Transistors, the building blocks of modern electronics, are typically made of silicon. Because it’s a semiconductor, this material can control the flow of electricity in a circuit. But silicon has fundamental physical limits that restrict how compact and energy-efficient a transistor can be.

MIT researchers have now replaced silicon with a magnetic semiconductor, creating a magnetic transistor that could enable smaller, faster, and more energy-efficient circuits. The material’s magnetism strongly influences its electronic behavior, leading to more efficient control of the flow of electricity. 

The team used a novel magnetic material and an optimization process that reduces the material’s defects, which boosts the transistor’s performance.

The material’s unique magnetic properties also allow for transistors with built-in memory, which would simplify circuit design and unlock new applications for high-performance electronics.

“People have known about magnets for thousands of years, but there are very limited ways to incorporate magnetism into electronics. We have shown a new way to efficiently utilize magnetism that opens up a lot of possibilities for future applications and research,” says Chung-Tao Chou, an MIT graduate student in the departments of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) and Physics, and co-lead author of a paper on this advance.

Chou is joined on the paper by co-lead author Eugene Park, a graduate student in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (DMSE); Julian Klein, a DMSE research scientist; Josep Ingla-Aynes, a postdoc in the MIT Plasma Science and Fusion Center; Jagadeesh S. Moodera, a senior research scientist in the Department of Physics; and senior authors Frances Ross, TDK Professor in DMSE; and Luqiao Liu, an associate professor in EECS, and a member of the Research Laboratory of Electronics; as well as others at the University of Chemistry and Technology in Prague. The paper appears today in Physical Review Letters.

Overcoming the limits

In an electronic device, silicon semiconductor transistors act like tiny light switches that turn a circuit on and off, or amplify weak signals in a communication system. They do this using a small input voltage.

But a fundamental physical limit of silicon semiconductors prevents a transistor from operating below a certain voltage, which hinders its energy efficiency.

To make more efficient electronics, researchers have spent decades working toward magnetic transistors that utilize electron spin to control the flow of electricity. Electron spin is a fundamental property that enables electrons to behave like tiny magnets.

So far, scientists have mostly been limited to using certain magnetic materials. These lack the favorable electronic properties of semiconductors, constraining device performance.

“In this work, we combine magnetism and semiconductor physics to realize useful spintronic devices,” Liu says.

The researchers replace the silicon in the surface layer of a transistor with chromium sulfur bromide, a two-dimensional material that acts as a magnetic semiconductor.

Due to the material’s structure, researchers can switch between two magnetic states very cleanly. This makes it ideal for use in a transistor that smoothly switches between “on” and “off.”

“One of the biggest challenges we faced was finding the right material. We tried many other materials that didn’t work,” Chou says.

They discovered that changing these magnetic states modifies the material’s electronic properties, enabling low-energy operation. And unlike many other 2D materials, chromium sulfur bromide remains stable in air.

To make a transistor, the researchers pattern electrodes onto a silicon substrate, then carefully align and transfer the 2D material on top. They use tape to pick up a tiny piece of material, only a few tens of nanometers thick, and place it onto the substrate.

“A lot of researchers will use solvents or glue to do the transfer, but transistors require a very clean surface. We eliminate all those risks by simplifying this step,” Chou says.

Leveraging magnetism

This lack of contamination enables their device to outperform existing magnetic transistors. Most others can only create a weak magnetic effect, changing the flow of current by a few percent or less. Their new transistor can switch or amplify the electric current by a factor of 10.

They use an external magnetic field to change the magnetic state of the material, switching the transistor using significantly less energy than would usually be required.

The material also allows them to control the magnetic states with electric current. This is important because engineers cannot apply magnetic fields to individual transistors in an electronic device. They need to control each one electrically.

The material’s magnetic properties could also enable transistors with built-in memory, simplifying the design of logic or memory circuits.

A typical memory device has a magnetic cell to store information and a transistor to read it out. Their method can combine both into one magnetic transistor.

“Now, not only are transistors turning on and off, they are also remembering information. And because we can switch the transistor with greater magnitude, the signal is much stronger so we can read out the information faster, and in a much more reliable way,” Liu says.

Building on this demonstration, the researchers plan to further study the use of electrical current to control the device. They are also working to make their method scalable so they can fabricate arrays of transistors.

This research was supported, in part, by the Semiconductor Research Corporation, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Army Research Office, and the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports. The work was partially carried out at the MIT.nano facilities.

The European Union Council pushed for a dangerous plan to scan encrypted messages, and once again, people around the world loudly called out the risks, leading to the current Danish presidency to withdraw the plan. 

EFF has strongly opposed Chat Control since it was first introduced in 2022. The zombie proposal comes back time and time again, and time and time again, it’s been shot down because there’s no public support. The fight is delayed, but not over.

It’s time for lawmakers to stop attempting to compromise encryption under the guise of public safety. Instead of making minor tweaks and resubmitting this proposal over and over, the EU Council should accept that any sort of client-side scanning of devices undermines encryption, and move on to developing real solutions that don’t violate the human rights of people around the world. 

As long as lawmakers continue to misunderstand the way encryption technology works, there is no way forward with message-scanning proposals, not in the EU or anywhere else. This sort of surveillance is not just an overreach; it’s an attack on fundamental human rights. 

The coming EU presidencies should abandon these attempts and work on finding a solution that protects people’s privacy and security.

I can’t believe that I haven’t yet posted this picture of a giant squid at the Smithsonian.

As usual, you can also use this squid post to talk about the security stories in the news that I haven’t covered.

Blog moderation policy.

When Congress eventually reopens, the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) will be moving toward a vote. This gives us a chance to see the priorities of the Secretary of Defense and his Congressional allies when it comes to the military—and one of those priorities is buying technology, especially AI, with less of an obligation to prove it’s effective and worth the money the government will be paying for it. 

As reported by Lawfare, “This year’s defense policy bill—the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)—would roll back data disclosures that help the department understand the real costs of what they are buying, and testing requirements that establish whether what contractors promise is technically feasible or even suited to its needs.” This change comes amid a push from the Secretary of Defense to “Maximize Lethality” by acquiring modern software “at a speed and scale for our Warfighter.” The Senate Armed Services Committee has also expressed interest in making “significant reforms to modernize the Pentagon's budgeting and acquisition operations...to improve efficiency, unleash innovation, and modernize the budget process.”

The 2026 NDAA itself says that the “Secretary of Defense shall prioritize alternative acquisition mechanisms to accelerate development and production” of technology, including an expedited “software acquisition pathway”—a special part of the U.S. code that, if this version of the NDAA passes, will transfer powers to the Secretary of Defense to streamline the buying process and make new technology or updates to existing technology and get it operational “in a period of not more than one year from the time the process is initiated…” It also makes sure the new technology “shall not be subjected to” some of the traditional levers of oversight. 

All of this signals one thing: speed over due diligence. In a commercial technology landscape where companies are repeatedly found to be overselling or even deceiving people about their product’s technical capabilities—or where police departments are constantly grappling with the reality that expensive technology may not be effective at providing the solutions they’re after—it’s important that the government agency with the most expansive budget has time to test the efficacy and cost-efficiency of new technology. It’s easy for the military or police departments to listen to a tech company’s marketing department and believe their well-rehearsed sales pitch, but Congress should make sure that public money is being used wisely and in a way that is consistent with both civil liberties and human rights. 

The military and those who support its preferred budget should think twice about cutting corners before buying and deploying new technology. The Department of Defense’s posturing does not elicit confidence that the technologically-focused military of tomorrow will be equipped in a way that is effective, efficient, or transparent. 

Listen to the Audio on NextBigIdeaClub.com

Below, co-authors Bruce Schneier and Nathan E. Sanders share five key insights from their new book, Rewiring Democracy: How AI Will Transform Our Politics, Government, and Citizenship.

What’s the big idea?

AI can be used both for and against the public interest within democracies. It is already being used in the governing of nations around the world, and there is no escaping its continued use in the future by leaders, policy makers, and legal enforcers. How we wire AI into democracy today will determine if it becomes a tool of oppression or empowerment...

“The White House Effect” examines the first Bush administration and the events leading up to a pivotal climate summit in Rio de Janeiro.

Utility executives indicate the administration has ordered J.H. Campbell to stay open because of the president's declared energy emergency.

Chevron had accused Multnomah County's lead attorney of fraud for hiding his role in climate research papers. The judge rejected that argument but lashed out at the lawyer for not disclosing his connections.

Only one other year on record boasted more Category 5 storms in a single season.

The funding, for projects like desalinating water in Jordan, comes as the U.S. and other nations have reduced international aid.

The Environment and Public Works ranking member is trying to find who is pushing the administration against climate action.

Authorities evacuated villagers and livestock, but a man was killed in the May 28 landslide from the Kleines Nesthorn peak.

Cempasuchil growers near Mexico City say they've been left reeling by torrential rains and drought.

Last year’s floods rank among Europe’s worst natural disasters, claiming 237 lives, with 229 victims from the eastern Valencia region.

Cancer immunotherapy, which uses drugs that stimulate the body’s immune cells to attack tumors, is a promising approach to treating many types of cancer. However, it doesn’t work well for some tumors, including ovarian cancer.

To elicit a better response, MIT researchers have designed new nanoparticles that can deliver an immune-stimulating molecule called IL-12 directly to ovarian tumors. When given along with immunotherapy drugs called checkpoint inhibitors, IL-12 helps the immune system launch an attack on cancer cells.

Studying a mouse model of ovarian cancer, the researchers showed that this combination treatment could eliminate metastatic tumors in more than 80 percent of the mice. When the mice were later injected with more cancer cells, to simulate tumor recurrence, their immune cells remembered the tumor proteins and cleared them again.

“What’s really exciting is that we’re able to deliver IL-12 directly in the tumor space. And because of the way that this nanomaterial is designed to allow IL-12 to be borne on the surfaces of the cancer cells, we have essentially tricked the cancer into stimulating immune cells to arm themselves against that cancer,” says Paula Hammond, an MIT Institute Professor, MIT’s vice provost for faculty, and a member of the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research.

Hammond and Darrell Irvine, a professor of immunology and microbiology at the Scripps Research Institute, are the senior authors of the new study, which appears today in Nature Materials. Ivan Pires PhD ’24, now a postdoc at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, is the lead author of the paper.

“Hitting the gas”

Most tumors express and secrete proteins that suppress immune cells, creating a microenvironment in which the immune response is weakened. One of the main players that can kill tumor cells are T cells, but they get sidelined or blocked by the cancer cells and are unable to attack the tumor. Checkpoint inhibitors are an FDA-approved treatment designed to take those brakes off the immune system by removing the immune-suppressing proteins so that T cells can mount an attack on tumor cells

For some cancers, including some types of melanoma and lung cancer, removing the brakes is enough to provoke the immune system into attacking cancer cells. However, ovarian tumors have many ways to suppress the immune system, so checkpoint inhibitors alone usually aren’t enough to launch an immune response.

“The problem with ovarian cancer is no one is hitting the gas. So, even if you take off the brakes, nothing happens,” Pires says.

IL-12 offers one way to “hit the gas,” by supercharging T cells and other immune cells. However, the large doses of IL-12 required to get a strong response can produce side effects due to generalized inflammation, such as flu-like symptoms (fever, fatigue, GI issues, headaches, and fatigue), as well as more severe complications such as liver toxicity and cytokine release syndrome — which can be so severe they may even lead to death.

In a 2022 study, Hammond’s lab developed nanoparticles that could deliver IL-12 directly to tumor cells, which allows larger doses to be given while avoiding the side effects seen when the drug is injected. However, these particles tended to release their payload all at once after reaching the tumor, which hindered their ability to generate a strong T cell response.

In the new study, the researchers modified the particles so that IL-12 would be released more gradually, over about a week. They achieved this by using a different chemical linker to attach IL-12 to the particles.

“With our current technology, we optimize that chemistry such that there’s a more controlled release rate, and that allowed us to have better efficacy,” Pires says.

The particles consist of tiny, fatty droplets known as liposomes, with IL-12 molecules tethered to the surface. For this study, the researchers used a linker called maleimide to attach IL-12 to the liposomes. This linker is more stable than the one they used in the previous generation of particles, which was susceptible to being cleaved by proteins in the body, leading to premature release.

To make sure that the particles get to the right place, the researchers coat them with a layer of a polymer called poly-L-glutamate (PLE), which helps them directly target ovarian tumor cells. Once they reach the tumors, the particles bind to the cancer cell surfaces, where they gradually release their payload and activate nearby T cells.

Disappearing tumors

In tests in mice, the researchers showed that the IL-12-carrying particles could effectively recruit and stimulate T cells that attack tumors. The cancer models used for these studies are metastatic, so tumors developed not only in the ovaries but throughout the peritoneal cavity, which includes the surface of the intestines, liver, pancreas, and other organs. Tumors could even be seen in the lung tissues.

First, the researchers tested the IL-12 nanoparticles on their own, and they showed that this treatment eliminated tumors in about 30 percent of the mice. They also found a significant increase in the number of T cells that accumulated in the tumor environment.

Then, the researchers gave the particles to mice along with checkpoint inhibitors. More than 80 percent of the mice that received this dual treatment were cured. This happened even when the researchers used models of ovarian cancer that are highly resistant to immunotherapy or to the chemotherapy drugs usually used for ovarian cancer.

Patients with ovarian cancer are usually treated with surgery followed by chemotherapy. While this may be initially effective, cancer cells that remain after surgery are often able to grow into new tumors. Establishing an immune memory of the tumor proteins could help to prevent that kind of recurrence.

In this study, when the researchers injected tumor cells into the cured mice five months after the initial treatment, the immune system was still able to recognize and kill the cells.

“We don’t see the cancer cells being able to develop again in that same mouse, meaning that we do have an immune memory developed in those animals,” Pires says.

The researchers are now working with MIT’s Deshpande Center for Technological Innovation to spin out a company that they hope could further develop the nanoparticle technology. In a study published earlier this year, Hammond’s lab reported a new manufacturing approach that should enable large-scale production of this type of nanoparticle.

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the Marble Center for Nanomedicine, the Deshpande Center for Technological Innovation, the Ragon Institute of MGH, MIT, and Harvard, and the Koch Institute Support (core) Grant from the National Cancer Institute.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 31 October 2025; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02479-8

Antarctic ice shelves affect the mass loss of the Antarctic ice sheet and are vulnerable to damage from crevasses and rifts. Decades of satellite observations link this damage to past thinning and retreat of ice shelves. Damage is projected to intensify under future high-emission climate scenarios, further weakening ice shelves and accelerating ice loss.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 31 October 2025; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02475-y

Restrictions on civil society may drive climate activists to shift from protest to litigation. However, challenges to judicial independence, deregulation and anti-climate litigation mean that activists need to consider the conditions under which litigation leads to strengthened climate ambition and implementation.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 31 October 2025; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02470-3

Climate change influences not only crop yields but also crop nutritional content, which is currently not simulated by process-based crop models. This Perspective proposes a way forward to integrate nutrients into crop models to assess climate impacts and highlights data needs.

Quenching, a powerful heat transfer mechanism, is remarkably effective at transporting heat away. But in extreme environments, like nuclear power plants and aboard spaceships, a lot rides on the efficiency and speed of the process.

It’s why Marco Graffiedi, a fifth-year doctoral student at MIT’s Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering (NSE), is researching the phenomenon to help develop the next generation of spaceships and nuclear plants.

Growing up in small-town Italy

Graffiedi’s parents encouraged a sense of exploration, giving him responsibilities for family projects even at a young age. When they restored a countryside cabin in a small town near Palazzolo, in the hills between Florence and Bologna, the then-14-year-old Marco got a project of his own. He had to ensure the animals on the property had enough accessible water without overfilling the storage tank. Marco designed and built a passive hydraulic system that effectively solved the problem and is still functional today.

His proclivity for science continued in high school in Lugo, where Graffiedi enjoyed recreating classical physics phenomena, through experiments. Incidentally, the high school is named after Gregorio Ricci-Curbastro, a mathematician who laid the foundation for the theory of relativity — history that is not lost on Graffiedi. After high school, Graffiedi attended the International Physics Olympiad in Bangkok, a formative event that cemented his love for physics.

A gradual shift toward engineering

A passion for physics and basic sciences notwithstanding, Graffiedi wondered if he’d be a better fit for engineering, where he could use the study of physics, chemistry, and math as tools to build something.

Following that path, he completed a bachelor’s and master’s in mechanical engineering — because an undergraduate degree in Italy takes only three years, pretty much everyone does a master’s, Graffiedi laughs — at the Università di Pisa and the Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (School of Engineering). The Sant’Anna is a highly selective institution that most students attend to complement their university studies.

Graffiedi’s university studies gradually moved him toward the field of environmental engineering. He researched concentrated solar power in order to reduce the cost of solar power by studying the associated thermal cycle and trying to improve solar power collection. While the project was not very successful, it reinforced Graffiedi’s impression of the necessity of alternative energies. Still firmly planted in energy studies, Graffiedi worked on fracture mechanics for his master’s thesis, in collaboration with (what was then) GE Oil and Gas, researching how to improve the effectiveness of centrifugal compressors. And a summer internship at Fermilab had Graffiedi working on the thermal characterization of superconductive coatings.

With his studies behind him, Graffiedi was still unsure about this professional path. Through the Edison Program from GE Oil and Gas, where he worked shortly after graduation, Graffiedi got to test drive many fields — from mechanical and thermal engineering to exploring gas turbines and combustion. He eventually became a test engineer, coordinating a team of engineers to test a new upgrade to the company’s gas turbines. “I set up the test bench, understanding how to instrument the machine, collect data, and run the test,” Graffiedi remembers, “there was a lot you need to think about, from a little turbine blade with sensors on it to the location of safety exits on the test bench.”

The move toward nuclear engineering

As fun as the test engineering job was, Graffiedi started to crave more technical knowledge and wanted to pivot to science. As part of his exploration, he came across nuclear energy and, understanding it to be the future, decided to lean on his engineering background to apply to MIT NSE.

He found a fit in Professor Matteo Bucci’s group and decided to explore boiling and quenching. The move from science to engineering, and back to science, was now complete.

NASA, the primary sponsor of the research, is interested in preventing boiling of cryogenic fuels, because boiling leads to loss of fuel and the resulting vapor will need to be vented to avoid overpressurizing a fuel tank.

Graffiedi’s primary focus is on quenching, which will play an important role in refueling in space — and in the cooling of nuclear cores. When a cryogen is used to cool down a surface, it undergoes what is known as the Leidenfrost effect, which means it first forms a thin vapor film that acts as an insulator and prevents further cooling. To facilitate rapid cooling, it’s important to accelerate the collapse of the vapor film. Graffiedi is exploring the mechanics of the quenching process on a microscopic level, studies that are important for land and space applications.

Boiling can be used for yet another modern application: to improve the efficiency of cooling systems for data centers. The growth of data centers and electric transportation systems needs effective heat transfer mechanisms to avoid overheating. Immersion cooling using dielectric fluids — fluids that do not conduct electricity — is one way to do so. These fluids remove heat from a surface by leaning on the principle of boiling. For effective boiling, the fluid must overcome the Leidenfrost effect and break the vapor film that forms. The fluid must also have high critical heat flux (CHF), which is the maximum value of the heat flux at which boiling can effectively be used to transfer heat from a heated surface to a liquid. Because dielectric fluids have lower CHF than water, Graffiedi is exploring solutions to enhance these limits. In particular, he is investigating how high electric fields can be used to enhance CHF and even to use boiling as a way to cool electronic components in the absence of gravity. He published this research in Applied Thermal Engineering in June.

Beyond boiling

Graffiedi’s love of science and engineering shows in his commitment to teaching as well. He has been a teaching assistant for four classes at NSE, winning awards for his contributions. His many additional achievements include winning the Manson Benedict Award presented to an NSE graduate student for excellence in academic performance and professional promise in nuclear science and engineering, and a service award for his role as past president of the MIT Division of the American Nuclear Society.

Boston has a fervent Italian community, Graffiedi says, and he enjoys being a part of it. Fittingly, the MIT Italian club is called MITaly. When he’s not at work or otherwise engaged, Graffiedi loves Latin dancing, something he makes time for at least a couple of times a week. While he has his favorite Italian restaurants in the city, Graffiedi is grateful for another set of skills his parents gave him when was just 11: making perfect pizza and pasta.

If you've been following the wave of age-gating laws sweeping across the country and the globe, you've probably noticed that lawmakers, tech companies, and advocates all seem to be using different terms for what sounds like the same thing. Age verification, age assurance, age estimation, age gating—they get thrown around interchangeably, but they technically mean different things. And those differences matter a lot when we're talking about your rights, your privacy, your data, and who gets to access information online.

So let's clear up the confusion. Here's your guide to the terminology that's shaping these laws, and why you should care about the distinctions.

Age Gating: “No Kids Allowed”

Age gating refers to age-based restrictions on access to online services. Age gating can be required by law or voluntarily imposed as a corporate decision. Age gating does not necessarily refer to any specific technology or manner of enforcement for estimating or verifying a user’s age. It simply refers to the fact that a restriction exists. Think of it as the concept of “you must be this old to enter” without getting into the details of how they’re checking. 

Age Assurance: The Umbrella Term

Think of age assurance as the catch-all category. It covers any method an online service uses to figure out how old you are with some level of confidence. That's intentionally vague, because age assurance includes everything from the most basic check-the-box systems to full-blown government ID scanning.

Age assurance is the big tent that contains all the other terms we're about to discuss below. When a company or lawmaker talks about "age assurance," they're not being specific about how they're determining your age—just that they're trying to. For decades, the internet operated on a “self-attestation” system where you checked a box saying you were 18, and that was it. These new age-verification laws are specifically designed to replace that system. When lawmakers say they want "robust age assurance," what they really mean is "we don't trust self-attestation anymore, so now you need to prove your age beyond just swearing to it."

Age Estimation: Letting the Algorithm Decide

Age estimation is where things start getting creepy. Instead of asking you directly, the system guesses your age based on data it collects about you.

This might include:

• Analyzing your face through a video selfie or photo
• Examining your voice
• Looking at your online behavior—what you watch, what you like, what you post
• Checking your existing profile data

Companies like Instagram have partnered with services like Yoti to offer facial age estimation. You submit a video selfie, an algorithm analyzes your face, and spits out an estimated age range. Sounds convenient, right?

Here's the problem, “estimation” is exactly that: it’s a guess. And it is inherently imprecise. Age estimation is notoriously unreliable, especially for teenagers—the exact group these laws claim to protect. An algorithm might tell a website you're somewhere between 15 and 19 years old. That's not helpful when the cutoff is 18, and what's at stake is a young person's constitutional rights.

And it gets worse. These systems consistently fail for certain groups:

• People of color are routinely misidentified (even Yoti's own research admits higher error rates for darker skin tones)
• Trans and nonbinary people are frequently misclassified
• People with disabilities that affect their appearance fall outside the algorithm's training parameters and anyone who doesn't fit the algorithmic "norm" gets flagged

When estimation fails (and it often does), users get kicked to the next level: actual verification. Which brings us to…

Age Verification: “Show Me Your Papers”

Age verification is the most invasive option. This is where you have to prove your age to a certain date, rather than, for example, prove that you have crossed some age threshold (like 18 or 21 or 65). EFF generally refers to most age gates and mandates on young people’s access to online information as “age verification,” as most of them typically require you to submit hard identifiers like:

• Government-issued ID (driver's license, passport, state ID)
• Credit card information
• Utility bills or other documents
• Biometric data

This is what a lot of new state laws are actually requiring, even when they use softer language like "age assurance." Age verification doesn't just confirm you're over 18, it reveals your full identity. Your name, address, date of birth, photo—everything.

Here's the critical thing to understand: age verification is really identity verification. You're not just proving you're old enough—you're proving exactly who you are. And that data has to be stored, transmitted, and protected by every website that collects it.

We already know how that story ends. Data breaches are inevitable. And when a database containing your government ID tied to your adult content browsing history gets hacked—and it will—the consequences can be devastating.

Why This Confusion Matters

Politicians and tech companies love using these terms interchangeably because it obscures what they're actually proposing. A law that requires "age assurance" sounds reasonable and moderate. But if that law defines age assurance as requiring government ID verification, it's not moderate at all—it's mass surveillance. Similarly, when Instagram says it's using "age estimation" to protect teens, that sounds privacy-friendly. But when their estimation fails and forces you to upload your driver's license instead, the privacy promise evaporates.

Language matters because it shapes how we think about these systems. "Assurance" sounds gentle. "Verification" sounds official. "Estimation" sounds technical and impersonal, and also admits its inherent imprecision. 

Here's the uncomfortable truth: most lawmakers writing these bills have no idea how any of this technology actually works. They don't know that age estimation systems routinely fail for people of color, trans individuals, and people with disabilities. They don't know that verification systems have error rates. They don't even seem to understand that the terms they're using mean different things. The fact that their terminology is all over the place—using "age assurance," "age verification," and "age estimation" interchangeably—makes this ignorance painfully clear, and leaves the onus on platforms to choose whichever option best insulates them from liability.

Language matters because it shapes how we think about these systems. "Assurance" sounds gentle. "Verification" sounds official. "Estimation" sounds technical and impersonal, and also admits its inherent imprecision. But they all involve collecting your data and create a metaphysical age gate to the internet. The terminology is deliberately confusing, but the stakes are clear: it's your privacy, your data, and your ability to access the internet without constant identity checks. Don't let fuzzy language disguise what these systems really do.