The Matrix, a 5-ton electric vertical takeoff and landing vehicle, or eVTOL, is considered the largest electric aircraft built so far, at least in China.

Countries around the world are becoming increasingly concerned about their dependencies on the US. If you’ve purchase US-made F-35 fighter jets, you are dependent on the US for software maintenance.

The Dutch Defense Secretary recently said that he could jailbreak the planes to accept third-party software.

This year in a rural school district in southeastern Montana, one high school student is taking calculus. For many people, calculus is daunting enough, even when teachers are used to offering it and peers are around to help. Studying it solo can be even harder. Yet this lone student has an unusual source of support: weekly tutoring directly from an MIT undergraduate, by Zoom, a long-distance but helpful way to stay on track.

It's part of a new program called the MIT4America Calculus Project, launched from the Institute last summer, in which MIT undergraduates and alumni work with school districts across the U.S., from Montana to Texas to New York, to tutor high school students. The logic is compelling: Students are highly proficient at calculus at MIT, where it is almost a requirement for admissions and success. The new civic-minded outreach program lets those MIT people share their knowledge and skills, getting high schoolers ready for further studies and even jobs, especially in STEM fields. 

“Calculus is a gateway for many students into STEM higher education and careers,” says MIT Professor Eric Klopfer, a co-director of the MIT4America Calculus Project. “We can help more students, in more places, fulfill requirements and get into great universities across the country, whether MIT or others, and then into STEM careers. We want to make sure they have the skills to do that.”

At this point, the project is working closely with 14 school districts across the U.S., deploying 30 current MIT undergraduates and seven alumni as tutors. The weekly sessions are carefully coordinated with school administrators and teachers, and the MIT tutors have all received training. The program started with an in-person summer calculus camp in 2025; by next summer, the goal is to be collaborating with about 20 schools districts.

“We want it to have a lasting impact,” says Claudia Urrea, an education scholar and co-director of the MIT4America Calculus Project “It’s not just about students passing an exam, but having tutors who look like what the students want to be in the future, who are mentors, have conversations, and make sure the high school students are learning.” 

Klopfer and Urrea bring substantial experience to the project. Klopfer is a professor and director of the Scheller Teacher Education Program and the Education Arcade at MIT; Urrea is executive director for the PreK-12 Initiative at MIT Open Learning.

The MIT4America Calculus Project is supported through a gift from the Siegel Family Endowment and was developed as a project in consultation with David Siegel SM ’86, PhD ’91, a computer scientist and entrepreneur who is chairman of the firm Two Sigma.

“David Siegel came to us with two powerful questions: How can we spread the educational impact of MIT beyond our walls? And how can we open doors to STEM careers for U.S. high school students who don’t have access to calculus?” says MIT President Sally Kornbluth.

She adds: “The MIT4America Calculus Project answers those questions in a perfectly MIT way: Reflecting the Institute’s longstanding commitment to national service, the MIT4America Calculus Project supplies an innovative answer to a hard practical problem, and it taps the uncommon skill of the people of MIT to create opportunity for others. We’re enormously grateful to David for his inspiration and guidance, and to the Siegel Family Endowment for the financial support that brought this idea to life.”

The U.S. has more than 13,000 school districts, and about half of them offer calculus classes. The MIT effort aims to work with districts that already have existing programs but are striving to add educational support for them, often while facing funding constraints or other limitations.

In contrast to the one-student calculus situation in Montana, the project is also working with a 5,000-student district in Texas, south of Dallas, where about 60 high school students take calculus; currently five Institute undergraduates are tutoring 15 students from the district’s schools.

“Other organizations are involved in efforts like this, but I think MIT brings some unique things to it,” Klopfer says. “I think involving our undergraduates in this is an awesome contribution. Our students really do come from all over the place, and are sometimes connecting back to their home states and communities, and that makes a difference on both sides.”

He adds: “I see benefits for our students, too. They develop good ways of communicating, working with other people and building skills. They can gain a lot of great experience.”

In addition to the in-person summer calculus camp, which is expected to continue, and the weekly video tutoring, the MIT4America Calculus Project is working on developing online tools that help guide high school students as well. Still, Urrea emphasizes, the project is built around “the importance of people. A community of support is very important, to have connections that build over time.  The human aspect of the program is irreplaceable.”

The MIT tutors must pass rigorous training sessions that cover pedagogy and other aspects of working with high school students, and know they are making a substantial commitment of time and effort.

It has been worth it, as teachers say their high school students have been responding very well to the MIT tutors.

“For students to be able to see themselves in their tutors is a really cool thing,” says Shilpa Agrawal ’15, director of computer science and an AP calculus AB teacher at Comp Sci High in the Bronx, New York, where 15 students are participating in the project.

“It’s led to a lot of success for my students,” adds Agrawal, who majored in computer science at MIT. She is part of the national network of MIT-connected teachers who have been helping the program grow organically, having reached out to Jenny Gardony, manager of the MIT4America Calculus Project.

Gardony, who is also the math project manager in MIT’s Scheller Teacher Education program, has been receiving enthusiastic emails from teachers in other participating districts since the project started.

“I have to start by saying thank you,” one teacher wrote to Gardony, adding that one student “was so excited in class today. The session she had with you made her so confident. She’s always nervous, but today she was smiling and helping others, and that was 100 percent because of you.”

Gardony adds: “The fact that a busy teacher takes the time to send that email, I’m touched they would do that.” 

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 March 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02592-2

Changing bird nutrient inputs

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 March 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02593-1

Amplified variability

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 March 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02591-3

Design impacts building emissions

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 March 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02594-0

Symbolic policies foster support

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 March 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02589-x

Overshoot, the temporary crossing of climate targets before warming is reversed, has shifted from theoretical models to an urgent reality. Addressing this challenge requires effective strategies, global collaboration of different stakeholders and fair governance systems to manage the unprecedented risks.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 10 March 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02515-7

Youth-led translation efforts provide solutions to make climate knowledge accessible worldwide.

The SAFE act, introduced by Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Dick Durbin (D-IL), is the first of many likely proposals we will see to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act of 2008—and while imperfect, it does propose a litany of real and much-needed reforms of Big Brother’s favorite surveillance authority. 

The irresponsible 2024 reauthorization of the secretive mass surveillance authority Section 702 not only gave the government two more years of unconstitutional surveillance powers, it also made the policy much worse. But, now people who value privacy and the rule of law get another bite at the apple. With expiration for Section 702 looming in April 2026, we are starting to see the emergence of proposals for how to reauthorize the surveillance authority—including calls from inside the White House for a clean reauthorization that would keep the policy unchanged. EFF has always had a consistent policy: Section 702 should not be reauthorized absent major reforms that will keep this tactic of foreign surveillance from being used as a tool of mass domestic espionage. 

What is Section 702?

Section 702 was intended to modernize foreign surveillance of the internet for national security purposes. It allows collection of foreign intelligence from non-Americans located outside the United States by requiring U.S.-based companies that handle online communications to hand over data to the government. As the law is written, the intelligence community (IC) cannot use Section 702 programs to target Americans, who are protected by the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. But the law gives the intelligence community space to target foreign intelligence in ways that inherently and intentionally sweep in Americans’ communications.

We live in an increasingly globalized world where people are constantly in communication with people overseas. That means, while targeting foreigners outside the U.S. for “foreign intelligence Information” the IC routinely acquires the American side of those communications without a probable cause warrant. The collection of all that data from U.S telecommunications and internet providers results in the “incidental” capture of conversations involving a huge number of people in the United States.

But, this backdoor access to U.S. persons’ data isn’t “incidental.” Section 702 has become a routine part of the FBI’s law enforcement mission. In fact, the IC’s latest Annual Statistical Transparency Report documents the many ways the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) uses Section 702 to spy on Americans without a warrant. The IC lobbied for Section 702 as a tool for national security outside the borders of the U.S., but it is apparent that the FBI uses it to conduct domestic, warrantless surveillance on Americans. In 2021 alone, the FBI conducted 3.4 million warrantless searches of US person’s 702 data.

The Good

Let’s start with the good things that this bill does. These are reforms EFF has been seeking for a long time and their implementation would mean a big improvement in the status quo of national security law.

First, the bill would partially close the loophole that allows the FBI and domestic law enforcement to dig through 702-collected data’s “incidental” collection of the U.S. side of communications. The FBI currently operates with a “finders keeper” mentality, meaning that because the data is pre-collected by another agency, the FBI believes it can operate with almost no constraints on using it for other purposes. The SAFE act would require a warrant before the FBI looked at the content of these collected communications. As we will get to later, this reform does not go nearly far enough because they can query to see what data on a person exists before getting a warrant, but it is certainly an improvement on the current system. 

Second, the bill addresses the age-old problem of parallel construction. If you’re unfamiliar with this term, parallel construction is a method by which intelligence agencies or domestic law enforcement find out a piece of information about a subject through secret, even illegal or unconstitutional methods. Uninterested in revealing these methods, officers hide what actually happened by publicly offering an alternative route they could have used to find that information. So, for instance, if police want to hide the fact that they knew about a specific email because it was intercepted under the authority of Section 702, they might use another method, like a warranted request to a service provider, to create a more publicly-acceptable path to that information. To deal with this problem, the SAFE Act mandates that when the government seeks to use Section 702 evidence in court, it must disclosure the source of this evidence “without regard to any claim that the information or evidence…would inevitably have been discovered, or was subsequently reobtained through other means.” 

Next, the bill proposes a policy that EFF and other groups have nonetheless been trying to get through Congress for over five years: ending the data broker loophole. As the system currently stands, data brokers who buy and sell your personal data collected from smartphone applications, among other sources, are able to sell that sensitive information, including a phone’s geolocation, to the law enforcement and intelligence agencies. That means that with a bit of money, police can buy the data (or buy access to services that purchase and map the data) that they would otherwise need a warrant to get. A bill that would close this loophole, the Fourth Amendment is Not For Sale Act passed through the House in 2024 but has yet to be voted on by the Senate. In the meantime, states have taken it upon themselves to close this loophole with Montana being the first state to pass similar legislation in May 2025. The SAFE Act proposes to partially fix the loophole at least as far as intelligence agencies are concerned. This fix could not come soon enough—especially since the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has signaled their willingness to create one big, streamlined, digital marketplace where the government can buy data from data brokers. 

Another positive thing about the SAFE Act is that it creates an official statutory end to surveillance power that the government allowed to expire in 2020. In its heyday, the intelligence community used Section 215 of the Patriot Act to justify the mass collection of communication records like metadata from phone calls. Although this legal authority has lapsed, it has always been our fear that it will not sit dormant forever and could be reauthorized at any time. This new bill says that its dormant powers shall “cease to be in effect” within 180 of the SAFE Act being enacted. 

What Needs to Change 

The SAFE Act also attempts to clarify very important language that gauges the scope of the surveillance authority: who is obligated to turn over digital information to the U.S. government. Under Section 702, “electronic communication service providers” (ECSP) are on the hook for providing information, but the definition of that term has been in dispute and has changed over time—most recently when a FISA court opinion expanded the definition to include a category of “secret” ECSPs that have not been publicly disclosed.  Unfortunately, this bill still leaves ambiguity in interpretation and an audit system without a clear directive for enforcing limitations on who is an ECSP or guaranteeing transparency. 

As mentioned earlier, the SAFE Act introduces a warrant requirement for the FBI to read the contents of Americans’ communications that have been warrantlessly collected under Section 702. However, the law does not in its current form require the FBI to get a warrant before running searches identifying whether Americans have communications present in the database in the first place. Knowing this information is itself very revealing and the government should not be able to profit from circumventing the Fourth Amendment. 

When Congress reauthorized Section 702 in 2014, they did so through a piece of policy called the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA). This bill made 702 worse in several ways, one of the most severe being that it expanded the legal uses for the surveillance authority to include vetting immigrants. In an era when the United States government is rounding up immigrants, including people awaiting asylum hearings, and which U.S officials are continuously threatening to withhold admission to the United States from people whose politics does not align with the current administration, RISAA sets a dangerous precedent. Although RISAA is officially expiring in April, it would be helpful for any Section 702 reauthorization bill to explicitly prohibit the use of this authority for that reason. 

Finally, in the same way that the SAFE Act statutorily ends the expired Section 215 of the Patriot Act, it should also impose an explicit end to “Abouts collection” a practice of collecting digital communications, not if their from suspected people, but if their are “about” specific topics. This practice has been discontinued, but still sits on the books, just waiting to be revamped. 

We're celebrating the launch of Privacy's Defender, a new book by EFF Executive Director Cindy Cohn on Thursday, March 12—and we want you to join us! Cindy has tangled with the feds, fought for your data security, and argued before judges to protect our access to science and knowledge on the internet. In Privacy's Defender she asks: can we still have private conversations if we live our lives online?

Join the festivities for a live conversation between Cindy Cohn and Annalee Newitz followed by a book signing with Cindy.

REGISTER TODAY! 

$20 General Admission for 1
$30 Discounted tickets for 2
$12.50 Student Ticket
All proceeds benefit EFF's mission.

Want your own copy of Privacy's Defender?
Save $10 when you preorder the book with your ticket purchase

WHEN:
Thursday, March 12th, 2026
6:30 pm to 9:30 pm

WHERE:
Ciel Creative Space
Entrance located at:
940 Parker St, Berkeley, CA 94710

6:30 PM Doors Open
7:15 PM Program Begins

About the book

Throughout her career, Cindy Cohn has been driven by a fundamental question: Can we still have private conversations if we live our lives online? Privacy’s Defender chronicles her thirty-year battle to protect our right to digital privacy and shows just how central this right is to all our other rights, including our ability to organize and make change in the world.

Shattering the hypermasculine myth that our digital reality was solely the work of a handful of charismatic tech founders, the author weaves her own personal story with the history of Crypto Wars, FBI gag orders, and the post-9/11 surveillance state. She describes how she became a seasoned leader in the early digital rights movement, as well as how this work serendipitously helped her discover her birth parents and find her life partner. Along the way, she also details the development of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which she grew from a ragtag group of lawyers and hackers into one of the most powerful digital rights organizations in the world.

Part memoir and part legal history for the general reader, the book is a compelling testament to just how hard-won the privacy rights we now enjoy as tech users are, but also how crucial these rights are in our efforts to combat authoritarianism, grow democracy, and strengthen other human rights. Learn about the Privacy's Defender book tour.

Parking

Street parking is available around the building.

Accessibility

The main event space is wheelchair accessible, on concrete. Lively music will be playing, and the speakers will be using a microphone, so louder volumes are expected. EFF is committed to improving accessibility for our events. If you will be attending in-person and need accommodation, or have accessibility questions prior to the event, please contact events@eff.org.

Food and Drink

Wine & Beer will be available for purchase. Cellarmaker Brewing Co., located next door to Ciel Space, will be serving food until 8:00 pm. 

Questions?

Email us at events@eff.org.

About the Speakers

Cindy Cohn
Cindy Cohn is the Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. From 2000-2015 she served as EFF’s Legal Director as well as its General Counsel.  Ms. Cohn first became involved with EFF in 1993, when EFF asked her to serve as the outside lead attorney in Bernstein v. Dept. of Justice, the successful First Amendment challenge to the U.S. export restrictions on cryptography. 

Ms. Cohn has been named to TheNonProfitTimes 2020 Power & Influence TOP 50 list, honoring 2020's movers and shakers.  In 2018, Forbes included Ms. Cohn as one of America's Top 50 Women in Tech. The National Law Journal named Ms. Cohn one of 100 most influential lawyers in America in 2013, noting: "[I]f Big Brother is watching, he better look out for Cindy Cohn." She was also named in 2006 for "rushing to the barricades wherever freedom and civil liberties are at stake online."  In 2007 the National Law Journal named her one of the 50 most influential women lawyers in America. In 2010 the Intellectual Property Section of the State Bar of California awarded her its Intellectual Property Vanguard Award and in 2012 the Northern California Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists awarded her the James Madison Freedom of Information Award.  

Ms. Cohn is the author of the professional memoir, called Privacy's Defender to be published by MIT Press in March, 2026. She is also the co-host of EFF's award-winning podcast, How to Fix the Internet.  

 

Annalee Newitz
Annalee Newitz writes science fiction and nonfiction. They are the author of four novels: Automatic Noodle, The Terraformers, The Future of Another Timeline, and Autonomous, which won the Lambda Literary Award. As a science journalist, they are the author of Stories Are Weapons: Psychological Warfare and the American Mind, Four Lost Cities: A Secret History of the Urban Age and Scatter, Adapt and Remember: How Humans Will Survive a Mass Extinction, which was a finalist for the LA Times Book Prize in science. They are a writer for the New York Times and elsewhere, and have a monthly column in New Scientist. They have published in The Washington Post, Slate, Scientific American, Ars Technica, The New Yorker, and Technology Review, among others. They were the co-host of the Hugo Award-winning podcast Our Opinions Are Correct, and have contributed to the public radio shows Science Friday, On the Media, KQED Forum, and Here and Now. Previously, they were the founder of io9, and served as the editor-in-chief of Gizmodo.

In some parts of the deep ocean, it can look like it’s snowing. This “marine snow” is the dust and detritus that organisms slough off as they die and decompose. Marine snow can fall several kilometers to the deepest parts of the ocean, where the particles are buried in the seafloor for millennia.

Now, researchers at MIT and their collaborators have found that as marine snow falls, tiny hitchhikers may limit how deep the particles can sink before dissolving away. The team shows that when bacteria hitch a ride on marine snow particles, the microbes can eat away at calcium carbonate, which is an essential ballast that helps particles sink.

The findings, which appear this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, could explain how calcium carbonate dissolves in shallow layers of the ocean, where scientists had assumed it should remain intact. The results could also change scientists’ understanding of how quickly the ocean can sequester carbon from the atmosphere.

Marine snow is a main vehicle by which the ocean stores carbon. At the ocean’s surface, phytoplankton absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and convert the gas into other forms of carbon, including calcium carbonate — the same stuff that’s found in shells and corals. When they die, bits of phytoplankton drift down through the ocean as marine snow, carrying the carbon with them. If the particles make it to the deep ocean, the carbon they carry can be buried and locked away for hundreds to thousands of years.

But the new study suggests bacteria may be working against the ocean’s ability to sequester carbon. By eroding the particles’ calcium carbonate, bacteria can significantly slow the sinking of marine snow. The more they linger, the more likely the particles are to be respired quickly, releasing carbon dioxide into the shallow ocean, and possibly back into the atmosphere.

“What we’ve shown is that carbon may not sink as deep or as fast as one may expect,” says study co-author Andrew Babbin, an associate professor in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences and a mission director at the Climate Project at MIT. “As humanity tries to design our way out of the problem of having so much CO2 in the atmosphere, we have to take into account these natural microbial mechanisms and feedbacks.”

The study’s primary author is Benedict Borer, a former MIT postdoc who is now an assistant professor of marine and coastal sciences at the Rutgers School of Environmental and Biological Sciences; co-authors include Adam Subhas and Matthew Hayden at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Ryan Woosley, a principal research scientist at MIT’s Center for Sustainability Science and Strategy.

Losing weight

Marine snow acts as the ocean’s main “biological pump,” the process by which the ocean pulls carbon from the surface down into the deep ocean. Scientists estimate that marine snow is responsible for drawing down billions of tons of carbon each year. Marine snow’s ability to sink comes mainly from minerals such as calcium carbonate embedded within the particles. The mineral is a dense ballast that weighs down the particle. The more calcium carbonate a particle has, the faster it sinks.

Scientists had assumed based on thermodynamics that calcium carbonate should not dissolve within the ocean’s upper layers, given the general temperature and pH conditions in the surface ocean. Any calcium carbonate that is bound up in marine snow should then safely sink to depths greater than 1,000 meters without dissolving along the way.

But oceanographers have long observed signs of dissolved calcium carbonate in the upper layers of the ocean, suggesting that something other than the ocean’s macroscale conditions was dissolving the mineral and slowing down the ocean’s biological pump.

And indeed, the MIT team has found that what is dissolving calcium carbonate in shallow waters is a microscale process that occurs within the immediate environment of an individual particle.

“Most oceanographers think about the macroscale, and in this instance what’s happening in microscopic particles is what is actually controlling bulk seawater chemistry,” Borer says. “Consequences abound for the ocean’s carbon dioxide sequestration capacity.”

A sinking sweetspot

In their new study, the researchers set up an experiment to simulate a sinking particle of marine snow and its interactions at the microscale. The team synthesized particles similar to marine snow that they made from varying concentrations of calcium carbonate and bacteria — organisms that are often found feasting on the particles in the ocean.

“The ocean is a fairly dilute medium with respect to organic matter,” Babbin says. “So organisms like bacteria have to search for food. And particles of marine snow are like cheeseburgers for bacteria.”

The team designed a small microfluidic chip to contain the particles, and flowed seawater through the chip at various rates to simulate different sinking speeds in the ocean. Their experiments revealed that whenever particles hosted any bacteria, they also rapidly lost some calcium carbonate, which dissolved into the surrounding seawater. As bacteria feed on the particles’ organic material, the microbes excrete acidic waste products that act to dissolve the particles’ inorganic, ballasting calcium carbonate.

The researchers also found that the amount of calcium carbonate that dissolves depends on how fast the particles sink. They flowed seawater around the particles at slow, intermediate, and fast speeds and found that both slow and fast sinking limit the amount of calcium carbonate that’s dissolved. With slow sinking, particles don’t receive as much oxygen from their surroundings, which essentially suffocates any hitchhiking bacteria. When particles sink quickly, bacteria may be sufficiently oxygenated, but any waste products that they produce can be easily flushed away before they can dissolve the particles’ calcium carbonate.

At intermediate speeds, there is a sweet spot: Bacteria are sufficiently oxygenated and can also build up enough waste, enabling the microbes to efficiently dissolve calcium carbonate.

Overall, the work shows that bacteria can have a significant effect on marine snow’s ability to sink and sequester carbon in the deep ocean. Bacteria can be found everywhere, and particularly in the shallower ocean regions. Even if macroscale conditions in these upper layers should not dissolve calcium carbonate, the study finds bacteria working at the microscale most likely do.

The findings could explain oceanographers’ observations of dissolved calcium carbonate in shallow ocean regions. They also illustrate that bacteria and other microbes may be working against the ocean’s natural ability to sequester carbon, by dissolving marine snow’s ballast and slowing its descent into the deep ocean. As humans consider climate solutions that involve enhancing the ocean’s biological pump, the researchers emphasize that bacteria’s role must be taken into account.

“Insights from this work are vital to predict how ecosystems will respond to marine carbon dioxide removal attempts, and overall how the oceans will change in response to future climate scenarios,” says Benedict Borer, who carried out the study’s experiments as a postdoc in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences.

This work was supported, in part, by the Simons Foundation, the National Science Foundation, and the Climate Project at MIT.

Join EFF Executive Director Cindy Cohn in conversation with 404 Media Cofounder Jason Koebler to discuss Privacy's Defender: My Thirty-Year Fight Against Digital Surveillance, Cindy’s personal story of standing up to the Justice Department, taking on the NSA, and tangling with the FBI to protect our right to digital privacy. The highly anticipated book asks the fundamental question: Can we still have private conversations if we live our lives online? Join the livestream for a live discussion followed by by Q&A.

EFFecting Change Livestream Series:
Privacy's Defender
Thursday, March 19th
11:00 AM - 12:00 PM Pacific
This event is LIVE and FREE!

Accessibility

This event will be live-captioned and recorded. EFF is committed to improving accessibility for our events. If you have any accessibility questions regarding the event, please contact events@eff.org.

Event Expectations

EFF is dedicated to a harassment-free experience for everyone, and all participants are encouraged to view our full Event Expectations.

Upcoming Events

Want to make sure you don’t miss our next livestream? Here’s a link to sign up for updates about this series: eff.org/ECUpdates. If you have a friend or colleague that might be interested, please join the fight for your digital rights by this link: eff.org/EFFectingChange. Thank you for helping EFF spread the word about privacy and free expression online.

Recording

We hope you and your friends can join us live! If you can't make it, we’ll post the recording afterward on YouTube and the Internet Archive!

About the Speakers

 

 Cindy Cohn 
Cindy Cohn is the Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. From 2000-2015 she served as EFF’s Legal Director as well as its General Counsel.  Ms. Cohn first became involved with EFF in 1993, when EFF asked her to serve as the outside lead attorney in Bernstein v. Dept. of Justice, the successful First Amendment challenge to the U.S. export restrictions on cryptography. Ms. Cohn has been named to TheNonProfitTimes 2020 Power & Influence TOP 50 list, honoring 2020's movers and shakers.  In 2018, Forbes included Ms. Cohn as one of America's Top 50 Women in Tech. The National Law Journal named Ms. Cohn one of 100 most influential lawyers in America in 2013, noting: "[I]f Big Brother is watching, he better look out for Cindy Cohn." She was also named in 2006 for "rushing to the barricades wherever freedom and civil liberties are at stake online."  In 2007 the National Law Journal named her one of the 50 most influential women lawyers in America. In 2010 the Intellectual Property Section of the State Bar of California awarded her its Intellectual Property Vanguard Award and in 2012 the Northern California Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists awarded her the James Madison Freedom of Information Award.  

 Jason Koebler 
Jason Koebler is a cofounder of 404 Media, a journalist-owned investigative tech publication. He reports on surveillance and privacy, the ways that artificial intelligence is changing the internet, labor, and society, and consumer rights. Before 404 Media, he was the editor-in-chief of Motherboard, VICE's technology publication and an executive producer on Encounters, a Netflix documentary about the search for alien life.

When we learn a new skill, the brain has to decide — cell by cell — what to change. New research from MIT suggests it can do that with surprising precision, sending targeted feedback to individual neurons so each one can adjust its activity in the right direction.

The finding echoes a key idea from modern artificial intelligence. Many AI systems learn by comparing their output to a target, computing an “error” signal, and using it to fine-tune connections within the network. A long-standing question has been whether the brain also uses that kind of individualized feedback. In an open-access study published in the Feb. 25 issue of the journal Nature, MIT researchers report evidence that it does.

A research team led by Mark Harnett, a McGovern Institute for Brain Research investigator and associate professor in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT, discovered these instructive signals in mice by training animals to control the activity of specific neurons using a brain-computer interface (BCI). Their approach, the researchers say, can be used to further study the relationships between artificial neural networks and real brains, in ways that are expected to both improve understanding of biological learning and enable better brain-inspired artificial intelligence.

The changing brain

Our brains are constantly changing as we interact with the world, modifying their circuitry as we learn and adapt. “We know a lot from 50 years of studies that there are many ways to change the strength of connections between neurons,” Harnett says. “What the field really lacks is a way of understanding how those changes are orchestrated to actually produce efficient learning.”

Some actions — and the neural connections that enable them — are reinforced with the release of neuromodulators like dopamine or norepinephrine in the brain. But those signals are broadcast to large groups of neurons, without discriminating between cells’ individual contributions to a failure or a success. “Reinforcement learning via neuromodulators works, but it’s inefficient, because all the neurons and all the synapses basically get only one signal,” Harnett says.

Machine learning uses an alternative, and extremely powerful, way to learn from mistakes. Using a method called back propagation, artificial neural networks compute an error signal and use it to adjust their individual connections. They do this over and over, learning from experience how to fine-tune their networks for success. “It works really well and it’s computationally very effective,” Harnett says.

It seemed likely that brains might use similar error signals for learning. But neuroscientists were skeptical that brains would have the precision to send tailored signals to individual neurons, due to the constraints imposed by using living cells and circuits instead of software and equations. A major problem for testing this idea was how to find the signals that provide personalized instructions to neurons, which are called vectorized instructive signals. The challenge, explains Valerio Francioni, first author of the Nature paper and a former postdoc in Harnett’s lab, is that scientists don’t know how individual neurons contribute to specific behaviors.

“If I was recording your brain activity while you were learning to play piano,” Francioni explains, “I would learn that there is a correlation between the changes happening in your brain and you learning piano. But if you asked me to make you a better piano player by manipulating your brain activity, I would not be able to do that, because we don’t know how the activity of individual neurons map to that ultimate performance.”

Without knowing which neurons need to become more active and which ones should be reined in, it is impossible to look for signals directing those changes.

Understanding neuron function

To get around this problem, Harnett’s team developed a brain-computer interface task to directly link neural activity and reward outcome — akin to linking the keys of the piano directly to the activity of single neurons. To succeed at the task, certain neurons needed to increase their activity, whereas others were required to decrease their activity.

They set up a BCI to directly link activity in those neurons — just eight to 10 of the millions of neurons in a mouse’s brain — to a visual readout, providing sensory feedback to the mice about their performance. Success was accompanied by delivery of a sugary reward.

“Now if you ask me, ‘How does the mouse get more rewards? Which neuron do you have to activate and which neuron do you have to inhibit?’ I know exactly what the answer to that question is,” says Francioni, whose work was supported by a Y. Eva Tan Fellowship from the Yang Tan Collective at MIT.

The scientists didn’t know the exact function of the particular neurons they linked to the BCI, but the cells were active enough that mice received occasional rewards whenever the signals happened to be right. Within a week, mice learned to switch on the right neurons while leaving the other set of neurons inactive, earning themselves more rewards.

Francioni monitored the target neurons daily during this learning process using a powerful microscope to visualize fluorescent indicators of neural activity. He zeroed in on the neurons’ branching dendrites, where the appropriate feedback signals have long been suspected to arrive. At the same time, he tracked activity in the parent cell bodies of those neurons. The team used these data to examine the relationship between signals received at a neuron’s dendrites and its activity, as well as how these changed when mice were rewarded for activating the right neurons or when they failed at their task.

Vectorized neural signals

They concluded that the two groups of neurons whose activity controlled the BCI in opposite ways, also received opposing error signals at their dendrites as the mice learned. Some were told to ramp up their activity during the task, while others were instructed to dial it down. What’s more, when the team manipulated the dendrites to inhibit these instructive signals, mice failed to learn the task. “This is the first biological evidence that vectorized [neuron-specific] signal-based instructive learning is taking place in the cortex,” Harnett says.

The discovery of vectorized signals in the brain — and the team’s ability to find them — should promote more back-and-forth between neuroscientists and machine learning researchers, says postdoc Vincent Tang. “It provides further incentive for the machine learning community to keep developing models and proposing new hypotheses along this direction,” he says. “Then we can come back and test them.”

The researchers say they are just as excited about applying their approach to future experiments as they are about their current discovery.

“Machine learning offers a robust, mathematically tractable way to really study learning. The fact that we can now translate at least some of this directly into the brain is very powerful,” Francioni says.

Harnett says the approach opens new opportunities to investigate possible parallels between the brain and machine learning. “Now we can go after figuring out, how does cortex learn? How do other brain regions learn? How similar or how different is it to this particular algorithm? Can we figure out how to build better, more brain-inspired models from what we learn from the biology?” he says. “This feels like a really big new beginning.” 

It’s called AirSnitch:

Unlike previous Wi-Fi attacks, AirSnitch exploits core features in Layers 1 and 2 and the failure to bind and synchronize a client across these and higher layers, other nodes, and other network names such as SSIDs (Service Set Identifiers). This cross-layer identity desynchronization is the key driver of AirSnitch attacks.

The most powerful such attack is a full, bidirectional machine-in-the-middle (MitM) attack, meaning the attacker can view and modify data before it makes its way to the intended recipient. The attacker can be on the same SSID, a separate one, or even a separate network segment tied to the same AP. It works against small Wi-Fi networks in both homes and offices and large networks in enterprises...

Agency cuts, layoffs and policy shifts are throwing America’s role into question.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin could help revitalize FEMA if confirmed as Homeland Security secretary, lawmakers and experts say.

A multistate effort aims to educate policyholders about their danger — and how they can reduce it to receive premium discounts.

Voters were confused about where the money came from.

Gov. Kathy Hochul looks to change New York’s landmark climate law because of affordability concerns, reflecting a national clash between high energy prices and environmental goals.