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.

In courts across the country, publishers and creators are suing large AI companies for training generative AI models on copyrighted works. It’s easy to see these cases as a David-and-Goliath showdown between authors and publishers fighting for a cut of Big Tech company profits. But this fight is actually much larger. It affects billions of people who aren’t represented in the case at all, including researchers, artists, activists, journalists, people with disabilities, and anyone who accesses and shares content online.   

That’s why EFF is stepping in to defend the public’s rights in these cases. Today, EFF filed an amicus brief in In re OpenAI, explaining how the court’s ruling on fair use could impact people worldwide. If fair use gets narrowed, it will impede work that benefits the public, like medical research and investigative journalism, and even limit access to privacy protection tools.

Let’s be clear: creators and workers deserve support as AI changes their fields, and Big Tech companies must be held accountable for the harms they cause. But giving copyright holders more control over the web won’t accomplish either of these goals. If the plaintiffs prevail in these cases, courts would have to rewrite copyright law in ways that hurt everyone except powerful media and tech companies.

Rewriting Fair Use Makes Everyone Worse Off

Copyright exists for one reason: to stimulate creativity and innovation in service of the greater public good. Unfortunately, the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are arguing to limit everyone’s fair use rights, in ways that would thwart the basic purpose of copyright. The harms of shrinking fair use will go far beyond generative AI, impacting everyone.

Initial speculation that AI models would be infringement machines, churning out works highly similar to those on which they were trained, has proven unfounded. And courts have already found fair use in cases where copyrighted works were used to train generative AI models, recognizing that training uses those works for a fundamentally different purpose.

Plaintiffs in these cases argue that, even if the use is transformative, using their works to train AI is still unfair, because the AI models could generate new, non-infringing works that might compete with plaintiffs’ own works. They also argue that scraping or downloading the data without permission—or in some cases, from websites containing infringing copies—was independently infringing and/or rendered any subsequent uses of that data unfair.

These arguments would put beneficial research and reporting at risk. First, if copying without permission rules out fair use, the law will never protect transformative uses that benefit us all. Researchers, journalists, and other watchdog groups gather information the same way AI companies do—but they do it to serve the public interest, and often to hold Big Tech itself accountable. For example, journalists and nonprofit researchers have used “crawling” or “scraping” to investigate potentially anticompetitive practices by tech companies, and research misinformation and hateful content posted on X. Their data acquisition techniques are virtually identical to those used by AI giants—but they lack those companies’ deep pockets.

Requiring users to show that copyrighted material was lawfully obtained would also threaten everyday internet use. As EFF’s brief explained, that requirement would “cast legal doubt on the billions of copies we collectively make every day through routine online activities like opening emails, clicking on an embedded link, visiting websites, sharing pictures, streaming music, and watching videos. All of this activity requires intermediate copying.”

Fair use is what lets us all use the internet without being compelled to track the source of every image, video, and article that we click on, and make sure the rights are all cleared.

Additionally, while rightsholders are understandably concerned about competition from AI generated works, copyright law exists to promote new creation, not protect authors who published first. Under the plaintiffs’ theory, no one could stand upon the shoulders of giants. Copyright could prevent people from writing new books inspired by themes in a favorite novel or genre, or prevent academic researchers from publishing literature reviews that distill insights from prior research—simply because readers might prefer those new publications over those that came first.

Finally, general-purpose AI models are neither designed nor usually used to create works targeted at any particular market. These models have been used to generate new insights and tools for medicine, science, journalism, art, and accessibility. For instance, an AI-powered tool called Be My AI uses Open AI’s GPT models to provide visual descriptions for people who are blind or have low vision. Generative tools have also accelerated scientific research, and researchers have used these tools to develop new medical treatments and medications for conditions previously thought to be incurable.

Mandatory Licensing Would Entrench Big Tech

Some creators and publishers argue that AI developers should just get a license. But requiring permission for every work used would give the largest companies massive advantages over small competitors and impede academic research. As Professor Lawrence Lessig recently noted:

If all training requires a license, then none but a handful of tech giants will be able to afford the costs of training. That’s not because authors are greedy but because the copyright system is the least efficient property system known to man.

Moreover, creators are unlikely to benefit from these licensing arrangements in many cases. Media and entertainment giants have exploited the imbalance between themselves and underpaid working artists for decades. Trying to help creators by giving them more rights under copyright is, as Cory Doctorow has written, like trying to help a bullied kid by giving them more lunch money for the bully to take. Artists aren’t getting good deals from record labels or publishers now; there’s no reason to think these companies, which already own the copyrights, will treat artists more fairly once they control the data that powers AI.

The Future of AI Is Too Important to Leave to Big Content or Big Tech

AI technologies will affect all of us, and copyright law is ill-equipped to address many of these consequences. The rules governing these technologies should be rules that serve the public—not just the small number of companies that can afford to litigate copyright battles for decades, or settle for billions.

Neat video:

The sighting, announced September 2, marks the first time anyone has spotted a live bigfin squid, which belongs to the Magnapinna genus, in the northeastern Pacific Ocean.

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.

Developers of virtual private network (VPN) apps are reporting that their products are again being pulled from Apple’s App Store in Russia. This is an unacceptable crackdown on a vital tool to protect privacy and speech online.

Why? VPNs give people a way to control their own online activities. When you visit a website through a VPN, that website only sees the VPN server's location (well, IP address) rather than your actual location. It's like sending a letter through a P.O. box so the recipient doesn't know where you really live. It can also disguise where you’re accessing information from, which can make it possible to access information banned by your government.

This is an unacceptable crackdown on a vital tool to protect privacy and speech online.

Going after tools that give people the space to communicate and access information freely is a common tactic from the totalitarian playbook. This latest demand comes after several steps the Russian government’s taken to surveil speech specifically on Apple products. In 2024, the Moscow Times reported that Russia’s state media watchdog, Roskomnadzor, went after VPN apps on the Apple App Store, after banning access to Western social media platforms and blacklisting opposition media sites. Russia then blocked Apple’s FaceTime software in 2025, according to Apple Insider.

Bloomberg also recently reported that the Russian government has added Apple and Microsoft to its state surveillance registry. This gives Roskomnadzor access to local users’ correspondence, Apple Insider reported, and puts both companies in a position to turn over customer information to the country’s security services as required.

With government control encroaching on their devices and less access to tools that give them alternate methods, people in Russia are left with shrinking options to communicate online or find information that isn’t state-sanctioned.

While Russia’s actions offer a more extreme vision of what happens when the government tries to enforce speech rules by attacking vital privacy tools, it is far from the only government doing so. Several states in the U.S., bent on making it difficult to circumvent invasive age-gating laws, have suggested banning VPNs—either to access certain content or in some cases to simply ban them outright. EFF has publicly (and loudly) criticized these proposals, because going after VPNs is a dangerous step down the road of censorship.

Attacks on speech and privacy online are deeply troubling, no matter where they happen. What those in power may see as a “loophole” in their invasive laws is actually an expression of user control. We’ll continue to speak out when we see governments going after them to take that control away.

This story is interesting:

One Civic owner purchased a cheap aftermarket head unit off Amazon, and decided to have Claude work its magic on it, like it would a smart TV. What was reportedly discovered isn’t surprising, but is worth knowing about.

Among the pre-installed bloatware—­or spyware, if you’re being less charitable­—was a voice assistant equipped with WebView, an Android system component that lets apps display content off the web. This apparently always used about a third of processing power, even while idle, which isn’t great. There were also Baidu location services, a call recorder (!), a DAB radio client that is pretty much useless in the U.S., and Adobe Acrobat, presumably so your passenger can entertain themselves with PDFs on the go...

A nanoscale particle with a unique structure, developed at MIT, holds potential as a customizable delivery vehicle for personalized cancer vaccines.

The backbone of the vaccine is a modified, harmless bacteriophage called M13, which forms a nanofiber that can be coated with cancer antigens. By precisely controlling the density of those cancer proteins, the researchers found that they could create a vaccine that prevents the development of colon tumors in mice.

This type of delivery particle could be adapted to carry many different antigens, allowing for the creation of personalized vaccines to treat individual patients’ tumors, the researchers say.

“The great thing about this is that it’s modular and we could switch out different antigens on demand, so you could design it to be patient-specific and target a known antigen for a particular kind of cancer,” says Angela Belcher, the James Mason Crafts Professor of Biological Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering and a member of the Koch Institute.

Belcher is the senior author of the study, which appears today in the journal Advanced Healthcare Materials. Shengnan Huang, research scientist at the Koch Institute, is the paper’s lead author. Jack Rudrum, Huaiyao Peng, and Hao Nghi Luu, graduate students at the Koch Institute, are also authors of the paper.

Viral vaccine assembly

For more than 20 years, Belcher’s lab has been deploying the M13 bacteriophage in a variety of applications. This virus, which is harmless to humans, consists of a single strand of DNA coated in a protein shell, or capsid. 

Belcher has previously developed techniques for generating materials by engineering these viruses to self-assemble into nanoscale scaffolds. By coating these scaffolds with inorganic materials, they can create functional devices such as batteries, semiconductors, solar cells, and catalysts, with precise control over the electronic, optical, and magnetic properties of the materials.

More recently, Belcher’s lab has been developing methods to control features of the phage that could allow it to be repurposed for medical applications, including vaccine delivery. 

“We’re taking this toolkit that we’ve worked on and developed over decades and formatting it to be specific for vaccine therapeutics,” Belcher says. “Some of the lessons learned from making batteries and all these other things are now being fine-tuned to make personalized vaccines.”

The capsid that surrounds the M13 phage forms a long filament made from viral proteins. To create vaccines, the researchers modify one of these proteins, known as pVIII, by attaching an antigen to the end of the protein. This can be done by adding the gene for the antigen to the virus’s DNA.

Some of the lab’s previous work had suggested that changing the density of cancer antigens attached to the capsid could affect the strength of the resulting immune response. In the new study, Huang wanted to find a way to control that density. 

“The antigen is the specific target we want to initiate the immune response against, which means we have to ensure the right dose of antigen to make sure that we can have a strong immune response,” she says.

Huang discovered that she could increase the density of the modified pVIII proteins by adding one or two negatively charged amino acids to the protein sequence. The density could be further fine-tuned by adding a genetic mutation that slows down production of the antigen protein.

In this study, the researchers also figured out how to boost the phage’s own ability to act as a vaccine adjuvant, by changing the genetic sequence of the virus’s DNA. Most vaccines need to be delivered along with an adjuvant such as aluminum hydroxide, which helps to stimulate a strong immune response. However, the M13 phage can act as an adjuvant itself because single-stranded DNA activates a pathway called TLR9, which is part of the body’s innate immune system.

“We can control the exact length. We can control the exact antigen expression, density, pattern, the exact adjuvant amount. A lot of times with a vaccine, you’ll have to put a different adjuvant with it, but now it’s all genetically encoded,” Belcher says. 

Targeting tumors

Using these techniques, the researchers showed that they could design phages that express an antigen called SIINFEKL at densities ranging from 6 percent to 70 percent. SIINFEKL, a small protein that can be engineered into tumors, is often used as a model to test vaccine effectiveness.

The researchers tested two of these vaccines in mice, one with 6 percent density and one with 35 percent, and found that the one with 35 percent was the most protective. 

After vaccination with the higher-density particles, mice were much less likely to develop tumors when later exposed to melanoma cancer cells expressing the SIINFEKL antigen. These mice also generated more T cells targeting SIINFEKL. This is, in part, because dendritic cells, which help to activate T cells, were more likely to take up vaccines with higher antigen density, the researchers found.

In another set of experiments, the researchers created and tested a vaccine carrying a neoantigen, which is only present in the tumor cells. This protein, known as ADPGK, is specifically expressed by colon tumors in a mouse model of cancer. When given the higher density vaccine, these mice were much less likely to develop colon tumors.

In this study, the researchers tested the vaccine as a way to prevent cancer from developing, and in their previous work, they adapted it for use to treat mouse colon tumors that have already formed. In the future, they also hope to use it to combat other types of cancer.

“This interesting work adds another cog to improve the translational potential of the M13 phage platform for cancer immunotherapeutics,” says Alberto Danielli, an associate professor of molecular biology at the University of Bologna, who was not involved in the study. “I look forward to seeing whether this platform is also effective against established tumors and whether additional tumor antigens can be displayed with comparable molecular and immunological efficacy.”

This platform could be especially well-suited for personalized cancer vaccines, because many different antigens could be swapped into the vaccine.

“Because this is a modularly engineered platform, we can change the antigen we are interested in. For colon cancer, we use this specific antigen. For other types of cancer, we can just plug in other antigens and they can be assembled in this platform,” Huang says.

The research was funded, in part, by the Koch Institute Frontier Research Program, the Marble Center for Cancer Nanomedicine, and the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 30 October 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02791-x

The long-term response of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets to warming is often studied using ice-only simulations. Here the authors use a coupled ice–atmosphere–ocean model and find that East Antarctica remains stable even under higher warming because changes in atmospheric circulation increase precipitation sensitivity.

In today’s digital world, the internet is an essential resource for young people to access information, explore community, and find themselves. But we know that this often comes alongside fears of experiencing online harms like doxxing, grooming, or bullying.

Trying to protect your family from everything all the time is impractical and exhausting, but some thoughtful planning can help families devise a workable plan that meets their needs and addresses their concerns.

That’s why this Digital Parent Week, we’re sharing easy tips on how parents and their children can work together to co-curate a digital safety plan that helps all members of the family enjoy the benefits of technology while protecting their online privacy and safety. 

Start with Open Conversations

Online safety begins with communication, not just restrictions. Talk with a young person about how they use the internet: their favourite apps, games, and social media platforms for example. Creating a supportive environment helps young people feel comfortable asking for help if something goes wrong online.

Together, you can think about:

1. What do we want to protect? e.g., I want to protect a young person’s privacy and mental health when they’re playing Roblox. They love Roblox and use it to communicate and hang out with their best friend, so we’d like to find a way to make it as safe as possible.
2. Who do we want to protect it from? e.g., messages from strangers, staying up too late playing, wasting money on pointless digital junk in games.
3. How bad are the consequences if we fail? e.g, losing some money on a scam or having creepy conversations with strangers that could escalate into something more nefarious or dangerous.
4. How likely is it that we will need to protect it? e.g., I don’t know the likelihood of a stranger messaging you on Roblox because I’m not sure how communication works on the platform, but I’ve heard from their friends that strangers message them all the time in some games.
5. How much trouble are we willing to go through to try to prevent potential consequences? e.g., I’m willing to learn from my child how the game works, play the game with my child, and learn how to work the parental controls. 
6. Who are our allies? e.g., my partner, our parents, as well as a young person’s best friends and their parents.

It's easy to think of a young person's experience on the internet as being totally disconnected and different from your own. But now is a great time to also interrogate your own internet habits, like the sorts of sites you engage with, tools you use, and privacy settings you've set. These questions are as valuable to help you as a parent as they are just an internet user.

Sometimes even just figuring out what conversations are worth having can take some effort, we've put together some ideas to get you started in our guide.

Make Privacy a Family Priority

Digital security training can feel overwhelming but this is why a community-oriented approach helps. In speaking with your family and friends, you can build out digital security practices that work for you. This makes it more likely that your privacy practices will become second nature to you and your loved ones.

Use secure messaging services for every communication: Choosing a secure service ensures that your privacy is protected from government and corporate surveillance. If you can convince your family to get on board, options like Signal provide the most extensive privacy protections out of the box through its use of end-to-end encryption and limited data collection. But we understand that sometimes it's easier to stick with whatever the family already uses for a group chat, like WhatsApp, Apple's iMessage, or Google Messages, so take the time to familiarize yourself with the limits of WhatsApp and RCS encryption.

Consider the content posted online: It's easy to accidentally share personal information through photos, messages, and other content. Children and adults may unknowingly share personal information through photos, messages, location settings and app permissions. Take time together to review privacy settings, check which apps can access the camera or location, and discuss why personal details should be shared carefully. Make sure you have family agreement about when and where to post photos of each other or your home.

Create incident response plans: Developing a plan for if or when something bad happens is a good practice for anyone, but especially with younger people. It’s important to strategize with your family around what to do in the event of such things happening, and doing so before an incident occurs is much easier than when you’re presently facing a crisis.

Alongside this, simple steps like using strong and unique passwords on all devices, including those that are shared in the family, can make a real difference. Regardless of age, there’s no time like the present to get started on good security hygiene, and for many that starts with a password manager and two-factor authentication.

How to Think About Parental Controls

Many sites permit parents to control features such as personalization, algorithmic feed, autoplay, endless scroll, reactions, notifications, and time limits. Talk as a family about which features are important and useful and which are problematic. The conversations above around boundaries and digital literacy are a more effective way to prepare youth for accessing the internet. To develop true autonomy, young people need the privacy to discover the world for themselves without their parents monitoring the contents of every conversation they have.

Explore new apps together and revisit family rules as they grow. These decision points where you’re exploring with a young person what you’re both comfortable with can be good moments to “find your way to a yes” for whatever feature or tool or game they’re asking about. The questions they ask, along with your responses, provide a road map for what to look for in privacy controls that can get you to a place where everyone is comfortable engaging with that technology. 

Small Steps = Big Difference

There is no one size fits all to the tech questions and concerns a parent will face, and keeping young people safe online is not about removing every risk and monitoring every click. This Digital Parenting Week, you can start to focus on what’s important for your family and how to best achieve those goals. 

If you're still not sure where to start, installing EFF’s Privacy Badger on every computer in your household is a great starting point to protecting everyone's privacy.

For more detailed information on all these tips and more, visit EFF’s Online Privacy Guide for Parents and Youth.

You know it’s autumn when the scent of pumpkin spice latte begins to waft through the air at the Dunkin’ in the Stratton Student Center, and students in MIT’s Next House residence hall diligently begin to piece together the many parts needed to showcase Next Haunt — a combination of a Halloween haunted house and escape room, built in the basement of the hall.

Every fall since 2014, students — also known as hauntmasters — spend several weekends building the room and preparing puzzles, physical tasks, or word challenges to obtain a code to open locks that let participants escape the house. This year’s theme, titled “Where the Light Ends,” follows “Terror Under Destruction,” “Next Stop: MBTA,” and last year’s theme: “Get in the HOLE.”

Next Haunt is free and open to all MIT students, also known as “test subjects.” Participants typically spend around 20 minutes in small, dark, enclosed rooms, working with four to six teammates to find the clues they need to escape.

Along the way, they have to navigate zombies — played by student actors — who may shout at them or splash them with blood (fake) while they solve the puzzles. If a zombie touches a participant, they become “paralyzed” and can no longer move, but they can still communicate and relay information to their teammates.

Teams must work closely, strategize, delegate tasks, and communicate effectively as the clock counts down. The group with the quickest escape time gets bragging rights, and every group signs their names on a wooden board to show that they participated.

MIT junior Kiyoko Hayano, Next Haunt co-producer, says, “I became involved in Next Haunt during my first semester at MIT because I had experience with larger-scale painting. I split the build director’s role with two other freshmen, including Michelle Liang, our current assistant producer. I thought this would be a great opportunity to take a break from psets and work with my hands, and fell in love with the club.”

Safety first

Before the room is built and the puzzles and costumes are created, careful planning takes place to ensure the escape room is safe, fire-resistant, and passes an on-site inspection. MIT’s Campus Construction and Environment, Health, and Safety offices are involved from the start, and all students who partake in the build are required to attend safety orientation and tool training.

“We currently have 18 people on our executive team, and we have 12 outside volunteers come help over the first few weekends of Next Haunt build,” says Hayano. “We then run Next Haunt for six-and-a-half hours every night for two weekends at the end of October.”

Once the build is complete, several alumni volunteers conduct a “test run” to make sure the puzzles and clues are hard, but not impossible, and anyone who wants to leave the room before the allotted time can easily find the door out built with Velcro closures. 

Escaping by solving the puzzles is not easy, and not all participants are successful. Last year, only 16 percent of the 73 teams successfully got out of the room. The winning team escaped in just under 15 minutes.

Alumnus and previous Next Haunt producer Allen Lin ’26 notes, “I became involved with Next Haunt in my freshman year after being a test subject myself, and I loved the creative and building process so much I wanted to join. My favorite part was seeing all the teams go through the house, especially on the last day when we hosted past Haunt alumni. It was just as rewarding to see how much our test subjects enjoy the house as it was to share the many laughs and moments of camaraderie among my team. I’m excited to come back as an alum and see what the Next Haunt team built this year!”

Environmentally mindful

At the end of Next Haunt, the escape room is dismantled, and anything that can be repurposed safely is stored for the following year’s build. The executive crew then goes to a Boston-area escape room to celebrate their hard work.

“It’s a joy working collaboratively with students and connecting them to campus partners who lend their expertise as the build develops," says Milo Alto, manager of special projects, housing and residential services. “Students get very creative every year with the theme and costumes, but they also learn valuable leadership skills along the way — time management, delegation, working with peers, and implementation of a detailed plan. It’s also a great way to build community.”

Interested MIT students can sign up to help plan and work on the 2027 build.

MIT researchers have shown that they can accurately track muscle movement using tiny magnetic beads implanted in the muscle. These measurements could make it easier for people with certain types of amputations to control their prosthetic limbs.

For decades, researchers have been working to develop neuroprosthetic limbs, which use neural information from muscles remaining after an amputation to guide the prosthetic limb. Measurements of a muscle’s length, velocity and activation can be fed into the control algorithms that guide the limbs, allowing individuals with leg amputation to walk with a more natural gait, or those with arm amputation to manipulate objects more effectively.

Until now, these devices have relied on muscle activity measurements from electrodes placed on the surface of the skin. However, those measurements have not proven reliable enough to ensure safety while walking with a neuroprosthetic leg. 

The MIT team hopes that their new magnetic tracking system, which offers more accurate measurements, will enable commercial development of such limbs.

“For four decades, the standard methodology for neurally controlling prostheses has been to use skin electrodes to measure muscle activation. However, to control a prosthetic limb, joint position, torque, or impedance has to be controlled, and one cannot directly determine such mechanical signals using electrical activation alone,” says Hugh Herr, a professor of media arts and sciences, co-director of the K. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics at MIT, an associate member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and the senior author of the new study.

In the new study, which appears today in Nature Sensors, the researchers demonstrated the accuracy of the magnetic measurements in three participants with below-knee amputations.

“This interface is minimally invasive, so it could be accessible to more people. You place two beads in the muscle and you have access to all of this rich information about the muscle dynamics,” says Christopher Shallal, an MIT graduate student in the Harvard-MIT Program in Health Sciences and Technology and one of the lead authors of the paper.

The paper’s other lead author is Cameron Taylor PhD ’20, an assistant professor of biomedical engineering at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Tracking muscles

For many years, Herr’s lab has been developing human-machine interfaces that can be used to control an artificial limb in a way that makes it more like using a natural limb. Obtaining accurate measurements of how the user is moving the muscles at the amputation site is critical to the success of this type of prosthesis.

Electrodes on the surface of the skin can reveal the electrical activation of the muscle below, and those measurements can be converted to estimates of how much a muscle is contracting or flexing. Based on that input, a robotic controller generates commands that guide the prosthetic limb in the user’s intended direction. 

However, that measurement approach, known as electromyography, does not always provide accurate enough information. The electrical signal is not a perfect proxy for muscle dynamics; for example, when a muscle is held at a fixed length for several seconds, the signal fades. Additionally, the electrodes may pick up signals from muscles other than the intended target, and sweat can interfere with detection of the signal.

Last year, Herr and his colleagues reported a “bionic knee” prosthesis that uses electrodes implanted in the muscles to provide accurate measurements and feed them into a robotic controller. This approach proved successful in a small clinical study, but alongside that work, Herr’s team has also been working on a less invasive approach that relies on magnets instead of electrodes.

With this approach, known as magnetomicrometry, pairs of magnets are implanted into muscles. When a muscle contracts or stretches, external sensors placed on the skin can measure the change in distance between the magnets, allowing muscle length and velocity to be calculated.

“Magnets can be tracked wirelessly through the body, so you can get very specific muscle signals and measure the mechanical output of the muscle without needing to be extremely invasive,” Shallal says.

Better control

In a 2021 study led by Taylor, Herr’s lab first demonstrated the magnet-based technique in animal models. The new Nature Sensors study extends the approach to humans with long-term magnetic implants. For the study, the researchers recruited three participants who have below-knee amputations.

All of these participants had a type of amputation that creates what’s called an agonist-antagonist myoneural interface (AMI). With this surgical procedure, muscle pairs are reconnected during surgery so that they still dynamically communicate with each other within the residual limb. This sensory feedback, called proprioception, helps the wearer of the prosthesis to decide how to position and move their prosthetic limb. 

Participants had magnets implanted in up to four muscles of the ankle joint. The surgeries were performed at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in collaboration with plastic surgeon Matthew Carty, a co-author of the study. The beads are 3 millimeters in diameter, about the size of a sesame seed. The magnets are made from an alloy of neodymium, iron, and boron, and are coated with gold and a polymer called parylene C to make them biocompatible. The magnetic signals can be read from a depth of up to 6 centimeters from the skin’s surface, using a customized external sensor that is worn over the skin, positioned over the muscles that are being tracked. 

Each of the participants in this study also had electrodes implanted into the same muscles that received magnetic beads. This allowed the researchers to compare the accuracy of three different types of measurements: magnetomicrometry, electromyography with implanted electrodes, and electromyography with electrodes on the surface of the skin.

During the experiments, the participants were not wearing a prosthetic limb but were asked to perform tasks such as moving a cursor on a screen to a particular target using their muscle movements. Using each of the three measurement techniques, the signals generated by the muscle movements were translated into control signals that, in this case, moved the cursor but in the future could be fed into the controller of a robotic ankle-foot prosthesis.  

“The cursor on the screen represented the degrees of freedom that they would control on a robotic ankle-foot prosthesis. This virtual neuroprosthetic task allowed us to compare the performance across different neural interfaces, and our results suggest that the magnet-based approach can offer more accurate and stable control,” Shallal says.

The researchers are now performing a larger study in which they are evaluating how well people can control prosthetic limbs using measurements from the magnetic beads. 

The research was funded, in part, by the Yang Tan Collective at MIT as well as a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship.

A user who is frustrated with changes a social media company made to their favorite messaging platform, like the introduction of an annoying AI chatbot, can’t do much to address the situation, short of leaving the platform.

Now, MIT researchers are offering an alternative path.

They’ve created Social.Wiki, a system that allows users to easily edit any social application made within Social.Wiki, and choose which of the edits made by others they want to see. 

For example, a user could change a messaging site on Social.Wiki to remove an AI chatbot and instead add a restaurant voting feature so their group chat can finally decide where they are going out for dinner.

“The infrastructure that we are all dependent on online is very rigid. It is based on these one-size-fits-all applications that we don’t have a lot of power to change. This project is about trying to imagine what a different web would look like where anyone can participate,” says Theia Henderson, an electrical engineering and computer science (EECS) graduate student, and lead author of a new paper on Social.Wiki.

The researchers envision a world in which, if a user is unhappy with their social app, they can edit it to change it however they like — without getting cut off from their social connections.

The platform enables users with no coding expertise to create a range of websites, including social sites like photo sharing networks, discussion forums, and dating apps. It handles all back-end work, eliminating the need for creators to set up servers or arrange databases.

Social.Wiki employs a decentralized infrastructure that allows users to retain ownership of their data as they create, edit, and navigate social websites within the platform. It also includes a “data guard” that protects user data from malicious or buggy applications. 

Through case studies and user tests, the researchers demonstrated the breadth of applications people can create with Social.Wiki, including a rideshare app where riders propose the prices they are willing to pay and a collaborative canvas for creating art together.

While Social.Wiki is still in its early days, the researchers plan to continue refining the platform as they deploy it to a wider audience. 

“We want to empower the creation of far more social applications that meet the needs of unusual small groups. Each group is unusual, but everyone is in unusual groups. Everybody has their own needs for social applications that we want to be able to address,” says David Karger, professor of EECS, a member of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), and senior author of the paper.

Henderson and Karger are joined on the paper by EECS graduate students Carmel Schare and Ana Dodik; Clemens Klokmose, a professor of computer science at Aarhus University in Denmark; Ziv Epstein, a postdoc in the MIT Media Lab; and David D. Clark, an MIT research scientist. The paper will be presented at the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology in November.

Letting users choose

Social.Wiki is a Wikipedia-like system in which users can navigate to different web applications or create their own web application within the Social.Wiki ecosystem. Each website has an “edit” button that allows any user to change the content of the site, from the text color on a message board to the pricing algorithm in a ride-sharing app.

Clicking the “edit” button in Social.Wiki opens a page that lets users view and edit the source code manually or prompt an AI assistant to make changes to the site. 

This platform builds on the researchers’ prior work on Graffiti, a web framework with a decentralized infrastructure that makes building personalized applications easier. 

With Social.Wiki, the researchers sought a collaboratively editable system that would allow anyone to revise web applications to be ideally suited for their needs and the needs of groups they belong to. 

To enable this structure, Social.Wiki relies on a strategy the researchers call “plural governance.” Instead of a central moderator deciding which content users will see, each Social.Wiki user can choose the rules that determine which edits they will see on Social.Wiki webpages.

Users can also identify “trusted editors,” so they will see edits from individuals or organizations they consider reliable.

For instance, a user could customize their rules, or “governance policy,” so they only see edits to a site that have been endorsed by at least two of their friends. When the Social.Wiki browser loads a site for a user, it applies the governance policy that user selected to decide which version of the site to present.

For example, based on each user’s choices and edits, the system might show one user a ride-sharing app with a uniform pricing algorithm while another user might see the same app with a dynamic pricing algorithm.

“No website is tied to a particular machine. This means we have no centralized ownership over the websites or the underlying infrastructure,” Henderson explains.

Security and creativity

In this decentralized infrastructure, user data are stored separately from the websites that access it, which helps keep data secure.

Social.Wiki also employs a data guard, which prompts a user to review each request from a website that is attempting to access their data.

“In Social.Wiki, these websites are held in common and anybody can edit them, but the data guard makes sure that each user stays in control of what happens to their data,” Karger adds.

The researchers evaluated Social.Wiki through several case studies. For one, they developed a messaging platform that allows participants to modify the chat’s styling and interface without affecting the experience of others. In another, they built a collaborative ride-sharing app that enables riders to adjust the fare they want to pay using a transparent “living wage” calculator.

They also sponsored a hackathon in which users built Social.Wiki applications.

Participants developed a range of creative sites, including a housing co-op communication tool that organizes chats on a map of the co-op, as well as a garden-themed microblogging site where posts are “planted” as flowers.

“Even the little bit that has been done so far with Social.Wiki demonstrates that there is so much more that could be done with social apps if users could specialize them to meet a particular group’s needs,” Karger says.

Moving forward, the researchers are working to deploy Social.Wiki to a broader audience and gather feedback from more diverse user groups. They also want to make technical upgrades to enable end-to-end encryption on private message data and provide better developer tools.

This work was funded, in part, by Schmidt Sciences and the National Science Foundation (NSF). 

For decades, scientists have been able to look at individual moments in the development of an embryo: a snapshot of a developing brain, a picture of how the heart takes shape, or a glimpse of cells beginning to form the nervous system.

But what if instead of taking snapshots, they could watch the entire process unfold?

A new study out of the lab of MIT Professor Jonathan Weissman, a member of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, offers one of the most detailed views yet of how a mammal is built, cell by cell.

By following the family history of over a million cells as a mouse embryo develops, the researchers have created a kind of developmental blueprint, or movie, showing how cells divide and ultimately become the tissues and organs in the body.

This open-access work, published Oct. 8 in the journal Cell, in collaboration with Zachary Smith’s group at Yale University and the Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, provides a comprehensive view of a process that has long been studied in pieces: how a single fertilized egg gives rise to hundreds of different kinds of cells, arranged in the right places and at the right times to build an animal.

“This is really a view of how the information in the genome plays out over space and time to go from linear DNA to a three-dimensional animal,” Weissman says.

The map could have broad implications for understanding birth defects and cancer. Many birth defects arise when cells change course as tissues and organs are being assembled. A detailed map of typical development could help researchers pinpoint where and when those processes go awry. In cancer, the same approach could help scientists trace when cells acquire traits such as the ability to spread or resist treatment. 

The map could also inform stem cell research by revealing the sequence of cell states that leads to mature, functional cell types.

In the 1980s, scientists ventured into similar territory by painstakingly following the development of Caenorhabditis elegans, a tiny worm whose transparent body contains only about 1,000 cells. Using microscopy, they could trace how individual cells divided and where their descendants ended up.

But achieving something similar in a mammal was a challenge on a vastly different scale. Mammalian embryos contain far more cells, develop inside the uterus — out of sight — and do not follow a completely predetermined script.

The new study tackles this challenge using a technology developed in the Weissman Lab called PEtracer. The system acts somewhat like a flight recorder inside a cell. PEtracer makes small, heritable changes to DNA that are passed down as cells divide. By reading those changes later, scientists can work backward to reconstruct which cells came from which ancestors, essentially building a family tree for the cells in the developing embryo.

In this work, the researchers combined these family trees with information about what genes were turned on in each cell and where these cells were located in the embryo. They analyzed over a million cells from mouse embryos collected at multiple points during development, allowing them to follow not just where cells ended up, but when they began heading toward particular fates.

A new study from Jay Shendure’s group at the University of Washington, published concurrently in the journal Science, uses a related approach called DNA Typewriter to track cell divisions in developing mouse embryos and build a record of their cellular history. 

Both studies provide a much more comprehensive look at mammalian development than existed previously. The Weissman team, however, studied embryos at closely spaced stages of development, looking at multiple embryos at each stage. This gave them a more detailed picture of how development unfolds and allowed them to ask how consistently cells follow the same paths from one embryo to another. 

With this detailed timeline, the researchers could also determine when cells commit to particular fates, how many early cells go on to form a tissue, and how they ultimately contribute to the developing organ.

While earlier studies might focus on one cell population, this approach puts those individual stories into the context of the entire developing animal — a perspective that is particularly useful for understanding disease. 

Cancer, for example, is not a single event, but a process in which cells acquire new characteristics over time, including the ability to spread or resist treatment. A lineage map could allow researchers to trace when those characteristics emerge and how cells change as they acquire them.

“Development and cancer both depend on decisions cells make about what they will become,” says Luke Koblan, a postdoc in the Weissman Lab and co-first author of the paper. “By tracing how cells develop in mouse embryos, we hope to better understand how cancer cells change in ways that help them spread or resist treatment.”

The work could also provide a new guide for stem cell research. Scientists have spent decades trying to coax stem cells into becoming mature, functional versions of particular cell types for research or potential therapies. But reproducing the precise conditions in an embryo is difficult.

“If we could have a step-by-step recipe for how to create every cell type in the body,” says graduate student and co-first author William Colgan, “that would be incredibly powerful for stem cell biology.”

Weissman compares the work to the Human Genome Project: knowing the sequence of the human genome gave scientists the ingredients — but not the instructions for how those ingredients are used — to build an organism.

“The genome is like the ingredient list for a four-course meal,” he says. “It tells you what the ingredients are, but it doesn’t tell you which ones you use when, how much you use, or where you put them. Without the recipe, it’s impossible to know how those ingredients can become the meal.”

This new map begins to fill in the details of that missing recipe. The result is a resource that researchers can use to explore mammalian development in a fundamentally new way. Rather than studying development as a collection of separate processes, scientists can now begin to see how those processes fit together into one unfolding story. 

In the most recent update to Apple’s devices, iOS 27.2, the company has introduced a new setting to “Exclude Apps” from Siri AI, fulfilling one of our asks from our Encrypt It Already campaign earlier this year.

One of our main concerns with new AI features on devices is how those features interact with end-to-end encrypted content, particularly with secure messaging apps. Many AI features require cloud processing, and despite privacy protections engineered into these systems, the content of secure messaging apps may leave a user’s device without their knowledge. That changes the privacy concerns around using those tools. In a perfect world, users would be able to put a barrier up to ensure data from certain apps doesn’t leave the device. Here was our initial ask:

You should be able to tell the operating system’s AI to not access an app, even if that comes at the “cost” of missing out on some features. The setting should be straightforward and easy to understand in ways the Gemini and Apple Intelligence controls currently are not.

At launch, we found the settings to control Siri AI’s app access behavior pretty confusing. You had to toggle several options to block Siri AI off from accessing an app, or disable Siri AI entirely. Turning off Siri AI and reverting to Siri Classic is, for now, still a good option if you’d prefer to use the older version.

The most recent update is far more clear and does more to protect your data. And, just as expected, it comes at the cost of some features. That’s a good thing, actually. The features not working shows that the new setting is effective. 

Here’s how to add apps to the exclusion list, once you’ve updated to 27.2:

• Open Settings > Siri > Excluded Apps
• Tap “Add Apps” and select any apps you’d like to add to the exclusion list

Now Siri AI cannot access the contents of the app. Excluding an app also means you may lose some features. For example, if you exclude the Apple Messages app, you will no longer be able to have Siri AI read or respond to messages for you. Even the “onscreen awareness” feature, where you invoke Siri and ask it for information about what you’re currently looking at, will not work anymore. For example, if you exclude Signal, you cannot invoke Siri and ask it to discern any information in the Signal app. You’ll just get these messages:

What’s the State of This on Android?

This update from Apple is also a good excuse to check in on the process on Android. It has improved a little, but is not as straightforward as Apple’s new settings, and lacks the ability to set the screen context feature per-app. But you do have some control over what Gemini can access: 

• Open up the Gemini app
• Tap your user photo, then Settings > Personal Intelligence > Connected Apps
• Revoke access to any apps you do not want Gemini to have access to

This process seems to work well enough for some data and we like that it’s opt in, but it’s not exactly intuitive. For example, Signal doesn’t appear there because Signal doesn’t support Gemini’s app access feature at all. That means Gemini can’t access the content of Signal directly, which is good. 

But Gemini can read notifications if you’ve enabled the “Device Assistance” Connected App (which you likely have, since that also enables basic features, like setting a timer—check under Settings > Personal Intelligence > Connected Apps), and it can use screen context unless you’ve disabled the Device controls > Screen context > “Use screen and app data” option in the Gemini Settings. These two features may access the contents of the Signal app or notifications, if you choose to use them. We’d prefer a more hard-lined approach that reduces the chances of user error here: Google should give users the ability to turn these features off per app.

Apple clearly understands that some users want stronger controls over what Siri AI can and cannot access. But we think they should go further and offer the option to only use “on device” AI features, similar to what Samsung offered with its Galaxy AI. We’re happy to see this change and think all operating systems need to consider similar controls moving forward.

A federal appeals court should curb the government’s abuse of grand jury subpoenas to unmask social media users who criticize lawless immigration enforcement.

That is the message from the ACLU, EFF, and other civil liberties and trade groups who filed a friend-of-the-court brief in a sealed case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

The case involves the government’s investigation of an anonymous Reddit user who commented on a post about an immigration officer in Minnesota. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) first issued an administrative subpoena to Reddit to unmask the user. When the user challenged the subpoena in court on free speech and statutory grounds (as many others have), DHS withdrew it. But then the government obtained a separate grand jury subpoena—a subpoena issued by a prosecutor to gather evidence to present to a grand jury before any criminal charges are filed—for much of the same information. The user then challenged the grand jury subpoena too, and the case is currently being appealed.

The right to speak anonymously is essential. It preserves privacy and shields critics from government retaliation. In the past year, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued grand jury subpoenas to social media companies for their users’ personal data. This is frequently done for improper purposes and without really showing that social media users have committed any crime. These subpoenas have the effect of intimidating and chilling critics, as immigration authorities have engaged in invasive, unconstitutional, and sometimes violent conduct.

As the amicus brief makes clear, courts should not defer to the government’s claims regarding the legitimacy of using grand jury subpoenas to unmask internet users. Instead, the subpoenas must receive proper First Amendment scrutiny. Like many other types of legal processes, grand jury subpoenas are issued by federal officials without prior court approval. And they too can be abused to harass or retaliate against people critical of the government.

The amicus brief was filed in early September and recently unsealed. The brief was signed by the American Civil Liberties Union of DC, EFF, the Center for Individual Rights, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, the Cato Institute, and NetChoice.

It is notable that NetChoice signed the amicus brief. It is a trade group that represents many companies who have received similar subpoenas including Reddit, Google, Meta, PayPal, among others. EFF has called on these companies to do more to defend their users’ speech and privacy rights in the face of these subpoenas.

During its annual meeting on Oct. 19, the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) announced election of 100 new members, including MIT faculty member Michael Yaffe and six MIT alumni: Steven Allen Abrams ’79; Susan L. Ettner PhD ’91; Diane Medved Harper ’80, SM ’82; Albert Icksang Ko ’81; Jennifer Lewis ScD ’91; and Alexander Marson PhD ’08.

Election to the academy is considered one of the highest honors in the fields of health and medicine and recognizes individuals who have demonstrated outstanding professional achievement and commitment to service.

Michael Yaffe, David H. Koch (1962) Professor of Science, is the founding director of the MIT Center for Precision Cancer Medicine, as well as a professor in the MIT departments of Biology and Biological Engineering and a member of the MIT Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research. He is also an attending surgeon and intensivist at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, where he specializes in injury and surgical oncology, and was recently appointed as senior advisor to the director of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) for the NCI Intramural Research Program. 

The NAM recognized Yaffe for “the discovery of phospho Ser/Thr-binding domains in proteins and how they regulate signaling pathways controlling the cell cycle or in response to stress.” His contributions in this area were pivotal to “the emergence of systems biology and bioinformatic approaches to map motifs across the kinome and characterize biochemical principles that determine kinase-substrate selectivity.” 

Yaffe’s work in cell signaling more broadly seeks to understand how signaling pathways that control DNA damage responses, survival, cell cycle progression, and immune activation are integrated at the molecular and systems levels to control tumor outcomes after treatment, and to translate discoveries into more effective cancer drug combinations and treatment strategies.

Yaffe earned his doctoral degree in biophysical chemistry and his medical degree from Case Western Reserve University. Before joining the MIT faculty in 2000, he completed residencies in both general surgery at University Hospitals of Cleveland and surgical oncology at New England Deaconess Hospital, a fellowship in surgical critical care at Harvard Medical School’s Harvard-Longwood Critical Care Program, and a postdoctoral fellowship with Lewis Cantley at Harvard Medical School. Yaffe is a decorated veteran of the war in Afghanistan and retired as a colonel from the U.S. Army Reserve Medical Corps in 2021. He is also the scientific editor-in-chief of Science Signaling, an elected member of the Association of American Physicians, and a 2021 MacVicar Faculty Fellow.  

MIT alumni who were elected to the NAM for 2026 are affiliated with the following departments:

• Steven Allen Abrams ’79 is an alumnus of the Department of Biology.
• Susan L. Ettner PhD ’91 is an alumna of the Department of Economics.
• Diane Medved Harper ’80, SM ’82 is an alumna of the departments of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science and Engineering.
• Albert Icksang Ko ’81 is an alumnus of the departments of Chemistry and Biology.
• Jennifer Lewis ScD ’91 is an alumna of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering.
• Alexander Marson PhD ’08 is an alumnus of the Department of Biology.

Established originally as the Institute of Medicine in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Medicine addresses critical issues in health, science, medicine, and related policy, and inspires positive actions across sectors.

“I am thrilled to welcome these outstanding health and medicine leaders into the National Academy of Medicine,” said NAM President Monica M. Bertagnolli. “Their extraordinary talent and commitment to advancing evidence-based guidance and solutions for our country’s greatest health-care challenges will strengthen our efforts to improve health for all.”

One of the main ways that the APOE4 gene variant, the biggest genetic risk factor for late onset Alzheimer’s disease, undermines brain circuit function is by disrupting the process of insulating neurons with a fatty sheath that optimizes their electrical transmission. A new study led by neuroscientists at the Picower Institute for Learning and Memory at MIT provides several lines of evidence to implicate a specific molecular pathway in that disruption, and uses that insight to demonstrate an intervention for preventing it in lab experiments.

The study, published Oct. 15 in Cell Stem Cell, shows that APOE4 leads to a suppression of “Wnt” signaling in the oligodendrocyte cells that provide neurons with a fatty insulation, called myelin. When Wnt signaling is deficient, they showed, the cells accumulate droplets of lipids rather than deploying fats to properly myelinate the neurons’ axon branches. When the researchers restored Wnt signaling in APOE4-carrying oligodendrocytes, myelination rebounded, both in human cell cultures and in mice modeling Alzheimer’s.

The research team, led by Picower Professor Li-Huei Tsai and study lead author Leyla Akay PhD ’25, a former graduate student in Tsai’s lab, discovered Wnt’s key role via multiple methods, including a screen in which they used CRISPR gene editing to systematically knock out each protein-coding gene in the genome, one by one, in cultures of human APOE4-carrying oligodendrocytes. The screen showed that when genes promoting Wnt activity in oligodendrocytes were lacking, lipid droplets accumulated, and that when genes suppressing Wnt were lacking, lipid droplets were, too.

“This proof of principle of doing CRISPR screens for genetic modifiers of APOE4-associated lipid accumulation in a central nervous system cell type is very exciting,” says Tsai, who also directs MIT’s Aging Brain Initiative. “I think this type of screen not only provides new insights into cellular pathways contributing to lipid metabolism defects, but really also has the potential to provide new targets for drug development.”

For want of Wnt

In 2022, Tsai’s Lab, led by Akay, Djuna Von Maydell PhD ’25, Jose Davila-Velderrain, and Joel Blanchard (also a co-author of the new study), showed that APOE4 caused lipid droplet accumulation in oligodendrocytes and upset myelination. But, Akay says, that droplet accumulation could happen for many reasons. The new study sought to dig deeper into the underlying molecular mechanisms.

“This CRISPR screen allowed us an unbiased way to test every single possibility,” Akay says. “What kind of lipid enzymes are involved in this process? And what are upstream pathways that could be targeted?”

In parallel with the CRISPR screen, the team also analyzed the chromatin accessibility of the DNA in human oligodendrocyte cell cultures and in postmortem human brain samples, in each case comparing APOE4-carrying samples to ones carrying the neutral APOE3 variant. This analysis of ATAC-seq data allowed them to assess which genes were most accessible for expression versus which ones were locked down from transcription. The chromatin analysis showed that genes promoting Wnt signaling were less accessible in APOE4 carriers.

“There was a striking overlap between ATAC-seq and CRISPR screen results,” Tsai says. “Both pointed to a dysregulation of the Wnt signaling pathway.” 

Toward a therapy

Further analysis, including direct observations in cells at the lab bench, revealed how Wnt signaling became depressed in cultured APOE4 oligodendrocytes. Two proteins, beta-catenin and GSK3b, each compete to regulate Wnt — beta-catenin promotes it, and GSK3b suppresses it. The team found that in APOE4 oligodendrocytes compared to APOE3 ones, there was reduced beta-catenin expression and excessive GSK3b expression.

The team then tested interventions that manipulate GSK3b activity. In human APOE3 oligodendrocyte cultures, they showed that increasing GSK3b with a chemical called Dif3 increased lipid droplets. In APOE4 oligodendrocytes, they showed that inhibiting GSK3b with a chemical called CHIR99021 reduced droplets. In more complex “organoid” cultures combining APOE4 oligodendrocytes with neurons, they found that inhibiting GSK3b increased myelination and promoted the growth of neural axons.

The tests suggested that GSK3b inhibition could be a proof-of-concept therapeutic strategy for restoring Wnt signaling and myelination. As a final test, they treated mice carrying APOE4 and genetically modeling Alzheimer’s tau pathology with doses of CHIR99021. The treated mice exhibited a reduction in lipid droplets in the hippocampus of the brain, a key memory-making region. Moreover, they also showed increased myelination there, compared to untreated controls.

In addition to highlighting suppression of Wnt signaling, the CRISPR screen and chromatin analysis provided key clues about the molecular mechanisms by which loss of Wnt alters how oligodendrocytes metabolize lipids. Akay and Tsai say they are eager to follow up on those clues. They are also interested in investigating GSK3b’s linkage to tau phosphorylation, a major feature of Alzheimer’s pathology.

In addition to Tsai, Akay, and Blanchard, the paper’s other authors are Anna Bright, Daiyun Dong, Ethan Smith, Robert Hurt, Carles Boix, Kate Louderback, Janine Medrano, Dingcheng Sun, Haonan Lin, Oisín King, Gwyneth Welch, Hiba Nawaid, Emre Agbas, Alan Jiang, Adele Bubnys, and Ji-Xin Cheng.

The National Institutes of Health, the Robert and Renee E. Belfer Family Foundation, the Manthripragada McManama Alzheimer's Fund, the CAMA Seed Fund, the J. Crayton Pruitt Foundation, Joseph P. DiSabato and Nancy Sakamoto, and the Freedom Together Foundation provided funding for the study.

Raw data from the study is available on the Open Science Framework. Akay and Tsai have applied for a patent on the CRISPR screen results.

Disorders of the small intestine are often difficult to diagnose and treat. More than 20 feet long, an inch in diameter, and located deep within the body, this organ is harder to access than other parts of the digestive tract, such as the colon or stomach.

To overcome those challenges, MIT engineers have designed a new robotic enteroscope that can move easily through the narrow passage of the small intestine, allowing it to perform imaging, deliver drugs, and remove small polyps or tissue samples for biopsy.

In designing the new robot, the researchers were inspired by the locomotion of snakes, as well as the scaly skin that helps them gain traction on slippery surfaces. A special textured coating helps the robot remain attached to the mucosal lining of the intestine as it inches its way through the narrow tube. 

Similar to an endoscope, the robot contains a variety of tools to help detect and treat any abnormalities that it might encounter.

“When we evaluate the small intestine, we do it for either diagnosis or treatment. If we find a little polyp that needs to be removed, this robot allows us to take a biopsy or remove it,” says Giovanni Traverso, professor of mechanical engineering at MIT, a gastroenterologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and an associate member of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.

Traverso is the senior author of the study, which appears today in Science Robotics. The paper’s lead authors are former MIT postdoc Binbin Ying, who is now an assistant professor at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center; MIT graduate student Ahmad Mujtaba Jebran; and former MIT research scientist Sahab Babaee.

Snaking through the intestine

The most common problems that doctors need to evaluate within the small intestine include bleeding, lesions, and blockages.

Currently, the only way to diagnose those intestinal complications is with a procedure known as double balloon enteroscopy. During the procedure, an enteroscope advances through the small intestine as a health care worker alternately inflates and deflates two balloons that help propel it through the tract. 

This process is slow and laborious, so the MIT team wanted to design an alternative enteroscope that would be easier to control and could move faster through the intestine.

“The fundamental challenge that we’re trying to overcome is how to evaluate that 20-to-25-foot segment of the small intestine in a way that can be more automated,” Traverso says.

The new tube-like robot moves through the narrow small intestine using a locomotion strategy similar to that of the snake. When slithering along the ground, a snake can steer itself by first contracting muscles on one side of the body, then the other. 

To mimic this, the researchers designed multifunctional actuators that control the robot’s movement. Each actuator contains four chambers, which can be inflated in different combinations, prompting the tube to extend or bend in any direction. 

“By tuning the amount of air that goes into these chambers, you can tune the direction that the robot is moving in,” Traverso says.

The head and tail segments of the robot contain additional expandable anchoring balloons that take turns inflating and deflating, helping the robot move forward. These head and tail segments are coated with special patterned sleeves inspired by kirigami — a variation of origami that involves cutting paper as well as folding it.

Using this technique, the researchers created coatings that lie flat until they are stretched by the expansion of the balloon, which causes three-dimensional kirigami needles to pop out. Similar to the scales of a snake, these needles give the robot more traction within the slippery lining of the intestine. 

In previous work, Traverso’s lab has used this approach to create coatings for shoe soles that give them more traction, as well as stents that can temporarily lodge in the esophagus and release drugs. 

“By using kirigami sleeves to enhance surface friction, the robot can generate localized tissue engagement traction for locomotion without relying on excessive stretching of the delicate small intestinal tissue,” Jebran says.

Diagnosis and treatment

The system also includes electronics that allow for navigation, with a controller that the person operating the device can use to guide the robot through narrow passages and around tight corners. The soft robot is tethered to the external controllers by a cable and is designed so that it could enter the body through either the mouth or the rectum. 

The robot contains tools including a camera for imaging, a sprayer for drug delivery, and clips that can take tissue biopsies or remove polyps. 

In animal studies, the researchers showed that the robot could travel about six and a half feet through the small intestine. They also successfully demonstrated the drug sprayer, tissue clips, and camera. The team is now working on improving the navigation systems and testing this approach for additional applications in the small intestine.

“We hope we can continue to move it forward to eventually develop systems that can help achieve more automated evaluation of the small intestine,” Traverso says.

The research was funded, in part, by the Karl van Tassel Career Development Professorship, the MIT Department of Mechanical Engineering, a Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship, an NSERC Postdoctoral Fellowship, the UT Southwestern Medical Center Startup Fund, Samsung Semiconductor and Eurnekian Nanotechnology Graduate Student Fellowships, the Cooke Undergraduate Transfer Scholarship, and the MIT Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program.

For centuries, infrastructure has evolved alongside technology. New materials and engineering techniques enabled taller buildings, longer bridges, and larger cities. Computing and digital technologies later transformed how infrastructure was designed, monitored, and operated.

Now, the pace of change is accelerating, and challenges are arriving simultaneously. Climate change is increasing pressure on water, energy, and other resources. Artificial intelligence is beginning to transform engineering and design, and its energy needs, along with aging grid infrastructure, is creating significant challenges, as well as new opportunities. In addition, geopolitical complexity is exposing vulnerabilities in global supply chains, and demand for infrastructure is rising, particularly in the developing world.

The result is a fundamental challenge: How can the world build the infrastructure it needs without simply repeating the extractive, carbon- and resource-intensive model of the 20th century?

In this interview, Ali Jadbabaie, JR East Professor and head of the MIT Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, says the answer will require rethinking not only how infrastructure is designed and built, but how it is financed and operated, and bringing together the many stakeholders who shape those decisions. On Oct. 28, Jadbabaie will join experts from around the world in Madrid to explore these topics at the World Infrastructure Forum, which was co-founded by MIT’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UPM, the World Bank Group, and the University of Texas at Austin.

Q: Infrastructure has always evolved in response to technological advances. What makes this era different?

A: In the 18th century, civil engineering emerged as the civilian counterpart to military engineering, building the dams, bridges, and canals of its time. Industrialization in the 19th century brought railways and sewage systems. In the early 20th century, the focus scaled up to buildings, highways, tunnels, and metro systems, and by mid-century the infrastructure needed to support megacities and skyscrapers.

Every time technology has changed, with information technologies, computing, sensing, and, more recently, digital transformation, it has changed the shape of infrastructure. It has even changed the definition of what infrastructure is. Today, we consider the power grid, semiconductor manufacturing plants, and data centers part of infrastructure, along with wireless infrastructure like cellphone towers and the infrastructure for high-speed internet, just as much a part of our critical infrastructure as roads, water systems, and power grids. 

What is different now is the combination and speed of the changes we're facing. Climate change, resource constraints, and geopolitical instability are putting pressure on the way we designed infrastructure in the 20th century. At the same time, many people are moving out of poverty because of recent economic growth in the developing world. In fact, according to models, by 2028, for the first time in the history of humanity, the median human inhabitant of the planet will live off $10 a day. As more people move out of abject poverty, there will also be an increase in the demand for infrastructure.

If we try to meet that demand using the same resource-intensive model we used in the 20th century, we simply won't have the resources to do it. The question then becomes: How do we use the remaining resources more efficiently? We need to find a way to provide more infrastructure while using less water, energy, and materials, and produce less carbon.

This is where digital transformation and AI become potentially transformative. Faster and cheaper sensing, greater access to data, and better sensing, actuation, and control can help us make infrastructure decisions more efficiently. AI is slowly permeating the physical world, and we expect it to revolutionize the engineering design process, allowing us to explore many more possibilities, much faster and at a lower cost. 

But the story of that hasn't been written yet, and the outcomes could still be very positive, depending on what we do.

Q: Can you give an example of infrastructure systems becoming more interconnected in a way that changes how we build or manage them?

A: The revolution in information technology and digital transformation over the past 30 years has made infrastructure systems more interconnected. You see this in cities. If the power goes out, water and gas systems can stop functioning, internet fails, and transportation system comes to a halt. If communications networks fail, many other services are affected. We saw this during Covid, when disruptions in supply chains affected energy networks, critical materials, and manufacturing. We see it when geopolitical conflicts disrupt oil and energy markets and those disruptions propagate through other parts of the global economy.

Infrastructure systems that were once managed separately are increasingly dependent on one another. As we connect more things together for more efficiency, we also increase systemic risk and expose the systems to rare but catastrophic failures. They have become rare, but when they happen, they're much bigger and more consequential.

The really tricky thing is that developing infrastructure involves much more than designing and building it. The whole value chain includes financing and operating it, as well as understanding who will use it and what those users need and prefer.

So, designing infrastructure is a highly transdisciplinary, sociotechnical endeavor, involving social, technical, and economic considerations. Understanding how these systems are designed is increasingly important because they are becoming more complex, making decision-making particularly difficult.

There’s also so much uncertainty in large infrastructure projects. They’re very capital-intensive, the business is lower margin than many other industries, and projects take a long time. Combine all of that, and it has historically made the industry very conservative.

But the transformations coming from AI and digital transformation are potentially offering a new way forward. What that new way looks like, no one has quite delineated it yet.

Q: How are you and your colleagues working to change how these decisions get made?  

A: We realized that if we're going to develop a new approach to infrastructure, no single discipline, company, or country can do it alone. Infrastructure value chain is too interconnected, and the challenges are too large.

That's why MIT’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering co-founded the World Infrastructure Forum with the World Bank Group, the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, and University of Texas at Austin. The goal is to bring together academia, industry, governments, and financial institutions across the infrastructure value chain and create an ongoing dialogue about how infrastructure should be designed, financed, built, and operated in the decades ahead.

This is particularly important because the biggest opportunities for new infrastructure development are not necessarily in the United States or other countries with mature infrastructure systems. Those countries still face significant needs for modernization and new investment. But over the coming decades, much of the world's population growth, and much of the infrastructure that will need to be built, will be in countries where infrastructure systems are still developing. 

Those countries have an opportunity to benefit from modern infrastructure without simply repeating the model of the 20th century. But capturing that opportunity will require new approaches to technology, financing, engineering, and governance.

We're trying to create an ecosystem rather than just a forum, a mechanism for continuing the conversation among the different stakeholders across the infrastructure value chain. We've established five working groups and an advisory group of more than 30 leaders from across the infrastructure value chain, including engineering and construction, materials, finance, multilateral institutions, and academia.

Ultimately, the question is not whether we need a new way of developing infrastructure. The question is how we create it and who is going to execute it. There is no single person, company, or country that can solve this problem, because infrastructure itself is interconnected. We need to build the new model together.

When we give our private information to the government to pay taxes, apply for a job, or vote, we should be able to trust that our data won't later be used against us. But in a betrayal of that trust, the federal government has been pooling the information it has about us on an unprecedented scale—and using it for purposes we never agreed to.

EFF and other groups are fighting back. In our latest EFFector newsletter, we're talking about a recent victory in our lawsuit against the government for sharing federal workers' confidential personnel files with DOGE.

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER

For over 35 years, EFFector has been your guide to understanding the intersection of technology, civil liberties, and the law. This issue covers our free tracker blocker coming to Safari, a call to action for net neutrality in California, and a big win in our lawsuit against the DOGE data grab.

Prefer to listen in? EFFector is now available on all major podcast platforms. This time we're talking to EFF's F. Mario Trujillo about the dangers of government data grabs—and what defenders of privacy are doing to stop it. You can find the episode and subscribe on your podcast platform of choice:

%3Ciframe%20height%3D%22200px%22%20width%3D%22100%25%22%20frameborder%3D%22no%22%20scrolling%3D%22no%22%20seamless%3D%22%22%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fplayer.simplecast.com%2F59368254-4a09-4fcf-89fc-911a7c26dcc9%3Fdark%3Dfalse%22%20allow%3D%22autoplay%22%3E%3C%2Fiframe%3E Privacy info. This embed will serve content from simplecast.com

   

Want to protect your right to digital privacy? Sign up for EFF's EFFector newsletter for updates, ways to take action, and new merch drops. You can also fuel the fight for privacy and free speech online when you support EFF today!

Researchers set up a fake start-up company to study fraudulent North Korean IT workers.