The threat of a federal funding lapse comes as Tropical Storm Imelda approaches the East Coast.

POLITICO's E&E News conducted a detailed examination of the agency's effort to obscure key facts on global warming.

Trump administration efforts to cull equity and climate initiatives have spurred cuts in other areas, including a study of bridge construction.

The cost of electricity has emerged as a top issue in the contest between Democrat Mikie Sherrill and Republican Jack Ciattarelli.

The biggest change is a yearslong deadline extension for converting air conditioning to use newer chemicals that do less climate damage.

It is the latest in a series of Trump administration efforts to dispute, silence or downplay climate change.

Gov. Gavin Newsom highlighted the filings during New York City’s Climate Week.

Old Fort was well on its way to remaking itself as an outdoor destination. Then Hurricane Helene swept through.

When the nonprofit moved into its new headquarters this summer, it committed to a major retrofit.

By tracking even the slightest shifts in land and ice, the satellite will give forecasters and first responders a leg up in dealing with disasters.

A nice story.

The brain divides vision between its two hemispheres — what’s on your left is processed by your right hemisphere, and vice versa — but your experience with every bike or bird that you see zipping by is seamless. A new study by neuroscientists at The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory at MIT reveals how the brain handles the transition.

“It’s surprising to some people to hear that there’s some independence between the hemispheres, because that doesn’t really correspond to how we perceive reality,” says Earl K. Miller, Picower Professor in the Picower Institute and MIT’s Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences. “In our consciousness, everything seems to be unified.”

There are advantages to separately processing vision on either side of the brain, including the ability to keep track of more things at once, Miller and other researchers have found, but neuroscientists have been eager to fully understand how perception ultimately appears so unified in the end.

Led by Picower Fellow Matthew Broschard and Research Scientist Jefferson Roy, the research team measured neural activity in the brains of animals as they tracked objects crossing their field of view. The results reveal that different frequencies of brain waves encoded and then transferred information from one hemisphere to the other in advance of the crossing, and then held on to the object representation in both hemispheres until after the crossing was complete. The process is analogous to how relay racers hand off a baton, how a child swings from one monkey bar to the next, and how cellphone towers hand off a call from one to the next as a train passenger travels through their area. In all cases, both towers or hands actively hold what’s being transferred until the handoff is confirmed.

Witnessing the handoff

To conduct the study, published Sept. 19 in the Journal of Neuroscience, the researchers measured both the electrical spiking of individual neurons and the various frequencies of brain waves that emerge from the coordinated activity of many neurons. They studied the dorsal and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex in both hemispheres, brain areas associated with executive brain functions.

The power fluctuations of the wave frequencies in each hemisphere told the researchers a clear story about how the subject’s brains transferred information from the “sending” to the “receiving” hemisphere whenever a target object crossed the middle of their field of view. In the experiments, the target was accompanied by a distractor object on the opposite side of the screen to confirm that the subjects were consciously paying attention to the target object’s motion, and not just indiscriminately glancing at whatever happened to pop up on to the screen.

The highest-frequency “gamma” waves, which encode sensory information, peaked in both hemispheres when the subjects first looked at the screen and again when the two objects appeared. When a color change signaled which object was the target to track, the gamma increase was only evident in the “sending” hemisphere (on the opposite side as the target object), as expected. Meanwhile, the power of somewhat lower-frequency “beta” waves, which regulate when gamma waves are active, varied inversely with the gamma waves. These sensory encoding dynamics were stronger in the ventrolateral locations compared to the dorsolateral ones.

Meanwhile, two distinct bands of lower-frequency waves showed greater power in the dorsolateral locations at key moments related to achieving the handoff. About a quarter of a second before a target object crossed the middle of the field of view, “alpha” waves ramped up in both hemispheres and then peaked just after the object crossed. Meanwhile, “theta” band waves peaked after the crossing was complete, only in the “receiving” hemisphere (opposite from the target’s new position).

Accompanying the pattern of wave peaks, neuron spiking data showed how the brain’s representation of the target’s location traveled. Using decoder software, which interprets what information the spikes represent, the researchers could see the target representation emerge in the sending hemisphere’s ventrolateral location when it was first cued by the color change. Then they could see that as the target neared the middle of the field of view, the receiving hemisphere joined the sending hemisphere in representing the object, so that they both encoded the information during the transfer.

Doing the wave

Taken together, the results showed that after the sending hemisphere initially encoded the target with a ventrolateral interplay of beta and gamma waves, a dorsolateral ramp up of alpha waves caused the receiving hemisphere to anticipate the handoff by mirroring the sending hemisphere’s encoding of the target information. Alpha peaked just after the target crossed the middle of the field of view, and when the handoff was complete, theta peaked in the receiving hemisphere as if to say, “I got it.”

And in trials where the target never crossed the middle of the field of view, these handoff dynamics were not apparent in the measurements.

The study shows that the brain is not simply tracking objects in one hemisphere and then just picking them up anew when they enter the field of view of the other hemisphere.

“These results suggest there are active mechanisms that transfer information between cerebral hemispheres,” the authors wrote. “The brain seems to anticipate the transfer and acknowledge its completion.”

But they also note, based on other studies, that the system of interhemispheric coordination can sometimes appear to break down in certain neurological conditions including schizophrenia, autism, depression, dyslexia, and multiple sclerosis. The new study may lend insight into the specific dynamics needed for it to succeed.

In addition to Broschard, Roy, and Miller, the paper’s other authors are Scott Brincat and Meredith Mahnke.

Funding for the study came from the Office of Naval Research, the National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health, The Freedom Together Foundation, and The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory.

Jimmy Kimmel has been in the news a lot recently, which means the ongoing lawsuit against him by perennial late-night punching bag/convicted fraudster/former congressman George Santos flew under the radar. But what happened in that case is an essential illustration of the limits of both copyright law and the “fine print” terms of service on websites and apps. 

What happened was this: Kimmel and his staff saw that Santos was on Cameo, which allows people to purchase short videos from various public figures with requested language. Usually it’s something like “happy birthday” or “happy retirement.” In the case of Kimmel and his writers, they set out to see if there was anything they couldn’t get Santos to say on Cameo. For this to work, they obviously didn’t disclose that it was Jimmy Kimmel Live! asking for the videos.  

Santos did not like the segment, which aired clips of these videos, called “Will Santos Say It?”.  He sued Kimmel, ABC, and ABC’s parent company, Disney. He alleged both copyright infringement and breach of contract—the contract in this case being Cameo’s terms of service. He lost on all counts, twice: his case was dismissed at the district court level, and then that dismissal was upheld by an appeals court. 

On the copyright claim, Kimmel and Disney argued and won on the grounds of fair use. The court cited precedent that fair use excuses what might be strictly seen as infringement if such a finding would “stifle the very creativity” that copyright is meant to promote. In this case, the use of the videos was part of the ongoing commentary by Jimmy Kimmel Live! around whether there was anything Santos wouldn’t say for money. Santos tried to argue that since this was their purpose from the outset, the use wasn’t transformative. Which... isn’t how it works. Santos’ purpose was, presumably, to fulfill a request sent through the app. The show’s purpose was to collect enough examples of a behavior to show a pattern and comment on it.  

Santos tried to say that their not disclosing what the reason was invalidated the fair use argument because it was “deceptive.” But the court found that the record didn’t show that the deception was designed to replace the market for Santos’s Cameos. It bears repeating: commenting on the quality of a product or the person making it is not legally actionable interference with a business. If someone tells you that a movie, book, or, yes, Cameo isn’t worth anything because of its ubiquity or quality and shows you examples, that’s not a deceptive business practice. In fact, undercover quality checks and reviews are fairly standard practices! Is this a funnier and more entertaining example than a restaurant review? Yes. That doesn’t make it unprotected by fair use.  

It’s nice to have this case as a reminder that, despite everything, the major studios often argue, fair use protects everyone, including them. Don’t hold your breath on them remembering this the next time someone tries to make a YouTube review of a Hollywood movie using clips.  

Another claim from this case that is less obvious but just as important involves the Cameo terms of service. We often see contracts being used to restrict people’s fair use rights. Cameo offers different kinds of videos for purchase. The most well-known comes with a personal use license, the “happy birthdays,” and so on. They also offer a “commercial” use license, presumably if you want to use the videos to generate revenue, like you do with an ad or paid endorsement. However, in this case, the court found that the terms of service are a contract between a customer and Cameo, not between the customer and the video maker. Cameo’s terms of service explicitly lay out when their terms apply to the person selling a video, and they don’t create a situation where Santos can use those terms to sue Jimmy Kimmel Live! According to the court, the terms don’t even imply a shared understanding and contract between the two parties.  

It's so rare to find a situation where the wall of text that most terms of service consist of actually helps protect free expression; it’s a pleasant surprise to see it here.  

In general, we at EFF hate it when these kinds of contracts—you know the ones, where you hit accept after scrolling for ages just so you can use the app—are used to constrain users’ rights. Fair use is supposed to protect us all from overly strict interpretations of copyright law, but abusive terms of service can erode those rights. We’ll keep fighting for those rights and the people who use them, even if the one exercising fair use is Disney.  

This is the sixth installment in a blog series documenting EFF's findings from the Stop Censoring Abortion campaign. You can read additional posts here. 

When we started our Stop Censoring Abortion campaign, we heard from activists, advocacy organizations, researchers, and even healthcare providers who had all experienced having abortion-related content removed or suppressed on social media. One of the submissions we received was from an organization called the Miscarriage and Abortion Hotline.

The Miscarriage and Abortion Hotline (M+A Hotline) formed in 2019, is staffed by a team of healthcare providers who wanted to provide free and confidential “expert advice on various aspects of miscarriage and abortion, ensuring individuals receive accurate information and compassionate support throughout their journey.” By 2022, the hotline was receiving between 25 to 45 calls and texts a day. 

Like many reproductive health, rights, and justice groups, the M+A Hotline is active on social media, sharing posts that affirm the voices and experiences of abortion seekers, assert the safety of medication abortion, and spread the word about the expert support that the hotline offers. However, in late March of this year, the M+A Hotline’s Instagram suddenly had numerous posts taken down and was hit with restrictions that prevented the account from starting or joining livestreams or creating ads until June 25, 2025.

Screenshots provided to EFF from M+A Hotline

The reason behind the restrictions and takedowns, according to Meta, was that the M+A Hotline’s Instagram account failed to follow Meta’s guidelines on the sale of illegal or regulated goods. The “guidelines” refer to Meta’s Community Standards which dictate the types of content that are allowed on Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and Threads. But according to Meta, it is not against these Community Standards to provide guidance on how to legally access pharmaceutical drugs, and this is treated differently than an offer to buy, sell, or trade pharmaceuticals (though there are additional compliance requirements for paid ads). 

Under these rules, the M+A Hotline’s content should have been fine: The Hotline does not sell medication abortion and simply educates on the efficacy and safety of medication abortion while providing guidance on how abortion seekers could legally access the pills. Despite this, around 10 posts from the account were removed by Instagram, none of which were ads.

For how little the topic is mentioned in these Standards, content about abortion seems to face extremely high scrutiny from Meta.

In a letter to Amnesty International in February 2024, Meta publicly clarified that organic content on its platforms that educates users about medication abortion is not in violation of the Community Standards. The company claims that the policies are “based on feedback from people and the advice of experts in fields like technology, public safety and human rights.” The Community Standards are thorough and there are sections covering everything from bullying and harassment to account integrity to restricted goods and services. Notably, within the several webpages that make up the Community Standards, there are very few mentions of the words “abortion” and “reproductive health.” For how little the topic is mentioned in these Standards, content about abortion seems to face extremely high scrutiny from Meta.

Screenshots provided to EFF from M+A Hotline

Not only were posts removed, but even after further review, many were not restored. The M+A Hotline was once again told that their content violates the Community Standards on drugs. While it’s understandable that moderation systems may make mistakes, it’s unacceptable for those mistakes to be repeated consistently with little transparency or direct communication with the users whose speech is being restricted and erased. This problem is only made worse by lack of helpful recourse. As seen here, even when users request review and identify these moderation errors, Meta may still refuse to restore posts that are permitted under the Community Standards.

The removal of the M+A Hotline’s educational content demonstrates that Meta must be more accurate, consistent, and transparent in the enforcement of their Community Standards, especially in regard to reproductive health information. Informing users that medical professionals are available to support those navigating a miscarriage or abortion is plainly not an attempt to buy or sell pharmaceutical drugs. Meta must clearly defineand then fairly enforce–what is and isn’t permitted under its Standards. This includes ensuring there is a meaningful way to quickly rectify any moderation errors through the review process. 

At a time when attacks on online access to information—and particularly abortion information—are intensifying, Meta must not exacerbate the problem by silencing healthcare providers and suppressing vital health information. We must all continue to fight back against online censorship.

 This is the sixth post in our blog series documenting the findings from our Stop Censoring Abortion campaign. Read more in the series: https://www.eff.org/pages/stop-censoring-abortion

Today’s world requires us to make complex and nuanced decisions about our digital security. Evaluating when to use a secure messaging app like Signal or WhatsApp, which passwords to store on your smartphone, or what to share on social media requires us to assess risks and make judgments accordingly. Arriving at any conclusion is an exercise in threat modeling.

In security, threat modeling is the process of determining what security measures make sense in your particular situation. It’s a way to think about potential risks, possible defenses, and the costs of both. It’s how experts avoid being distracted by irrelevant risks or overburdened by undue costs...

The agency may need to ditch its scientific justification for repealing the endangerment finding that underpins most climate rules.

The Homeland Security secretary tucked "unlawfully ambiguous" language into grant documents, the judge said.

After a Supreme Court defeat, young activists are turning to a foreign court to force U.S. climate action.

Reliable long-term measurements are crucial to evaluating climate and weather risks, the experts said.

Future cost increases are expected to moderate as insurers stabilize their finances and remain "robust and financially sound," a report says.