have Blood on Your Hands!. He argues that the unintended consequences of the rise of social media and mobile computing include hate mongering on a global scale and a worldwide youth mental health crisis.

"How did the technology that we considered 'cool' just a decade ago become an assault weapon used to hurt, traumatize, and even kill vulnerable people?" Vardi asks. "Looking back at my past columns, one can see the forewarnings. Our obsession with efficiency came at the expense of resilience. In the name of efficiency, we aimed at eliminating all friction. In the name of efficiency, it became desirable to move fast and break things, and we allowed the technology industry to become dominated by a very small number of mega corporations. It is time for all computing professionals to accept responsibility for computing's current state. To use Star Wars metaphors, we once considered computing as the 'Rebels,' but it turns out that computing is the 'Empire.' Admitting we have a problem is a necessary first step toward addressing the problems computing has created."
Examples cited in the piece include:

• Amnesty International's 2022 accusation that Meta "substantially contributed" to human rights violations of Myanmar's Rohingya people
• Internal Meta documents saying "We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly" in policing harmful content.

So far the ACM's piece has attracted one comment. "Deep thanks for your long-term commitment to ethics and how you articulate clearly its challenges."