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.

Legal intern Suzanne Castillo co-authored this post.

Playstation’s decision to kill physical game discs is the latest attack on our diminishing rights to access and engage with culture digitally. Rent-seeking corporations and negligent lawmakers share the blame–and they can do better. 

We’ve seen the same playbook used in the move to digital distribution of  film, TV, and music: draw in customers with the convenience of a digital download, then limit physical access and move the goalpost on what it actually means to “own” a piece of media. The end goal is to turn the customer into a renter, stuck making regular subscription payments for access. Gamers are right to sound the alarm, and we must take this moment to fight for digital ownership before it’s too late.

Disk Space Invaders

Depriving gamers of physical discs leads to another obvious and immediate cost: data.  Unlike other digital media like film and TV, video games require a ton of storage. Access to high speed internet is still abysmal in the US, making the high-speeds needed for digital game downloads a luxury some of us may take for granted. For many, a modern game can take days and exceed their data caps. 

This made physical discs, particularly for the biggest AAA titles, a logical choice that also largely spared gamers from losing traditional ownership rights. With physical disks, the cost of storing the game was included in the purchase.

Own or Be Pwned

Limiting customers to digital copies also pushes gamers further into rent-only copyright culture.

Physical media comes with a "right of first sale," which means you can lawfully share, resell, alter, or destroy your own copy of a copyrighted work. This right has also helped protect the emergence of alternative community servers, and emulator addition of online play to games from the dial up era.

But courts have held that digital media doesn't carry the same right, meaning no such protection is afforded to digital purchases. Your ability to freely share games with friends or pass them on to family members becomes totally subject to the whims of the distributor. 

So, for example, a digital-only approach effectively guts the second-hand market for games. Saving some money with a used game and recouping the costs by reselling are no longer an option. Even with steep discounts and holiday sales, this raises the minimum cost of engaging with the medium at all.

The inevitable conclusion of the move to digital-only purchases is to lock gamers into  subscription models, making their access totally dependent on the distributor— or, several distributors, as we’ve seen with major TV and movie streamers. A handful of companies actually own the games, and your only option is to regularly pay for fractured libraries of games you may never play and will never truly own.

Achievement Locked

Since digital games are easy to copy, distributors and publishers argue that they are in an arms race against piracy. The irony is that law-abiding customers consistently suffer collateral damage. 

Most digital distributors lock down the content they offer with restrictive user agreements and digital rights management (DRM) software. DRM software, in particular, imposes onerous controls on the game — like forcing internet connection for single player games or modifications that harm performance — and can even introduce serious privacy and security concerns. Any gamer or researcher in the US who wants to reduce this burden by removing or modifying that DRM risks a lawsuit, thanks to Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). This federal law makes it illegal to alter DRM software, and is a beloved tool for companies trying to restrict how we can lawfully use our purchases — whether it’s a copy of the newest tractor simulator or a literal tractor. 

And since much of this DRM is tied to user accounts, ownership of a game is also revocable and modifiable for any number of reasons outside of your control. Error in your subscription payment? Your account got hacked? Licensing deal falls through with a major publisher? Developers want to kill the game in an update? All of this can limit or change your ability to access the game long after your so-called “purchase.”

Level-up Ownership

Policymakers can and should work to restore our ownership rights for the digital age. 

That starts with legal protections ensuring that the same rights that apply to physical media apply to digital media. Next up? Reform Section 1201 of the DMCA to clarify that it does not forbid fair uses.  

At the state level, we need meaningful consumer protections. Some promising models include California’s AB 1921, which would clarify what customers are actually paying for on digital storefronts and ensure some protections for maintaining discontinued games. The gaming industry has done its best to kill the bill, including claiming that private community servers are illegal. 

If you bought it, you should own it, and EFF will continue working to mitigate some of the worst harms of the DMCA 1201, defending modders, and fighting deceptive licensing that makes culture less free.

This essay was written with Nathan E. Sanders, and originally appeared in The Guardian.

Opposition to AI data centers has emerged as a primary theme in US politics, one that—surprisingly—doesn’t fall along party lines. We applaud people coming together for constructive debate on any issue, and agree that communities need to evaluate whether any economic benefits these data centers bring is worth their costs. Still, we worry that a focus on data centers obscures the larger impacts of AI on people’s lives: the concentration of power of AI companies, and their widespread political and financial influence...

Wind and solar generated more power than coal and nuclear during the first half of the year. Will that trend continue?

A green group has asked a state court to scrap a permit for a facility designed to power artificial intelligence.

California residents can expect the El Niño to bring both high wildfire and flood risk this year.

While New York pushed back a near-term climate goal, Gov. Kathy Hochul touted the state’s solar deployment, a major new transmission line and plans to boost nuclear power to achieve its 2050 net-zero target.

Temperatures will be 15 to 25 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than normal in many areas, including at night, officials said.

The boats are commonly made of carbon fiber, fiberglass and PVC foam, which take a lot of energy to produce in processes that emit carbon pollution.

Officials warn a deal with South American nations could undercut British farmers.

Europe is the world’s fastest-warming continent, with temperatures increasing twice as fast as the global average since the 1980s, according to officials.

With the exploding popularity of generative artificial intelligence, many open-source models are now available online for anyone to adapt for their task, such as generating product renderings in a certain artistic style. 

But these models also find their way into the hands of nefarious actors who may optimize them to produce illegal content, like hate speech or child sexual abuse material (CSAM). This is a growing problem — the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children received more than 1.5 million reports of AI-generated CSAM in 2025, an increase from 67,000 in 2024.

Engineers usually test AI for harmful capabilities by prompting the model and inspecting its outputs, but this is impossible for CSAM, since it is illegal in the U.S to generate such content, regardless of intent.

To avoid this dilemma and improve AI safety, a team of MIT scientists, led by graduate student Vinith Suriyakumar and associate professors Ashia Wilson and Marzyeh Ghassemi, joined forces with researchers from Thorn to develop a new auditing approach that determines whether a model can produce CSAM, without prompting it. Thorn is a child safety nonprofit whose mission is to transform how children are protected from sexual abuse and exploitation in the digital age.

Their technique examines how the inner workings of a model have been adapted, but it never generates an output. By examining hidden representations, it can reliably infer whether a model has been specialized to produce harmful imagery.

When tested, the auditing procedure identified model variations that had been specialized to generate CSAM with 100 percent accuracy. A hosting platform could use this technique to flag unsafe models and quickly remove them or prevent them from being uploaded in the first place.

“This unlocks a new avenue for platforms that host open-source models and for law enforcement to actually test whether a model is capable of generating CSAM. Before, we had no way of measuring this. It was a huge blind spot that some people were taking advantage of. Now, we can address an AI safety problem that is having severe negative impacts,” says Vinith Suriyakumar, an MIT electrical engineering and computer science (EECS) graduate student and lead author of a paper on this technique.

Suriyakamur and Wilson, the Lister Borthers Career Develop Professor in EECS and a principal investigator in the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS), are joined on the paper by Lena Stempfle, an MIT postdoc; Ghassemi, an associate professor in EECS and a member of the Institute of Medical Engineering Sciences (IMES) and LIDS; and others at Boston University and Thorn. The paper was be presented as a spotlight at the “Trustworthy AI for Good” workshop at the International Conference on Machine Learning.

Auditing adaptations

Recent techniques have made it easier for users to specialize a generative AI model for their task through a process known as fine-tuning. 

Rather than retraining the entire model on a task-specific dataset, individuals can utilize an algorithm called low-rank adaptation (LoRA) to specialize the model in a more efficient manner.

This has led to a wave of new generative AI model variants for a variety of purposes, like producing watercolor images that mimic an artistic movement. But it has also enabled malicious actors to create models that can generate high-quality CSAM and other harmful imagery.

To audit a model, engineers typically prompt it for harmful content and check its outputs, but this manual auditing procedure is not scalable. In addition, repeatedly generating heinous images can have negative psychological impacts on human evaluators. 

This evaluation method quickly falls apart when testing CSAM, which is illegal to generate for any purpose in the U.S. and many other international jurisdictions.

“We are in this very difficult situation where, based on the law itself, we cannot use the de facto means of evaluation. We had to throw out the entire toolkit and take a different approach,” Suriyakumar says.

After learning about this conundrum, the researchers joined forces with Thorn, to address this issue.

A nongenerative solution

Instead of focusing on outputs, the researchers targeted the modifications a LoRA algorithm makes during fine-tuning. 

Their technique probes these modifications, called LoRA adaptors, to determine whether a model has been specialized for a harmful capability, without generating an output.

Using a technique called Gaussian probing, the researchers feed the model a set of random data points and analyze how it manipulates those data within its multilayer internal structure. 

“We never run the model all the way to the end or prompt the model, so we never generate images,” Suriyakumar explains.

The researchers capture those modifications at multiple time points within the model’s inner structure and average them to summarize how the LoRA adaptor changed the model’s computation. They found these responses to be a strong signal of how a model had been specialized.

They tested their method on variations of three types of models, comparing the results to ground-truth data from LoRA adaptors known for generating CSAM, other harmful images, and safe content. 

Their method was 100 percent accurate in identifying models that had been adapted to generate CSAM. 

“There is a huge bucket of child safety concerns with AI, and these are real concerns that need to be addressed. A lot of children are being harmed by AI deepfakes. We’ve shown that Gaussian probing can be a very useful tool, and we hope the research community really pours more attention into this problem,” Wilson says.

Importantly, their technique is scalable and would be relatively inexpensive to implement. Since thousands of model variations are published online every month, scalability is key to help auditors remove harmful adaptations before they are widely distributed.

Gaussian probing is also more robust than some other auditing techniques, since a nefarious actor would need to carefully alter the inner workings of the base model to avoid detection.

In the future, the researchers want to evaluate their technique on a larger set of model variations and explore whether Gaussian probing can detect harmful capabilities in base models before they are adapted.

“Now we have a technological approach to partially address this concern. So much effort was poured into this collaboration, which enabled us to tackle a really hard problem that is harming so many children, nationally and around the world. Hopefully, we can have a transformative impact in this area,” Ghassemi says.

This work was supported, in part, by the Bridgewater AIA Labs Research Fellowship.

Infrared cameras can be used to spot useful information that our eyes can’t see, such as gases escaping from a pipeline, chemicals in the atmosphere, or heat leaking from a building. But sensing infrared light in sophisticated ways still requires expensive and bulky systems.

Now MIT researchers have created a chip-based optical device that can dynamically control incoming infrared light, to act as a tunable lens that gathers additional information for infrared cameras. Each microscopic pixel of the device’s lens can control infrared light independently, allowing it to change its focus and help cameras detect different signals without moving parts.

The system is described in a paper published in Nature Communications. The researchers also explain how they built a lab-scale demonstration using mostly conventional manufacturing processes in a semiconductor chip factory, suggesting the approach could be implemented at industrial scales.

The technology could enable compact, tunable infrared cameras for more dynamic thermal imaging, chemical sensing, pollution monitoring, and even new kinds of optical computing.

“This could give us more information as we study space, or help with environmental protections where you want to monitor for specific compounds in the atmosphere,” explains first author Cosmin-Constantin Popescu PhD ’25. “Thermal imaging is another application, and you can think of military applications where night vision goggles are currently being used. Basically, a lot of organic molecules absorb in the mid-infrared wavelength, and you could use this system to detect them.”

Joining Popescu on the paper are MIT PhD students Maarten Robbert Anton Peters and Khoi Phuong Dao; Dynasil company scientists Oleg Maksimov and Harish Bhandari; University of Central Florida PhD candidate Kathleen Richardson and scientist Rashi Sharma; University of Washington Professor Arka Majumdar; Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Associate Professor Hyun Jung Kim; MIT postdoc Rui Chen; Luigi Ranno PhD ’25; Brian Mills ’20, PhD ’26; Draper Laboratory scientist Dennis Calahan; MIT principal investigator Tian Gu; and Juejun Hu, MIT’s John F. Elliott Professor of Materials Science and Engineering.

Chip-based lenses

In recent years, researchers have developed ways to dynamically control light by etching tiny, precise patterns on transparent materials known as “metasurfaces,” which could enable more compact, programmable cameras and other advanced optical devices.

Hu’s research group at MIT has experimented with a class of metasurfaces that shift from solid to liquid after heat is applied. The phase changes can be harnessed to control how the materials interact with light. In 2021, Hu and collaborators created a miniature lens that could adjust its focus to different depths through such phase changes.

The device worked reliably, but it could only adjust focus all at once across the entire material, which is how most metasurfaces work. For their new study the researchers wanted to build on that approach to control light independently at each microscopic pixel of the material.

“Most active metasurfaces trying to do single-pixel tuning need wires going to every pixel, and how you route the wires becomes a big issue,” Hu explains. “The best approach so far has been one-dimensional pixel control with a bunch of wires.”

The researchers also wanted to create a system that worked with the mid-infrared wavelength of light, which the human eye can’t see but is useful for detecting heat signatures and molecules including methane and propane. Mid-infrared detection devices are already used to detect gas leaks and study Earth’s atmosphere, and for a number of defense and aerospace applications.

To build their system, the researchers adapted an approach commonly used in displays in which two layers of neatly packed copper wires are placed on top of each other perpendicularly. Below the wires is a layer of doped silicon that generates heat at the cross points of the wires and sits on top of the phase-change material. The silicon’s heat is used to switch each pixel of the material between crystalline and amorphous structures, which changes how the material interacts with the infrared light coming in. The silicon also includes a diode selector, which helps prevent unintended currents from leaking through neighboring pixels.

“We did some calculations showing this architecture allows us to scale to potentially millions of pixels without having any issues with the [unintended] currents,” Hu says. “The key innovation is this crossbar architecture, which creates a scalable way to increase the pixel-level switching of metasurfaces. We didn’t invent this architecture — it’s used in displays — but it’s the first time anyone’s used it for active phase-change metasurfaces to show you can get pixel-level control. People have been working toward two-dimensional pixel-level control for a long time, and it’s the first time anyone’s implemented it.”

The researchers worked with equipment in MIT.nano and with a factory that manufactures semiconductor chips, ultimately creating a two-dimensional system that featured a 6-by-6 metasurface pixel array. They tested their system and found it could switch on and off reliably.

“We found this mesh architecture to be very resilient,” Popescu says. “You don’t want these materials to switch once and not work anymore. You want it to switch a large number of times: maybe tens of thousands of times or more.”

Scaling up

The researchers say integrating part of their system’s design into existing semiconductor manufacturing should help it move beyond a research prototype.

“As you want to scale up, you need something that’s part of a consistent process, and that’s why chip foundry manufacturing becomes so important,” Hu says. “Working with a semiconductor foundry with well-defined process control is very powerful. It also allows you to implement each of the components into a single efficient process.”

The researchers are working to add more pixels to their array and develop more robust versions of their system so that it can start capturing more infrared information.

“In lots of cases when you’re taking images, you have prior knowledge of what you’re looking for,” Hu says. “You might be looking for a human in a dark room, or some specific features in an image, like a tree, and that prior information can be useful because now you can configure this system to specifically highlight those features.”

Hu also notes that researchers have used metasurfaces to emulate computational neural networks that power AI systems, though he notes that applications could be farther away from taking hold.

“This could enable more effective optical computing, where metasurfaces are used to encode network weights in neural networks,” Hu explains. “When light passes through the material, it interacts with the metasurface, and that information gets encoded in such a way that you can infer computational results. Researchers have already used this approach to emulate very complex neural networks.”

The work was supported, in part, by the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. National Science Foundation, the National Research Foundation of Korea, and the Draper Scholar Program.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 13 July 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02706-w

Ecology is not at risk of a methodological balance crisis

In a rare combined cybersecurity/squid post, a twenty-nine-year-old squid proxy bug can leak HTTP requests.

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.

A new study led by MIT researchers could drive the development of more energy-efficient digital displays — such as flat-screen TVs, augmented and virtual reality headsets, smartphone screens, medical imaging devices, and even large-area ambient lighting surfaces — that also generate richer, brighter colors.

The MIT scientists, in collaboration with researchers at Samsung, studied the microscopic changes that occur inside LEDs that utilize electrically excited quantum dots, which are precisely shaped nanoscale semiconductor particles that emit extremely pure colored light. 

Quantum dots are currently used in some of the computer and television displays with the best picture quality available. The efficiency of these displays could be further improved, and their manufacturing process further simplified, if the quantum dots could be electrically excited, as was first demonstrated in the quantum dot LED (QD-LED) structures over 20 years ago. 

But limitations on the operating lifespans of these QD-LEDs have prevented their widespread use in commercial applications.

The new study shows how encapsulating QD-LEDs in an acrylate-based resin can extend their lifespan by minimizing the physical degradation that would otherwise occur during QD-LED operation. 

The researchers demonstrated that encapsulating QD-LEDs with a resin layer using a simple, scalable process boosts stability and performance. In some devices, resin encapsulation enabled a 5,000-fold lifespan improvement. Importantly, their study reveals the fundamental reasons resin encapsulation is effective.

“The insights into how and why quantum dot LEDs get modified during their operation open the possibility of fixing everything that holds back commercialization of QD-LED displays. This technology can provide a light source like never before — pure in color, paper thin, and of large area, transforming how we produce both displays and general lighting,” says Vladimir Bulović, the Fariborz Maseeh (1990) Professor of Emerging Technology, principal investigator in the Research Laboratory of Electronics (RLE), director of MIT.nano, and senior author of this study.

He is joined on the paper by lead author Ruiqi Zhang, an electrical engineering and computer science graduate student; Moungi Bawendi, the Lester Wolfe Professor of Chemistry; and other colleagues at MIT and Samsung SAIT. The research appears today in Science Advances.

A blue bottleneck

This paper draws on foundational work by Bawendi, who shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2023 for discovering and synthesizing quantum dots, and engineering work by Bulović, who joined MIT in 2000, when he began collaborating with Bawendi to make efficient LED displays using quantum dots. 

Conventional LED displays utilize thousands of tiny lightbulbs that generate the red, green, and blue light needed to create the perception of any color on the visible spectrum. More advanced OLED screens, which Bulović was developing through his graduate work at Princeton University, utilize electrically excited, glowing organic molecules instead of light bulbs.

Bulović, Bawendi, and others at MIT sought to replace the organic molecules with quantum dots, which emit purer red, green, and blue light in a more energy-efficient manner.

“With quantum dots, the color quality of the screen would be more visually appealing and more optically flexible. One can mix and match those quantum dot colors more precisely to generate any color that is needed,” says Bulović.

Their collaboration generated a series of inventions on quantum dot LED technologies, leading to the launch of the startup QD Vision, which successfully commercialized the first-ever displays containing quantum dots. In 2016, QD Vision was acquired by Samsung, which incorporated a less efficient form of quantum dot technology into their “QLED” displays.

Although they are more energy-efficient, electrically excited QD-LEDs have still not been commercialized, particularly since the limited lifetime of the blue QD-LED does not meet the requirements of commercial displays.

“The blue quantum dot LEDs are 50 to 100 times less stable than their red and green counterparts. If you use them in an LED display, your TV might last for just a few months before it stops working. We wanted to understand what is different about the blue quantum dot LEDs,” Zhang says.

A nanoscale investigation

He and his collaborators developed a technique to slice a tiny QD-LED in nanoscale-thin slivers, revealing the device cross-section. They examined these cross-sections under extremely powerful microscopes at MIT.nano. This precise method allowed them to see what happens at the nanoscale to the ultrathin layers of materials stacked inside the QD-LED.

They explored the structural and chemical changes that occurred in each layer of red and blue QD-LEDs by comparing cross-sections of freshly made devices to cross-sections of devices that were operated on overdrive. The researchers found that during operation, the three core functional layers that enable blue QD-LEDs to glow are degraded, with modified morphology and reduced thickness. 

The distinct quantum dots also get merged together, losing their shape. This layer thinning and coarsening is caused, in part, by the release of extra hydrogen and oxygen during operation.

“We don’t yet know exactly where these extra elements are coming from — there are so many possibilities. But we definitely don’t want extra hydrogen and oxygen in the device,” Zhang says.

To prevent this degradation, they utilized a technique sometimes adopted by industry. They encapsulated the QD-LEDs with an acrylate-based resin.

They discovered that this encapsulation technique suppresses the release of the hydrogen and oxygen and inhibits some of the degradation that changes the morphology of the layers of the blue QD-LED. 

“For the first time, we have insights into the details of what happens inside these structures of many mixed and layered materials that form the QD-LED. No one knew this before,” Bulović says.

This encapsulation strategy, which is a cost-effective and scalable technique, led to an eightfold improvement in the lifetime of red QD-LEDs and more than a 5,000-fold lifetime improvement in blue QD-LEDs.

The researchers believe the resin prevents the formation of moisture in the cloud of gases that surrounds the quantum dot. That moisture likely causes the QD-LED to degrade. 

However, their experiments revealed that resin encapsulation does not eliminate all sources of degradation. 

The researchers are now exploring the addition of extra layers to QD-LEDs that could further improve efficiency and lifespan. They also plan to build on the lessons learned in this study to increase the stability of QD-LEDs for other applications. 

“This version of quantum dot LEDs would be better than anything that exists now — simpler to make, more efficient, and higher performing. This could open vistas into many more ways of thinking about this technology, not just for the sake of displays or lighting, but also for sensors, lasers, and so on,” says Bulović.

This work was funded by the Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology. The research was carried out, in part, using MIT.nano facilities.

In my first weeks as Executive Director of EFF, I’ve been reminded every day how consequential this moment is in determining what kind of future we will have.

We are on the edge. What each one of us steps up to do – with our expertise, energy, and resources – will determine whether our future is one of openness, security, and fundamental rights, or one controlled through fear, surveillance, and centralized power.

I am proud to take the torch and help lead our EFF community forward at this pivotal time in history. And we need you in the fight.

Right now, we are celebrating an important U.S. Supreme Court win in Chatrie v. United States that reaffirmed our right to privacy in our location data and will help curb one flank of supercharged government surveillance. But in another case, the Court overturned 90 years of precedent limiting executive power and rubber-stamped the President’s firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. The U.S. government also issued a chilling directive to Anthropic to prohibit the company from allowing foreign nationals to access its newest technology – then rescinded it two weeks later. And legislation limiting access to social media is advancing in many places around the world.

Each headline is different, but they tell one story: Many of the threats that once seemed hypothetical are now reality, and EFF’s work to ensure technology supports rights, justice, freedom, and innovation for all people has never been more critical. Governments and large corporations possess surveillance capabilities that were unimaginable just a few years ago. Ever greater concentrations of power are shaping speech, creativity, markets, and democratic institutions. Governments are increasingly seeking to control the internet and people’s ability to access information and communicate freely. Our community’s work is fundamental to the future of our countries, our livelihoods, and literally our lives.

I am also mindful that the United States marked its 250th anniversary last week and that this week is EFF’s 36th birthday. Anniversaries, like leadership changes, naturally invite reflection on where we are in history and challenge us to look ahead. What does it mean for a democracy, founded in an analog age, to survive in the digital world?

It is also an opportunity to ask how our EFF community can be even stronger, so we can help bring more people into the work of making sure technology serves everyone.

I began my career in public-interest work in Silicon Valley at the height of the 1990s dotcom boom, working at some of the earliest nonprofit “digital divide” programs that provided community access to computers and the internet, because I have always believed in the power of technology to create greater opportunity for all, not just profit for a few. I have dedicated my career to public interest technology because I am driven to see technology’s promise realized in my lifetime, and there is no other organization in the world that can do more to meet this moment and build a future where technology truly works for people than EFF.

These are perilous times. It is also a moment of extraordinary possibility. The future of AI has not been written and we can work together to get it right. We can make sure our laws reflect the needs of the modern digital age. We can build the technologies that empower rather than marginalize communities.

For me, the work starts with recognizing that digital rights are not a siloed policy issue. We must fight and win on the digital terrain to organize, speak freely, access healthcare, find work, receive an education, and participate fully in democracy. We can and must reject a false choice between innovation and civil liberties, and build power across movements to make sure technology truly works for people.

This challenge is what EFF was purpose-built to tackle. When EFF was founded in 1990, the World Wide Web did not yet exist, cell phones were the size of bricks, and EFF’s founders understood something remarkably prescient: Technology and civil liberties would become inseparable.

Now we all live digital lives, and the important digital rights issues that EFF has worked on since 1990 have become kitchen-table issues all around the world. EFF’s founders understood that how technology is built, developed, used, and controlled deeply intersects with rights, justice, freedom, and democracy.

EFF’s unique combination of world-class lawyers, activists, and public interest technologists pursue change simultaneously in the courts, legislatures, companies, and our communities, and pierce through false choices. This integrated, intersectional approach, grounded in deep legal, policy, and technical expertise, is a linchpin in fighting and winning against some of the most powerful forces in the world – both governments and trillion-dollar companies.

We defend people against unlawful government data collection and challenge license plate and face surveillance in our communities. We shape AI law and policy to protect civil liberties and support creativity and innovation. We push companies to strengthen encryption, fight to ensure you have the right to own what you buy, and build public interest technologies like Privacy Badger and Certbot that millions of people rely on every day.

This work matters because it all answers the same question: Will technology empower or control us?

As I look ahead, there are major battles on the horizon. We must:

• Challenge increasingly sophisticated government and corporate surveillance systems that endanger our rights, democracy, safety and security
• Preserve strong encryption and online anonymity
• Ensure AI is developed and used in ways that respect fundamental rights and works for those who build it, use it, and are affected by it
• Confront the concentrations of power that limit access to new creativity and defend the rights of developers to build and innovate

To meet these challenges, we must not only utilize the powerful levers of successful litigation, smart policy interventions, and effective public interest technology tools. We must also build a broader movement that recognizes that fights on the digital terrain are integral to all our fights for rights and justice – from civil rights and immigrants’ rights to reproductive rights, disability rights, LGBTQ+ rights, workers' rights, economic justice, and more. Together, our EFF community can help broaden the public conversation about technology's role in society and continue building the collective power necessary to shape the future rather than react to it.

I have hit the ground running, working with EFF’s exceptional staff and Board and starting to meet many of you in the broader EFF community. Every conversation has reinforced my confidence that our community is uniquely prepared for the work ahead. I’m looking forward to meeting more of you at my first EFFecting Change livestream on August 12 with Cory Doctorow, and hope this conversation is just the beginning of finding new ways to work together. Please stay tuned for additional in-person events with me around the country this fall.

As we celebrate EFF's birthday, I am energized by all the opportunities ahead for us to build on EFF’s strong foundation and make it even mightier. And we need you and others in the fight. Please renew your membership, become a recurring monthly supporter, and introduce someone new to EFF by snagging them a gift membership.

Everything we accomplish—every lawsuit, every policy victory, every public interest technology tool, every campaign—is possible because people like you are committed to ensuring technology strengthens freedom, privacy, creativity, and opportunity for everyone.

The future we want and need will be built by people and movements working together to ensure technology empowers rather than oppresses.

Let’s build that future together.

This post is part 2 in a series about automated content moderation. Read the first post here.

When whistleblower Frances Haugen leaked a set of documents from Meta in 2020, among the revelations was a jarring statistic: The company’s algorithms designed to detect terrorist content incorrectly deleted nonviolent Arabic-language content 77 percent of the time, while failing to detect hate speech under the company’s own policies in many instances. Meta’s own transparency report released later that year demonstrated similar findings. Five years later, researchers in the region report that overzealous moderation remains a problem, while paths to remedy have all but collapsed.

Where these systems are faltering in Arabic, they’re positively failing in less-resourced languages. As a 2025 report from the Center for Democracy and Technology found, labeled datasets in certain languages and dialects such as Maghrebi Arabic and Kiswahili contain inconsistencies, bias, and inaccuracies due to the limited hiring of annotators who actually speak the languages as well as shifts in the languages themselves. An investigation into ChatGPT’s outputs in several low-resource languages demonstrates the depth of problem.

But language disparities are just one of several concerns as automated moderation becomes more widespread. From the systemic suppression of content from Palestine to the repeated misclassification of LGBTQ+ content as adult or explicit material, these varied examples demonstrate the risks of overreliance on automated moderation—and the need for stronger safeguards.

Transparency, Cultural Competence, Appeals

As we discussed in Part 1 of this series, automated systems can process content at a scale that humans never could, potentially enabling better moderation at scale and alleviating the psychological load on ill-paid moderators whose jobs require them to view incredibly disturbing content. But automated systems also reproduce existing biases, struggle to understand context, and often make mistakes that disproportionately affect journalists, activists, artists, and other vulnerable and marginalized communities.

As Rachel Griffin wrote in 2023, “Perfectly accurate moderation is not only technically out of reach but intrinsically impossible.” Despite those intrinsic flaws, there is a great deal companies, policymakers, and civil society can do to help ensure that highly-automated systems operate in ways that respect human rights, minimize predictable harms, and provide meaningful accountability when they fail. If companies are going to continue relying on automation to moderate users’ speech—and there is little reason to believe they won’t—then accountability must evolve alongside these technologies.

That evolution can start with committing to the Santa Clara Principles 2.0. These principles, first outlined in 2020 and re-launched in 2021 after substantial international input, reflect the needs and expectations of the global community and specifically address automation. The first Foundational Principle states:

Companies should ensure that human rights and due process considerations are integrated at all stages of the content moderation process, and should publish information outlining how this integration is made. Companies should only use automated processes to identify or remove content or suspend accounts, whether supplemented by human review or not, when there is sufficiently high confidence in the quality and accuracy of those processes. Companies should also provide users with clear and accessible methods of obtaining support in the event of content and account action. 

Drawing on the Santa Clara Principles 2.0, international human rights standards, and years of research documenting the shortcomings of automated moderation, we propose eight recommendations for policymakers thinking about regulation and companies deploying AI-assisted content moderation systems.

1. Automated technologies should help, not replace, human moderators. For example, automated systems can help flag and prioritize content for review, while humans can interpret context, handle sensitive cases, and refine system performance.
2. Companies must be transparent about when and how automation is used in content decisions.
3. Companies must regularly audit their automated systems for bias, with particular attention to low-resource languages, vulnerable and marginalized communities, and conflict zones.
4. Users must have the ability to appeal, and to provide context when they believe human or automated moderation decisions have wrongfully removed their content. Appeals should be promptly evaluated and decided by human moderators.
5. Companies should regularly assess the human rights impact of their moderation decisions, and issue public statements of the results
6. If they rely on third-party vendors, companies should carefully (and regularly) audit those vendors for compliance with these same principles
7. Lawmakers should avoid promoting and passing legislation that effectively or explicitly mandates automated moderation systems
8. Policymakers should also refrain from attempting to dictate platforms technical and design choices to favor or disfavor particular expression.

These recommendations understand that automated content moderation isn’t just a technical problem for clever engineers and product teams to solve. Because content moderation shapes public discourse and fundamental rights, its design and oversight must respond to the concerns of policymakers, civil society, independent researchers, and the communities most affected by these systems.

This is the second post in a 2-part series on automated content moderation. Read the first post here.

In the near future, AI-powered surveillance systems will be able to track everything we do in public, and much of what we do in private. And if we do something wrong—shoplift, litter, jaywalk, you name it—the system will notice, retain it, tie it to your official government record, communicate that fact to you, and provide real-time alerts to any relevant authorities… and maybe also to the general public.

Think of these systems as automated speed cameras, but on steroids. Only they’ll enforce not just speed limits, but any other rule you can imagine. And you won’t receive a ticket weeks later by mail; you’ll be informed about and fined for your violation immediately...

California’s insurance commissioner is trying to weaken Consumer Watchdog as it fights a plan to help property insurers in the state.