climatemind-backend VS solutions

Our goal is to find a task for every developer who wants to contribute. To be able to do so we are trying to use the best open-source practices and developing a contributor guide. To start please follow the contributor guide. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask questions on GitHub discussions page or by email [email protected]. The onboarding process and contributor guide are still in progress so we would like to hear from you any feedback about this.

They definitely should make sure they have warned people. It's still pretty much unknown and low-tier warnings, partly that's due to media failure but it's also due to scientists failing work on * organizing themselves * communicating (not just individually or integrating new scientific knowledge into existing knowledge systems as well as in the media, but also giving the media something to report about similar to climate conferences; see above) * using and developing novel types of work and mechanisms such as living reviews (like continuously updated Wikis) and open letter-like somehow signed papers as a new form of output relevant to the above * putting some more effort into solutions – what can actually be done about such issues in practice and at scale?; many know it's a problem by now, the question is how, in the real world, to address it properly