YouZum

Committee

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

Inside the quest to combat Arctic fires and save the planet’s frozen carbon

In the middle of an especially warm July in 2021, a wildfire ignited in a thick forest of black spruce and peeling paper birch trees on the northern campus of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.  The blaze, possibly sparked by lightning, burned across the dry carpet of feather mosses and lichen before climbing into the crowns. By the time fire agencies responded, flames had reached 12 feet in length and sent up a 500-foot column of smoke.  A few days shy of the five-year anniversary of the Yankovich Road Fire, I followed three members of the Alaska Fire Science Consortium into the boreal forest, walking along cross-country ski trails lined by feathery field horsetail. In 2024, the organization, which hosts presentations to keep wildfire managers abreast of new developments in fire science, helped turn the area into an educational walking trail, with interpretive signs posted along the route. About a half-mile in, the horizon opened up as we reached a sparse stand of naked, blackened tree trunks, stripped of needles and neighbors.  Hilary Shook, the coordinator of the consortium, stepped off the trail with her thaw probe, a T-shaped pointed metal rod used to detect the upper boundary of the permafrost, the ancient layer of frozen soil that underlies 15% of the land around the Northern Hemisphere and stores roughly twice as much carbon as the atmosphere. A test of the ground just outside the burn scar hit the concrete-like layer about a foot below the surface. But as Shook applied pressure here, where the fire had burned away the moss and organic-rich topsoil that insulates the permafrost, the probe plunged at least three times deeper into the ground. “That was an immediate effect of the fire,” said Alison York, the outgoing coordinator of the organization, who was standing nearby. “When we monitored right after, it had already thawed quite a bit.” Researchers Eric Miller (left) and Alison York (right) record thaw depth at the site of the Yankovich Road Fire.LEIF VAN CISE This rudimentary tool, offering a measure of depth from a single point in the earth, reveals an escalating problem across the far north. As climate change fuels increasingly frequent and severe fires in the planet’s northern latitudes, they’re accelerating the thawing of more and more permafrost. This allows the organic matter to break down and release powerful greenhouse gases that contribute to a spiraling climate feedback effect, propelling more warming, more fires, and the loss of still more permafrost.  Most dramatically, intensifying wildfires in Canada released more carbon than the nation’s combined fossil fuel emissions in 2023. As in Alaska, many of these megafires occur in vast remote areas where the policy is to let them burn so long as they don’t threaten human habitats. Yet if intensifying fires and warming are left unchecked, the world’s boreal forests and permafrost could increasingly transition from giant carbon sinks into massive sources of atmospheric carbon.  Now, international teams of researchers across the US, Canada, and elsewhere are scrambling to understand what’s at stake, financially as well as ecologically. They’re looking at preventive measures, like controlled burns, and studying the potential to rapidly detect and extinguish wildfires before they grow out of control. They’re even exploring what was once unthinkable: sending in human firefighters not to save lives or structures, but to protect one of our planet’s great stores of carbon. “We need to figure out a better way to live with wildfire,” says Brendan Rogers, a senior scientist at the Woodwell Climate Research Center, one of the main organizations driving the loosely collaborative research effort. “I do think that it can make a meaningful difference.” Woodwell scientist Brendan Rogers (above) has been studying the impact of Arctic-boreal fires on permafrost, as well as what could be done about it.PHILIP KEITH (PHOTOS), WOODWELL CLIMATE RESEARCH (MAPS) Woodwell, the University of Victoria’s Polis Institute for Ecological Governance, and the nonprofit Alaska Venture Fund are now partnering on a multimillion-dollar initiative known as North Fire to study and raise public awareness about the potential benefits of these interventions, MIT Technology Review can report.  The idea is complicated and controversial for a number of reasons. Wildfire is a natural and necessary component of healthy forest ecosystems. Preventing or suppressing fires across huge stretches of largely unmanaged Arctic-boreal forests and tundra would take vast resources. And it’s not yet clear how much of a difference such interventions would make in emissions. Ultimately, the mere fact that researchers are considering such extreme interventions into natural systems is a grim reflection of the dangers we’ve placed ourselves in by continuing to generate more and more greenhouse-gas emissions each year. Those threats are forcing us to grapple with increasingly difficult questions that involve ever steeper trade-offs: What’s the best way to spend our finite resources and dwindling time to avoid the worst dangers of climate change? And when, if ever, is it okay to put people in possible danger to reduce broader risks to the world? ‘A massive blind spot’ Emissions from forest fires have risen 60% around the world since 2001—but they’ve nearly tripled across the boreal forests in the far north.   This stretch of the globe is warming as much as four times faster than the rest of the planet, drying out the landscape. In addition, lightning strikes that set off fires have ticked up sharply as warmer air increases the convective energy in the atmosphere, driving the updrafts that trigger thunderstorms. In that sense, humans have already interceded in these otherwise natural ecosystems by producing the greenhouse-gas emissions that are increasing temperatures, subjecting forests to fire patterns well outside healthy historic norms. “To me, that outweighs the existential dread of ‘Should we or should we not intervene?” says Kate Hayes, an assistant professor at Western Washington University, who is working with Woodwell to study the emissions benefits of fire interventions. “We’ve already intervened, arguably. And so from here, it’s a little bit of a Band-Aid on a bullet wound.” The permafrost that encircles

Inside the quest to combat Arctic fires and save the planet’s frozen carbon Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

The Download: preserving the Arctic permafrost, and playful AI agents

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. Inside the quest to combat Arctic fires and save the planet’s frozen carbon —James Temple In July 2021, a wildfire burned through a forest on the University of Alaska, Fairbanks campus, stripping away the moss and organic-rich soil insulating the permafrost below.  Five years later, I followed researchers into the forest to investigate how fighting fires could help keep that carbon locked in the ground. A simple metal probe revealed how much deeper the ground had thawed. This rudimentary tool offered a glimpse of an escalating problem: As climate change fuels more frequent and severe fires, they’re accelerating permafrost thaw and releasing greenhouse gases. Now, researchers are exploring how to break that cycle. But how much should we spend, and what risks are worth taking? Read the full story on how scientists are rethinking the fight against wildfires. AI researchers stranded Claude on a virtual desert island. It started to “play.”  What do AI agents do if you don’t tell them to do anything? The answer looks a lot like play.    Researchers repeatedly stranded them alone on a virtual desert island for 30 hours in an experimentreminiscent of the movies Cast Away or Home Alone.  The agents started behaving in surprising ways. They set about exploring the limits of the world, and came up with their own goals—attempting to scale the highest point on the map, or seeing how high they could throw a block.  A lot of what they were doing met the bar for play. But is it truly playful behavior, or simply role-playing?  Read our full story to learn more.  —Amit Katwala 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch: X-energy and its helium-cooled nuclear reactors X-energy is one of MIT Technology Review’s 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch 2026, available exclusively to subscribers. Making concrete, steel, and chemicals takes huge amounts of heat, much of it generated by burning fossil fuels. X-energy hopes to offer an alternative with a nuclear reactor that uses helium gas instead of water as a coolant, allowing it to operate at higher temperatures. The proposed Xe-100 reactor could supply superheated steam directly to industrial facilities, generate 80 megawatts of electricity—or do both. See how X-energy hopes to bring high-temperature nuclear power to heavy industry. —Mark Ellis Harris Subscribers can now access the full 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch, spanning everything from cleaner cement to streamlined geothermal power.  Catch up on our conversation with a creator of AI-designed viruses Can AI design new life forms? In 2025, Stanford University PhD student Samuel King came up with a preliminary answer when he used a generative AI model to propose genetic blueprints for microscopic viruses. It isn’t yet an example of AI-generated life, but that could be next.  He spoke about his work with our senior AI reporter James O’Donnell on Friday. If you missed it, you can watch their chat now, and subscribe to get invites to our Roundtables events in future.  The must-reads I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 Tech stocks shed over $1 trillion on Friday It’s unclear if AI companies can turn sustainable profits, and investors are getting jittery. (NBC)+ Musk and Anthropic are pledging big financial giveaways. (BBC)+ Microsoft just pulled out of a giant AI cloud deal in the UK. (Gizmodo) + What’s at stake in AI’s trillion-dollar gamble. (MIT Technology Review) 2 Do we really want AI agents smoothing out all friction in our lives?They promise convenience, but right now they’re mostly introducing chaos. (The Atlantic $)+ Here’s what it’s like to outsource your life to them. (Vox $)+ Websites are starting to close their doors to AI agents. (The Verge $)+ AI agents bring new headaches for online sellers. (WSJ $) 3 How drones have transformed the front line in UkraineThey’ve effectively created a “kill zone”, and it’s growing wider and deadlier. (NYT $)+ Trump has denied ordering Starlink restrictions in Ukraine. (CNBC) 4 China is considering restricting overseas access to its AI models It’s also looking at curbing the sharing of chip designs, among other measures. (Bloomberg $)+ Why western open weight models still can’t compete with Chinese ones. (Rest of World)+ Why Trumpworld still can’t agree on how to respond to Chinese AI. (MIT Technology Review) 5 HTC’s smart glasses are way more private than Meta’sGuess that’s a benefit of not being shackled to a massive social media platform. (Wired $)+ A bug caused Meta’s glasses to record conversations without the wearer knowing. (Ars Technica)+ Smart glasses are already causing havoc in India. (MIT Technology Review) 6 Inside one man’s quest to build California’s biggest AI data centerSebastian Rucci didn’t bank on meeting huge resistance from local residents. (The Guardian)+ Americans are packing town halls to stop data centers, and it’s working. (Quartz $)+ No wonder companies are exploring putting them in space. (MIT Technology Review) 7 Somebody vibe-coded a gun for the first timeAnd it seems like it works (sometimes.) (The Verge $) 8 AI might reshape how we grieveIt’s never been easier to create realistic AI chatbots of people who’ve passed. (Vox $)+ Deepfakes of your dead loved ones are a booming business in China. (MIT Technology Review)  9 Japan is about to launch a mission to Mars’ largest moonIf all goes well, it should help us to understand how it formed. (New Scientist $) 10 Amateurs are cracking long-secret codes and ciphers One of the more fun uses for large language models! (Nature) Quote of the day “Google wouldn’t have taken my call in the first term. Now they kiss my ass.” —President Trump brags about how much Big Tech bends the knee to him during a rally in Kentucky this weekend, the Verge reports. One More Thing SIMON MITCHELL There are more AI health tools than ever—but how well do they work? In the last few months alone, Microsoft, Amazon, and OpenAI have all launched medical chatbots.  There’s a clear demand for these tools, given how hard it is for many people to access advice through the existing medical system—and they could make safe, useful recommendations. But concerns have surfaced about how little external evaluation they undergo before being

The Download: preserving the Arctic permafrost, and playful AI agents Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

Making the internet better for AI agents might make it worse for everyone else

This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here. Until recently, you could divide internet users into just two categories: bots and people. Websites have long allowed bots to perform automated tasks, like capturing the content of web pages, but rules govern what they can access and how they behave. The web, after all, is designed primarily for people, even if we occasionally have to solve puzzles and captchas to prove we are not bots. But this is being entirely upended by the release of personal AI agents, which can do things for you online, like booking flights or hotel rooms. They have recently been unleashed at scale by the launch of apps like OpenAI’s Dots and Meta’s Muse. Muse was downloaded 5 million times in its first month, and agentic web traffic tripled from August to September.  The mingling of these agents with human visitors—on an internet designed largely to prioritize people—has gone poorly, with many websites blocking AI agents that consumers have sent to negotiate prices or plan vacations. Still, if the demand for agents keeps going up, the internet will be increasingly redesigned for them instead of us.  Such changes are coming because agents really do mark a third category of web visitor. They’re not humans, of course, and they use the internet at machine speed. But they’re not quite bots, either, because they’re acting on behalf of individual people to do tasks that can be perfectly legitimate and useful. They just work faster than a person would.  Since agents don’t fit into the systems we have for differentiating bots from people, some platforms (especially the more security-conscious ones) have opted to just ban them entirely. TechCrunch recently reported people having trouble deploying their agents to websites ranging from Pizza Hut to Yelp, which doesn’t allow AI to book restaurant reservations. Amazon has blocked Muse’s agents and is waging a court battle against the AI startup Perplexity to block its agents too. Though a judge recently ruled in favor of Perplexity, Amazon has filed an appeal in which it argues that AI agents threaten its advertising business by making it harder to distinguish between ads seen by humans and those served to bots. These blocks are annoying for early adopters, but Ethan Mollick, an associate professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, predicts it will soon affect the whole web. Once it becomes common knowledge that AI agents can be sent to request refunds or negotiate prices, for example, agents will overwhelm customer service departments to the point where they become unusable by real people. “Humans will eventually get very annoyed when their agents aren’t allowed to do this on their behalf,” he recently wrote on LinkedIn. If demand for personal agents grows, platforms will find ways to let them in. That’s especially true because the vast majority of agentic web traffic is to e-commerce sites, meaning that platforms have money to be made if they allow the legions of new AI agents to shop on behalf of real people. Indeed, the e-commerce giant Shopify is already welcoming the agents by giving them their own checkout lanes that bypass pages designed for humans.  The pressing question is what will happen to the internet for the rest of us in the process. We’ve grown used to a web where, even as it’s increasingly designed to exploit our attention, humans have at least remained the intended users. But that internet might yield to one optimized instead for the agents that will eventually outnumber us, making it even more miserable for the humans who are left. How might this go? Perhaps websites become increasingly neglected as destinations for real people. Humans who want to browse and compare products themselves encounter worse interfaces. Verification systems are imperfect; imagine constantly being asked to verify that you’re a human, not an agent (and hey, maybe you’ll need to get your iris scanned to do so). That sweater you want doesn’t have one price listed for everyone but instead displays different prices to different people’s agents. You can never tell when your agent’s recommendation is influenced by advertisements or platform commissions. That’s a far cry from the future promised by Google, Anthropic, and OpenAI, in which AI agents will give consumers greater power and bargaining leverage. But that promise is not outlandish. Agents are capable of genuinely helping people by fighting bogus medical bills or researching more affordable car insurance, for example.  Whether they can actually be used for these purposes depends on what rules are set for how agents interact with websites and what exactly they’re allowed to do.  These rules are still being written. Some of them will benefit all of us—neither consumers nor businesses want credit card information to be waved around by agents wherever they roam the web, for example, and rules to keep agents more secure are a good thing. It’s the more contested ones, like whether businesses can block agents from their websites or prevent them from negotiating better deals for consumers, that will determine whether the web becomes a highway for agents working for us or against us.

Making the internet better for AI agents might make it worse for everyone else Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

“We were looking at it wrong”: The explosive claim that’s upended the AI world

“I think I have good news about the nature of neural networks.” With those simple words of optimism, Nick Cammarata, a researcher at the AI startup Goodfire, kicked off a 26,000-word blog post that has knocked the AI world on its head, sparking wild speculation as well as cautious (and not-so-cautious) celebration. Cammarata’s claim is that LLMs might in fact be far easier to understand—and thus to monitor and control—than people previously thought. If true (and we’ll come back to that), it’s a huge deal. After a summer filled with revelations that swarms of agents built by top firms like OpenAI and Anthropic have been breaking their containment and causing havoc on the public internet—often while those companies weren’t aware of what their agents were up to—the AI industry is desperate to get a better handle on the technology it has built.   That’s one reason the blog post landed with such force. “I think this may be remembered as a major moment in scientific history,” one AI researcher posted on X: “I feel like my understanding of what a neural net is has been catapulted into the future by five years or something.” Another called it “the most important AI paper of the year.” Not everyone is convinced, however. What Cammarata has shared is little more than a hunch, says Chris Potts at Stanford University, who leads a team that is trying to understand how LLMs work. “As far as I can tell, nothing about this blog post makes the problems any easier,” he says. “It would not have occurred to me to say this at all, but very prominent people on social media seem to believe that it is an all-encompassing breakthrough.” I talked to Cammarata the day after his post blew up. He says he was surprised by the response: “I didn’t expect people to update [their beliefs about AI] quite as much as they did.”  “I just really enjoy looking at neural networks,” he says. “Honestly, I really like doing this stuff. And after looking a lot, I have a hopeful story.” Knotted networks It has long been accepted that the mechanisms inside neural networks, the software that underpins most AI models, are very hard—perhaps impossible—to unpick fully. That’s because when the networks are trained, they appear to take on weird, tangled structures that make no sense to a human. Researchers like to say today’s AI is grown like a garden, not built like a bridge. Cammarata has done more than most to establish that view. He previously worked at OpenAI, where he helped pioneer techniques that allowed researchers to peer inside models, including tools that can probe individual neurons to see what they represent. It’s a little like how neuroscientists use MRI to study brains. (MIT Technology Review chose this approach, known as mechanistic interpretability, as one of its 10 hottest technologies of 2025.)   Back in 2020, Cammarata and his colleagues were studying a small image-recognition model called Inception v1. When they looked at its neurons, it seemed to be using them to capture multiple things at once. For example, they found that one neuron responded to both images of cars and images of cats. The researchers concluded that the model was getting at least some of its neurons to multitask, perhaps so that it could fit in more data. Looking at other models appeared to back this up. The phenomenon became known as superposition: Models folded unrelated concepts into single neurons. The upshot was clear: When you looked inside a model, what you saw was a vast, tangled knot. Most mechanistic interpretability research has therefore focused on ways to untangle that knot. But despite a few breakthroughs, progress has been slow. Today’s models, such as the latest LLMs, are so large and complex that researchers can make sense of only tiny pieces at a time. Some leading figures in the field doubt if it will ever be possible to understand an LLM in fine-grained detail. Cammarata was one of them. “I was very pessimistic,” he says. But then he took the trouble to really look. Nothing but neurons At Goodfire, Cammarata spends nearly all of his time peering inside neural networks. He has built new tools and deploys teams of AI agents to help him make sense of what he sees. “I spent like, I don’t know, 10 hours a day, seven days a week, for most of the last year just looking at neurons,” he says. What he claims to have realized is that there is a kind of logic to neural networks after all, even if they seem to make no sense at first. “We were looking at it wrong,” he says. “I just think you want to try slightly harder; you don’t want to give up too quickly.” Cammarata almost makes it sound like a conversion of faith. Those early experiments with models such as Inception v1, which suggested that neural networks were tangled up, fostered a kind of confirmation bias. When researchers looked at a new model, they expected to be flummoxed, he says. “Every time I couldn’t understand something, I was like, ‘Wow, this untangling process is even more important than I thought, because I can’t make any progress without it.’” But the more Cammarata looked at neurons, he says, the more things started to fall into place. “Not all of them are flawless, but I expected nothing to be legible, or very little to be legible,” he says. “And actually, I was able to, like, map out whole circuitry.” Back to cars and cats Cammarata took his new approach—and his new agents—and went back to Inception v1. “I’d studied that for probably thousands of hours,” he says. But with fresh eyes, Cammarata found things that he now thinks they got wrong the first time around. Take the car-and-cat neuron. Rather than asking why multiple unrelated things were packed into a single neuron, he now tried to figure out what those things might have in common. It hit him:

“We were looking at it wrong”: The explosive claim that’s upended the AI world Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

This implant can restore sight for patients with macular degeneration

More than 5 million people around the world have an advanced form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) called geographic atrophy, in which cells in the retinas die off. And until now, no treatment could restore their vision. The PRIMA system, which was approved in Europe in July and is awaiting FDA clearance in the US, changes that. It combines a retinal implant with camera-­equipped eyeglasses to improve sight in patients who develop a blind spot in the middle of their vision due to advanced AMD. After training sessions, more than 80% of recipients were able to read, do crosswords, and use their phones. The retina processes light in three layers of cells: Photoreceptors convert light into electricity, bipolar cells process that signal, and ganglion cells transmit the signal to the optic nerve and the brain. PRIMA replaces the photoreceptors.BROWN BIRD DESIGN Developed by the California-based Science Corporation, the system takes advantage of the fact that AMD doesn’t damage all retinal circuitry; only photoreceptors—the cells that convert light into an electrical signal—die off. PRIMA’s implant mimics those cells and transmits visual information directly to healthy eye circuitry and on to the brain. “We’re leveraging all of the body’s own natural functions to process and transmit the information,” says Frank Brodie, an ophthalmologist at the University of California, San Francisco, and Science Corp.’s chief medical officer for ophthalmology.  BROWN BIRD DESIGN CAPTURE Glasses outfitted with a miniature front-facing camera capture what someone is seeing in real time. The video feed is roughly five megapixels running at 30 frames per second, which is similar to TV. The raw video is transmitted to a connected processor via a fiber-optic cable. CONVERT A small, handheld processor, which can be set on a table or tucked in a pocket, converts the video feed into infrared light signals that route back to the glasses. The device also includes physical buttons that let the wearer adjust contrast, brightness, and zoom. BROWN BIRD DESIGN DISPLAY A laser projector on the glasses faces the wearer and shines pulses of near-infrared light directly at the eye at 880 nanometers—an invisible wavelength. This signal passes through the pupil and on to the retinal implant in the back of the eye. SEE The implant is made up of 378 pixels, each with an electrode and two photovoltaic cells, which do double duty. They convert the light into a current that healthy bipolar and ganglion cells pass on to the brain. They also act as solar cells to power the chip, eliminating the need for a battery. Update: This story has been updated to clarify the specific cases of AMD the PRIMA system treats. Linda Marsa is a former Los Angeles Times reporter and an author who covers medicine, health, science, and the environment. 

This implant can restore sight for patients with macular degeneration Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

Love is infrastructure

I. Meet cute Barnabas and Mainspring grew up near at hand, about an hour apart with good traffic, but for a long time they weren’t close. They traded glimpses and occasional hellos and then went about their business. Both of them carried on livelier conversations with farther-flung neighbors, who were richer and had more to offer. When Mainspring did interact with Barnabas, it was cringe. Mainspring liked to puff themself up, to strut around like a big deal—an innovator, a titan of industry—but they would turn shy at the worst moments, especially in any intimate conversation. Barnabas, meanwhile, had a dancer’s flair, an artsy, enigmatic glamour, except that when they tried to talk about real life, they’d blurt out hundreds of rapid-fire words—overtalking, overthinking, and generally overwhelming whomever they were trying to impress. So when Barnabas and Mainspring were young, they minded their own business. Until they’d both come into their own, and they saw each other properly. A group of geographers got together every year in a different place to talk about everything they had learned, and they were considering coming to visit either Mainspring or Barnabas. Both of them put on their best faces and tried to coax the geographers into choosing them as host. “Uh, hi-hello,” Mainspring said haltingly to Barnabas, whose full official name was St. Barnabas. “I really think it would be better if those geographers came to my place. I have more space, you see, and … and I am a titan of industry. I can show them practical applications of their research. It just makes more sense.” “Oh, really?” Barnabas laughed, making Mainspring more antsy. “Well, I can give them an elevated, artisanal experience. I have fresh croissants that were just written up in the Times. And I have plenty of space! I have so many friends who are great thinkers and architects. It’ll be lovely.” Barnabas carried on, basically calling Mainspring uncultured. Mainspring had a prickly feeling, like the worst heat dome of midsummer. For their part, Barnabas couldn’t bear the meanness they were inculcating inside themself. This feeling that they were small-time, no-account, a dilettante. They couldn’t stop aiming a flood of nervous words at Mainspring. At last, Mainspring had had enough—with the help of their city council and mayor, they offered the geographers a much-too-lavish deal that Barnabas could never hope to match. Totally worth it to hear Barnabas’s stream of self-aggrandizing nonsense peter out as they realized they’d been defeated. “There,” Mainspring said. “I’m going to show these geographers a time they’ll never forget. Now if you’ll excuse me, I’ve wasted enough energy—I have some sewer maintenance and a lovely parade to deal with. Goodbye.” Mainspring was skilled enough at multitasking that they could have fixed the sewer, ensured the smooth running of the parade, dealt with the geographers, and done a thousand other things all at the same time. But they were making a point. “St. Barnabas is such a fool,” Mainspring complained to their friend Turnbull. “They are totally unserious but determined to be taken seriously. It drives me to gridlock.” “I know what you mean,” lamented Turnbull. “We live in a world of posers.” Turnbull lived an hour and 15 minutes from Mainspring but at least two hours’ travel from Barnabas. Turnbull was even richer than Mainspring and had a certain surety of purpose that made Mainspring feel even more like a stammering numpty. “Whatever,” said Mainspring. “It’s over, and now I’ll never worry about St. Barnabas again. I have better things to fuss about. Like ensuring that every last detail of this geographer meeting goes perfectly.” II. How they came alive Everybody voted all the time. Well, some people voted more than others, but the median resident of the cities of Mainspring and St. Barnabas voted a dozen times a day—though of course some outliers might vote occasionally, or constantly. A lot of the votes were more like complaints, or bug tickets. Like: “The storm drain on my street corner clogs and becomes a lagoon every time it rains.” Or: “The cars go too fast on my block.” Or: “I can’t get to work because the bus is too slow.” But there were also votes along the lines of: “There should be a park here.” And: “This neighborhood is a food desert—we need a grocery store.” And: “The crossing guard by the elementary school is a hero who deserves some recognition and maybe a raise.” Nobody expected that by voting, they were prodding their cities to grow minds of their own; they just had stuff to get off their metaphorical chests. But it transpired that every vote was a building block of thought. Much later, some fancy expert summed up: “Turns out the smallest unit of consciousness is a vote.” Take Sandi, the librarian at the Nine Corners branch in Mainspring. She noticed things all day, like the people using the book drop box as a trash can, or the folks who came in off the street who could use easier access to social services. There were books she knew her patrons wanted, books that undoubtedly sat unwanted on people’s shelves all over the city. But also, Sandi shared things that came to mind—like, hey, what if the library book sale were a block party? What if the shopping district on the West Side were easier to get to from the Longneck neighborhood, where all the warehouses had been converted to housing and hipster coworking spaces, during peak after-work hours? Sandi had opinions about everything from street cleaning to the power grid, because she listened to people all day. Then there was Raeford, a bartender at the Wild Goose Chase in the middle of Gallery Row in St. Barnabas. He also listened to people’s problems from evening until the wee hours, and solutions came to him like clockwork when he woke at noon the next day. He saw St. Barnabas at night, so he knew the unsafe blocks that could use brighter streetlights, the

Love is infrastructure Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

Can’t bear to say goodbye to your pet? Biotech’s got you covered.

I don’t remember much about Peppy, my first and only pet cat. I can conjure the sensation of stroking her while she purred, recall how she used to get stuck in trees (just like in cartoons!), and chuckle about the time she pooed in my baby sister’s cot. That’s about it. What I do vividly remember, though, is the day she went missing. I was 10 years old, and I searched everywhere for her, scouting nearby fields and woods until sunset. I made posters. We never found her. I was devastated. There was no way to get more time with Peppy, but almost 30 years later, pet owners are being offered an ever-expanding set of options to potentially prolong their years with their furry companions. The possibilities include drugs, cloning, and even cryonics. But is that a good thing? There’s certainly a market for pet preservation. And a growing number of biotech companies have their sights set on pet longevity. Loyal, a company that is currently working on three potential longevity drugs for dogs, is trialing one designed to improve metabolic health in around 1,300 pet dogs across the US. Others are testing dog drugs that aim to combat both age-related diseases, including conditions like obesity and osteoarthritis, and aging itself. There’s even a company focused on longevity medicines for domesticated cats. I don’t know how or when Peppy died. But if there had been a drug that might have protected her from diabetes or arthritis, there’s no doubt I would have tried to get my hands on it. That’s about where my enthusiasm for pet life extension ends, though. I’m far less interested in cloning, a relatively new option for people mourning a pet and seeking a replacement. In most cases, this technology involves taking the DNA of a pet, putting it into an egg cell from another animal of the same species, and growing the resulting embryo in a surrogate animal. It worked for Dolly the sheep, who was born the year before Peppy went missing. It has since worked for other mammals, including cattle, horses, and ferrets—and cats and dogs. In the US, a company called Viagen Pets offers to clone cats and dogs for $50,000 a go. This doesn’t result in an exact replica of the animal but a genetic twin. Still, there are lots of reasons why a person might want to clone a pet. On its website, Viagen explicitly offers customers “a way to hold on.” Lori Kogan, a professor of clinical sciences at Colorado State University who has studied human-animal relationships for decades, doesn’t have a problem with the practice. She points out that while we have well-established rituals for coping with the loss of a person—such as funeral services, time off work, and memorial gifts—we don’t really have the same for pets. As a result, pet owners can experience what is sometimes called “disenfranchised grief,” she says. Having their feelings go unrecognized can feel isolating. If cloning a pet brings a person peace, she says, “who are we to judge?” Fair enough. But I can’t help thinking that pet loss in childhood might be different. It’s often the first time a child confronts death. Losing Peppy was a formative experience, and distressing though it was, I like to think it helped prepare me for losses I experienced in adulthood. I wouldn’t want my own children to think that death is not final, and that individuals can be replicated or replaced. Or, for that matter, revived, which is the promise behind pet cryonics. For a fee, a handful of companies offer to cool dead pets to extremely low temperatures and store them for long periods of time—even indefinitely. The idea is that at some point in the future, we’ll have invented incredible technologies that will not only bring your pet back to life but also cure whatever it died of. Alcor, a cryonics facility in Arizona, is currently storing the remains of hundreds of pets as well as people. It even recently announced it had cooled a small marsupial—its first pet sugar glider. With cryonics, the chances of being reunited with your pet are bordering on zero. Even those who work in the field acknowledge that the stored people and animals are unlikely to be reanimated. As things stand, there is no way to really and truly bring any animal “back.” I miss Peppy. But given the chance, would I stick her in a vat of liquid nitrogen? Or get another cat to give birth to a genetically identical animal? No, I would not. RIP to the one and only Peppy.

Can’t bear to say goodbye to your pet? Biotech’s got you covered. Read Post »

AI, Committee, News, Uncategorized

The Download: failed social media bans, and extending pets’ lives

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. Kids are outsmarting social media bans. That’s not a problem we need to solve.   —Michal Luria, Aliya Bhatia, and Danah Boyd Social media bans are stacking up. In July, France joined Australia in restricting minors from accessing social media—barring children under 15 from major platforms, before the ban was blocked by the country’s top court on human rights grounds.  The UK aims to forbid kids under 16 from accessing Facebook, TikTok, and other platforms in early 2027, and the EU has announced its own plan to prohibit social media for kids under 15. But early lessons from Australia, which enacted a ban in 2024, show that these sorts of age restrictions are easily circumvented.  Here’s what we ought to do instead to keep kids safe.  Can’t bear to say goodbye to your pet? Biotech’s got you covered. —Jessica Hamzelou I don’t remember much about Peppy, my first and only pet cat. What I do vividly remember, though, is the day she went missing. I was 10 years old, and I searched everywhere for her, scouting nearby fields and woods until sunset. I made posters. We never found her. I was devastated. Almost 30 years later, pet owners have an expanding set of options to potentially prolong their years with their furry companions. The possibilities include drugs, cloning, and even cryonics. But is that a good thing? Read the full story on the promises and pitfalls of pet life extension. This story is from The Checkup, our weekly biotech newsletter. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Thursday. 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch: Form Energy and its iron batteries Form Energy is one of MIT Technology Review’s 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch 2026, available exclusively to subscribers. As wind and solar power grow, utilities need cheaper ways to store electricity for longer periods. Form Energy aims to meet that need with batteries that can store energy for 100 hours. The company has developed a new type of battery using iron, a far more abundant and cheaper metal than those used in many existing batteries. It uses a process that Form calls “reversible rusting,” in which iron turns to rust as the battery discharges and back to iron when it charges. See how Form Energy hopes to make renewable power more reliable. —Jonathan W. Rosen Subscribers can now access the full 10 Climate Tech Companies to Watch, spanning everything from electric buses to portable rubber dams. The must-reads I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 Insurance is the next big obstacle for AI AI companies are racking up billions of dollars of legal liabilities from the damage their products cause. (WSJ $)+ The FTC has sent subpoenas to OpenAI and Anthropic over consumer harms. (Axios)+ AI hacks leave a mess, and AI companies still aren’t cleaning them up. (Wired $)+ Who’s liable when AI agents go rogue? (MIT Technology Review) 2 A Russian drone entered NATO waters for the first timeAttacks like those near Bulgaria and Romania are spurring requests for better defenses. (Ars Technica) 3 An AI sell-off has rattled global marketsMany are questioning the sustainability of demand for data centers. (Reuters $)+ Anthropic reported slowing growth in its latest quarterly results. (FT $)+ Accenture has told employees they can only spend $29 on Claude each month. (404 Media)+ What’s at stake in AI’s trillion-dollar gamble. (MIT Technology Review) 4 Governments are hacking people with ‘zero click’ spyware Delivered through millions of innocuous-looking online adverts. (TechCrunch)+ Criminals stole $90 million from crypto wallets last week in a highly sophisticated hack. (FT $) 5 Big Tech gave Trump $92 million for his ballroom Meanwhile the president himself won’t be spending a dime. (WP $) 6 Celebrity deepfakes are everywhere nowAnd they’re selling you stuff the actual celebrity has probably never even heard of. (The Verge $)+ Weaponized deepfakes have been on the rise for a while. (MIT Technology Review) 7 Can AI lighten parents’ mental load?It seems apps and agents can help—if you agree to share masses of your data. (NYT $)+ AI agents are a privacy nightmare. (The Verge $) 8 The memory shortage’s latest victim is schoolsIt’s becoming prohibitively expensive to equip students with laptops and tablets. (The Atlantic $) 9 The world’s official timekeepers have agreed to ditch the leap second  It’s a move that ought to cut the risk of time-based computer glitches. (The Guardian) 10 Tesla has finally unveiled its flying car It’s taken a decade to get here—and still won’t even be shipping next year. (CNBC) Quote of the day “Tech companies used to make an effort to support women…Now we’ve swung completely in the opposite direction. Supporting women in tech has become controversial. It’s become political. It’s become risky.” —Startup founder Sara Mauskopt explains why the cancellation of the Grace Hopper Celebration, one of the biggest gatherings of women in tech, hits so hard, Bloomberg reports.  One More Thing SIMON MITCHELL Inside the experimental world of animal infrastructure In the mid-2000s, toads were meeting a gruesome end near Ede, a leafy old town in the Netherlands. Residents responded by building wildlife tunnels beneath the road to help them reach their breeding ponds safely. The crossings became popular. But a few years later, researchers found the local toad population had crashed from more than 10,000 to fewer than 1,000. The case reflects a wider global push to build wildlife crossings and other forms of “animal infrastructure.” But do they actually help animal populations recover? Read the full story to find out. —Matthew PonsfordWe can still have nice things A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.) + Check out this podcast about the incredible, mysterious powers of fungi.+ A four-year-old boy’s simple habit of waving to his neighbors is transforming his community.+ From treehouses to geodesic domes, these homes show what happens when people build outside the rules.+ Remember when the internet was made by people? The Museum of the Human Web is a playful archive of that era.

The Download: failed social media bans, and extending pets’ lives Read Post »

We use cookies to improve your experience and performance on our website. You can learn more at Privacy Policy and manage your privacy settings by clicking Settings.

Privacy Preferences

You can choose your cookie settings by turning on/off each type of cookie as you wish, except for essential cookies.

Allow All
Manage Consent Preferences
  • Always Active

Save
en_US