Imagine working at a warehouse or office sometime in the near future, and you’re asked to help a new trainee learn the basics of their job. The catch: It’s a robot. To teach them, you might want to play a game of “show and tell” — that is, physically showing how to do something a few different ways, while also explaining what you’re doing.

Let’s say you asked the robot to place some coffee on your desk without disturbing you during a Zoom call. You’ll prefer that the robot doesn’t get too close to you and the laptop so that it doesn’t interrupt your meeting. To enable this behavior, the robot should be trained with data that clearly demonstrates the full task. Computer scientists have attempted to explain manipulation tasks to robots by recording lots of physical demonstrations or writing extensive directions. But if you don’t have both, the machine is likely to misunderstand what it needs to do.

It’s laborious for humans to do all that showing and telling, so researchers at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) have automated the process of teaching a robot, while clarifying instructions automatically and using nearly five times less demonstration data. Their “Masked Inverse Reinforcement Learning” (Masked IRL) approach uses a large language model (LLM) to elaborate on ambiguous prompts based on the data collected from a user’s demo. Another LLM then narrows down which details an algorithm should incorporate into a motion plan, so that a robot can safely complete chores in homes, offices, and factories.

“Our approach could come in handy when a human interacts with a robot but doesn’t want to spell out all the details of a task,” says MIT PhD student and CSAIL researcher Minyoung Hwang, who is a lead author on a paper presenting the project. “We’re minimizing human effort by enabling machines to get to the bottom of what users really want.”

According to Hwang, Masked IRL can help robots safely maneuver in settings where there are elements a human might not describe in a prompt, but that are crucial nonetheless. For example, a machine grabbing you a snack from the kitchen may not know to avoid bumping into your laptop. Likewise, a factory robot placing items into different boxes must carefully navigate around shelves.

To learn new tasks in these situations, Masked IRL uses the robot’s sensors to capture information about its surroundings. These components also log each movement of a kinesthetic demonstration — a training approach where a human physically moves a robot to do a specific action. It’s sort of like being the machine’s physical therapist, bending joints in a particular direction to show a robot how to grab, move, and place objects.

MIT’s system then calls on an LLM to compare this sequence of motions (called a trajectory) to the shortest possible path. The model also elaborates on what might be unclear in a prompt, turning a request like “stay close” into “stay close to the surface of the table.” Using the trajectory comparison and clarified directions, the LLM begins to understand why the motions it was trained on are important to the task. 

A second LLM then evaluates details of the environment, such as the position of obstacles and the shape of the robot’s target object. During this process, it “masks” (in other words, ignores) the elements it deems irrelevant to the task at hand, scoring each one as either a “1” (important) or “0” (not so much). For example, whether or not a user was leaning on a table during a demonstration would be a “0,” making it irrelevant. Any detail considered a “1” is incorporated into the final action plan by an algorithm.

These masks gave Masked IRL a key advantage over comparable baselines in both 3D and real-world demos because it taught a robot which information to prioritize. Thanks to the researchers’ system, virtual and real robots alike were able to skillfully maneuver objects around obstacles, such as moving a coffee mug around a laptop to different spots on a table. In these tasks, Masked IRL correctly identified users’ preferences, which they didn’t explicitly state in their prompts, up to 15 percent more often than comparable baselines.

During simulation experiments, CSAIL researchers also found that Masked IRL was a fast learner. It required fewer demos to understand how to move the mug than its baselines. They also found that the robots performed better when an LLM cleared up instructions, instead of having the machine try to follow a vague request.

This more focused approach also translated well to a real robotic arm, executing prompts the system hadn’t seen during its training phase. After being trained on 50 kinesthetic demonstrations, the robot carefully moved a cup toward a human while avoiding colliding with a user’s computer — an obstacle it learned to avoid by elaborating on a more general request to “stay away.” It also wiped a table down while “staying close” to it, and handed a user a bag of chips while “staying away” from both a human and a table.

Masked IRL senses and explains what users leave unsaid, but soon, it might “see” it too. CSAIL researchers plan to make their approach more dynamic by equipping it with cameras, allowing a robot to take images of its surroundings. Then it could highlight and focus on specific elements nearby. For example, if you asked the machine to pick up a toy, it might see some bananas nearby and ignore them before handling its target object.

Hwang wrote the paper with three CSAIL colleagues: PhD student Alexandra Forsey-Smerek ’20, SM ’22; postdoc Nathaniel Dennler; and MIT Assistant Professor Andreea Bobu, who is a member of the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and CSAIL. Their work was supported, in part, by the Tata Group via the MIT Generative AI Impact Consortium Award, and the Department of Defense. They’ll present the project at the 2026 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation in June.

A database of almost a million passports from around the world was leaked online.

Note what happened. A high-value credential—a passport—was used in an ancillary low-value authentication system: ID verification for cannabis dispensaries. And it’s the low-value system that got hacked, putting the high-value credential at risk.

But how they do so varies from state to state.

Republican legislation would grant the oil and gas industry immunity from litigation that seeks compensation for the costs of climate change.

Deb Haaland, the Interior secretary under former President Joe Biden, is set to face Republican nominee Gregg Hull in November.

The Department of Energy would have to distribute funding for state energy and weatherization programs on a set timeline.

The decision fell short of requests from climate organizations who brought the lawsuit to force the company to reduce its oil and gas production.

Almost half of the 27 EU member states now support delaying the rules.

The far right’s calls for more air conditioning aren’t resonating with most voters.

The emissions quota trading on the pilot market will cover thermal power plants, steelmakers and cement producers.

Black holes are often misunderstood to be just that: dark and mysterious voids that are somehow akin to Alice in Wonderland’s mind-bending rabbit hole. 

But rather than a tunnel of nothing, a black hole is actually something — and a lot of it. The densest objects in the universe, black holes exert tremendous gravitational pull, gathering in the surrounding fabric of space and time, and generating huge disks of matter that whirl toward a black hole before falling in, past the point of no return. 

In recent years, as astronomers have been able to train more telescopes on the sky, for longer stretches of time, they have captured a surprising range of black hole behavior.

“It used to be that we didn’t have eyes on systems all the time,” says Erin Kara, an associate professor of physics at MIT. “Now we’re seeing that they can turn on and off at rates that are much faster than we ever thought possible. We see things are getting sucked in toward black holes faster than we thought, perhaps due to stars whipping around and getting trapped in a black hole’s accretion disk.”

Kara and her group in MIT’s Kavli Institute for Astrophysics and Space Research are at the forefront of black hole physics. She is using data from telescopes in space and on the ground to study the properties of black holes, especially supermassive black holes — the ultradense giants at the centers of galaxies. Supermassive black holes are the engines of galaxy formation. Kara, who recently earned tenure at MIT, seeks to connect the extreme physics of black holes with how galaxies such as our own Milky Way come to be.

“It’s amazing that we as humans can know anything about what’s happening billions of light years away,” Kara says. “There’s a lot of new open puzzles about supermassive black holes that I’m excited about.” 

Early impact

Kara was born and raised in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, as the youngest of four. Her mother was a nurse, and her father a doctor, so it felt only natural for Kara to follow their lead. She set out on a premed track at Barnard College of Columbia University. As part of the program that first year, she took an introductory physics class and was instantly drawn to the subject’s concrete, fundamental descriptions of the physical world, from the quantum to cosmic scales. 

“Physics was always the class that explained things at the ground level,” Kara recalls. “And I thought, wow, this is cool. I have to keep going with this.”

In class, she kept asking questions and wanting to know more. Her professor, astronomer Reshmi Mukherjee, took note and invited Kara to join her research group as a summer intern. The team would be working on new data from a telescope that was readying for launch. That summer, in June 2008, NASA launched the Fermi Gamma-Ray Space Telescope into low-Earth orbit, with the purpose of surveying the sky for sources of gamma rays — high-energy radiation that is produced by black holes, neutron stars, and other extreme astrophysical objects. 

When the telescope started sending back data, Mukherjee assigned Kara a project: to characterize two of the telescope’s unidentified gamma-ray signals. Both signals were bright, and the question was whether they came from nearby, within the Milky Way galaxy, or much further away. If the latter was the case, it would mean the sources were possibly quasars — a type of extremely active supermassive black hole that at the time was a rarity in astronomy observations. 

Kara got to work on the data and soon confirmed that both sources were indeed quasars. 

“It was a small discovery, but it felt awesome,” Kara says. “And I love that about astronomy, that there are so many unanswered questions, and even early on in your career, you can make an impact.”

Needless to say, Kara caught the astronomy bug, and soon opted to switch from premed to physics, though the new path was not always smooth. On Barnard’s all-women’s campus, introductory classes in physics were small, and professors were encouraging and approachable. In contrast, upper-level courses were held at Columbia, where Kara was one of a much larger, co-ed cohort. 

“It’s a very unique experience to be with all women in a physics environment, and then to see how my feelings about my own abilities changed, just based on the environment,” Kara reflects. “I went to Columbia and all of a sudden felt like I couldn’t do this. All these guys were much more confident and outwardly understanding of the material. In the end, I did well there too. And that juxtaposition helped me gain confidence and know, yeah, I belong here.”

Black hole reverb

After graduating with a major in physics and a minor in art history, Kara went abroad, to the Institute of Astronomy at Cambridge University. She earned a scholarship there to pursue a one-year master’s degree in physics, but she ended up staying to complete a PhD on a topic that was just starting to grow roots: black hole X-ray reverberation. 

In 2009, her thesis advisor, Andy Fabian, and his team were looking through archival data from an X-ray telescope and noticed curious time delays in signals coming from around a black hole. They interpreted the signals as X-ray echoes, or reverberations. It was the first evidence of X-ray echoes around a black hole, and it helped to resolve a debate in the field over the source of the radiation. 

Her advisor determined that the reverb was a result of X-rays generated from the black hole’s corona — a crown-shaped aura of high-energy radiation immediately surrounding the black hole — that then bounced, or reverberated, off the swirling disk of gas and dust that circles a black hole, known as an accretion disk. 

“They had only found these echoes in one black hole. But the archive was full of data of these reverberation signals that no one had analyzed in this particular way,” Kara explains. “So I had my whole PhD to kind of play with this archive, and it felt very discovery-driven.”

Since that initial exploration, Kara has worked to advance the study of X-ray reverberation as a technique to map regions around black holes and other extreme astrophysical objects. 

A pivotal disruption

After earning a PhD in physics, Kara returned to the U.S. for postdoctoral work at the University of Maryland and NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. She intended to work on data from a new satellite, Hitomi — a Japanese mission that would detect far-off X-rays to help scientists map the large-scale structure and evolution of the universe. After 40 days, the scientists lost control of the satellite, which ultimately began spinning uncontrollably and broke apart in orbit. Before it failed, the telescope sent back one clean signal.

“It got one really good observation, which was unlike any spectrum we had ever seen before,” Kara recalls. 

The data confirmed that the satellite’s detector — a microcalorimeter that was developed at NASA — was sound. That technology is now at the heart of Hitomi’s successor, the X-ray Imaging and Spectroscopy Mission, or XRISM, which has been successfully taking data since its launch in 2023. Today, Kara leads a science group as part of the XRISM mission to analyze X-ray signals from supermassive black holes. 

Back then, however, with the end of Hitomi, she had to pivot. She started working with a new group at NASA Goddard that was gearing up for the launch of another telescope — the Neutron Star Interior Composition Explorer, or NICER. In 2017, the telescope, which was developed and built by MIT researchers, was launched and attached to the International Space Station, where it measured the timing of incoming X-rays from astrophysical sources in deep space. 

The group Kara joined was analyzing NICER data for signs of tidal disruption events, which are instances when a black hole tears apart a nearby star. This was some of her earliest work on these dynamic sources, and she has since incorporated tidal disruption events — and data from NICER — as a main research area. 

At the hub

In 2019, Kara accepted a junior faculty position in MIT’s Department of Physics — a decision that to her was a “no-brainer.” 

“X-ray astronomy has its history at MIT,” Kara says. “Bruno Rossi, Hale Bradt, George Clark, Claude Canizares — it all started here. It was always a place that felt like a hub. And that was the draw.”

Today, she and her students regularly analyze data from various satellites and telescopes such as XRISM and NICER to better understand black holes and how they grow, evolve, and affect the galaxies around them. She continues to advance X-ray reverberation mapping, which has helped scientists map the extreme regions immediately surrounding a black hole. Her group is also studying signals from other extreme X-ray sources, including tidal disruption events, quasiperiodic eruptions, and galactic black hole outbursts. 

Kara also plans to explore data from future observatories, including the Ultraviolet Transiet Astronomy Satellite (ULTRASAT), which will continuously scan the entire sky for hot, ultraviolet sources; and the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), a space telescope that will detect low-frequency gravitational waves from sources such as pairs of lopsided, David-and-Goliath black holes. 

And she’s also found time for a bit of black hole fun: In 2022, Kara collaborated with educators and music anthropologists at MIT to convert a black hole’s X-ray echoes to audible sound. As a musician herself — she sings and plays the violin — she was curious how a black hole’s cosmic energy might “sound.” The effect was otherworldly, to say the least. 

“One of the reasons that I love black holes is that they are very extreme, and feel very sci-fi crazy, and things don’t make sense, and physics breaks down around them. And at the same time, they’re super foundational to even why we’re here,” Kara says. “For reasons we don’t fully understand, the distribution of stars and gas and dust in a galaxy is dictated in part by the supermassive black hole at its center. Our sun is one of those stars. It’s all intertwined. And untangling some of that is what motivates me.”

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 26 June 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02682-1

Distinguishing leaf scorching from senescence under climate extremes

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 26 June 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02679-w

The 2021 Pacific Northwest heat dome shows how acute thermal stress challenges prevailing assumptions about ecological resilience and adaptation. Extreme heat events are revealing physiological limits in forests that are not captured by conventional climate risk frameworks.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 26 June 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02681-2

Global greening has persisted under climate change, with feedbacks for Earth’s future climate. Here I look back on a critical 2016 study that resolved the patterns and drivers of global greening and consider how this work influences studies to monitor, model and manage greening.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 26 June 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02673-2

Mental health should not be viewed solely as a passive outcome of climate adaptation. Rather, it serves as a key determinant of cognitive capacity and shapes the effectiveness of climate adaptation. Here we call for the integration of mental health into adaptation assessments and policy implementation.

Time and time again, researchers have found numerous compromised Android devices for sale at large online retailers like Amazon. When these devices get individually reported, we have seen some noted efforts to take them down. But this is a systemic problem and Amazon and other major online retailers must make a corresponding systemic and intentional effort to stop these devices from entering people’s homes and ultimately their networks.

As a refresher: Last year, Google wrote that one major campaign, deemed BADBOX, affected 10 million uncertified devices that were running Android’s open-source software (Android Open Source Project or AOSP). These devices span from TVs and streaming devices to digital picture frames. Even now, someone can go on Amazon and Walmart and buy one of these devices. Not all of them come from Amazon and Walmart, but it’s fair to assume since they have the lion’s share of the market.

Most well-known Android-based devices don’t come with just “stock Android.” The operating system is usually Android plus additional features that the manufacturer wanted. These custom versions of Android often come with pre-installed applications that range from useful to innocuous bloatware to actual malware. Many Android OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) pre-install apps that may not be visibly represented by an icon in your list of installed apps. This obscurity makes the issue particularly hard for users to identify any potential threats.

Since the initial BADBOX analysis, there have been more reports of large campaigns and clusters of different devices participating in malicious activities that utilize people’s home networks to engage in illegal activity. Task forces in the private sector have made an effort to take down these existing Command and Control structures, but these actors may pivot and evolve to flood the market with more devices. 

Online retailers can stop this cycle. A multi-billion dollar company like Amazon should offer more resources, like their anti-fraud efforts, given that these products may have facilitated conditions for large scale attacks and illegal activity. It would also be helpful if they communicated malware-related take downs in a more visible way to consumers who are seeking very similar devices with shared characteristics.

Identifying these devices can be tricky, but it’s not impossible because they tend to follow a pattern. For example, the FBI warned consumers this year to avoid TV streaming devices that claim to provide free sports, tv shows, and movies, a common tactic used by the makers of these malware-filled Android devices that leverages people’s exhaustion from spending money on countless streaming services. We detailed what sorts of indicators to look for on a device you’ve purchased.

But it’s not just the storefronts. There are other parts of this ecosystem that need to improve too, like increased engagement in firmware transparency and the actual manufacturers of the devices themselves being held accountable for these malware laced products.

On Prime Day, we urge retailers like Amazon to better empower users with information they need to make safe and smart decisions.

Seeking transparency and accountability in Paraguay’s use of facial recognition, EFF, the Association of Technology, Education, Development, Research, Communication (TEDIC), and the Centre for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) filed a complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights against the state for arbitrarily denying access to information about its implementation and use of the technology as a tool for mass surveillance that erodes people’s privacy rights. 

The case involves the Ministry of the Interior and National Police’s installation in 2019 of surveillance cameras with facial recognition technology in Asunción. Maricarmen Sequera, a lawyer and executive director of TEDIC, filed an information request with the ministry seeking details and protocols about the implementation and use of facial recognition systems and the personal data processing involved. 

The request sought information about, among other things, whether the state had conducted human rights or data protection impact assessments, as well as if it had developed measures and protocols for avoiding abuses, illicit uses of personal data, and other risks in the deployment of the facial recognition system.

The state denied most of the information requested, arguing that implementation details, protocols, and the processing of individuals' personal data were confidential security information. TEDIC contested the secrecy in courts, but the analyses lagged and ultimately sustained the denial of information. 

The petition filed last Friday (19) cites Inter-American standards upholding the public’s right to access information, particularly in relation to national security, that the Paraguayan authorities disregarded in denying TEDIC’s information request. The petition also argues that the refusal of information violated privacy and the right to informational self-determination.

The petition asks the Commission to recognize a violation of those rights and require the state to deliver the information requested. Further, the petition seeks an order compelling the state to adopt mandatory permanent mechanisms of active transparency regarding the acquisition, contracting, implementation, financing, functioning, and use of surveillance technologies by public bodies, especially those that incorporate processing of biometric data or artificial intelligence systems. 

It also asks the Commission to order the state to mandatory procedures for human rights impact assessments prior to acquiring and using surveillance technologies, particularly those that collect biometric data or use artificial intelligence.

The state’s lack of transparency in this case is not an isolated incident, both in Paraguay and in Latin America, where opacity in matters of security and surveillance is the unsettling rule. The situation gets worse with the increasing normalization of intrusive surveillance technologies by states in the region.

The Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission emphasized that states should disclose surveillance capabilities and contracts, and acknowledge state use of surveillance technologies at a meaningful level of detail, to facilitate essential public debate on the necessary limitations of surveillance in democratic societies and ensure compliance with international human rights law.

We hope that the Inter-American Commission upholds the robust safeguards in the Inter-American System and advances access to information and privacy rights in a case that can set a crucial precedent for the region.

This week marks four years since Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization overturned Roe v. Wade’s constitutional protections for people seeking abortion care. Anniversaries are a moment to take stock, and over the last four years, EFF has seen firsthand how digital rights and reproductive rights have become increasingly intertwined. One major way this has happened: the fight over abortion has also become a fight over online speech and government censorship as a steady stream of proposed laws, cease-and-desist letters, lawsuits, and government investigations have targeted the websites and online resources that help people find and learn about reproductive healthcare.

This is an effort by anti-abortion government officials to mold the information ecosystem, restrict what people can read, and cut off the ways people communicate with one another. We’ve watched this build for years, and the encouraging news is that many of these efforts have failed. The worrying news is that they keep coming. And if they’re allowed to succeed, this could have repercussions for freedom of expression online beyond reproductive rights.

Targeting Sites That Just Share Information

The clearest tell that this is also a war on speech is that officials have aimed their efforts not just at abortion providers or the entities that prescribe and sell medication abortion, but also at websites that do nothing more than tell people what their options are, how to find a doctor, and where abortion remains legal.

Cease-and-Desists & Takedown Demands

State attorneys general have been hitting these online information hubs with cease-and-desist letters and takedown demands. Just this month, for example, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall sent cease-and-desist letters to multiple groups with abortion-related websites, including Plan C, a public health campaign that provides educational resources and research on abortion access. Plan C doesn’t sell or ship abortion pills. It simply provides information. Marshall’s office nonetheless claimed Plan C’s website “facilitates, aids, and abets” illegal abortion. The Arkansas attorney general similarly sent out cease-and-desists to several organizations regarding their websites, including Mayday Health, which, like Plan C, provides only information and does not directly prescribe or mail pills.

What’s especially concerning is that the state doesn’t have to win, or even file, a lawsuit to get what it wants.

In another example from earlier this year, North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley threatened legal action and ordered the Prairie Abortion Fund to scrub information off of its website, not because the fund sold pills, but because its site linked to several outside informational resources. The Attorney General primarily focused on the fund’s link to Plan C, meaning the biggest alleged issue was a link to a website that links to other websites where pills can be accessed.

What’s especially concerning is that the state doesn’t have to win, or even file, a lawsuit to get what it wants. Especially for smaller organizations and funds, a letter threatening legal action can be enough to chill their speech, causing them to remove important content and go quiet.

Censorship Mandates

Legislators in multiple states have also attempted to make it illegal to share resources on how to obtain an abortion, including on purely informational websites with a national or global audience. South Dakota recently passed a law making it a felony to “advertise” anything “described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing an abortion.” Language this broad can easily apply to websites that simply engage in First Amendment-protected advocacy or provide educational resources. Mayday Health, which operates one such website, has since sued the state in federal court to block the law. The lawsuit argues the law could reach something as small as wearing a sweatshirt that carries Mayday’s web address.

Other state legislatures have made similar efforts. Last year, for example, Texas introduced a bill that would have made it illegal to “provide information” on how to obtain an abortion-inducing drug. If you exchanged emails, had an online chat, or created a website that shared information about legal abortion services in other states, you could have violated this bill. Luckily this particular bill did not pass, but Texas has attempted to pass similar laws for several years now.

Dressing Censorship Up as Consumer Protection

A major way anti-abortion officials are targeting online speech is by weaponizing consumer protection and deceptive advertising laws, claiming that providing information about abortion violates them. This tactic is a threat to free speech rights. The First Amendment protects publishing truthful information on a public issue, and the Supreme Court has expressly said that includes providing information about legal abortion in a state where it is illegal.

Yet states like South Dakota have continued to use deceptive advertising claims to go after abortion speech. Last year, South Dakota sent a cease-and-desist and then filed a lawsuit against Mayday Health for running ads that simply read: “Pregnant? Don’t want to be?” with a link to Mayday’s website. The state claimed the ads were “deceptive.” Mayday then counter-sued in federal court, challenging South Dakota’s actions under the First Amendment. Though the federal judge ultimately declined to step in while the parallel state case was pending, she made a point of saying she believed Mayday’s website constitutes “speech subject to protection under the First Amendment.”

Other states have attempted to run the same play. Missouri sued Planned Parenthood in 2025 under its consumer-protection statute, calling a webpage that says abortion pills are safe an “unfair and deceptive” trade practice. Florida went even further, invoking its RICO law—a law typically used for organized crime—over the same kind of statement. Florida leaned heavily on a single study funded by an anti-abortion think tank, even as major medical organizations and decades of research put the serious-complication rate below half a percent. States should not be able to cherry-pick studies in order to erase online speech.

Going After Intermediaries & Erasing Whole Websites

Some officials aren’t content to restrict only certain abortion-related content—they want the websites gone entirely.

Take, for example, the cease-and-desist letters sent by the Arkansas attorney general last year. Letters were sent directly to internet intermediaries (entities that facilitate use of the internet, such as internet service providers, web-hosting providers, or things like search engines and social media platforms). The letters demanded that both a domain registry company and a web host stop supporting a site that discusses abortion drugs. But as we know, if we cut off the host or the domain, the speech disappears for everyone—not just for people in Arkansas.

Likewise, Texas’s 2025 bill would have required intermediaries to take down abortion-related content. It’s worth remembering that the imposition of civil and criminal liability on intermediaries also conflicts with a federal law that protects online intermediaries’ ability to host user-generated speech, 47 U.S.C. § 230 (“Section 230”), including speech about abortion medication.

The push has gone federal, too. In March 2026, Senator Bill Cassidy and colleagues on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee pressed the FDA to use every tool it has against online sellers, including leaning on the domain registrars that keep these sites online.

Why This Should Worry Everyone

It’s tempting to see this as limited to the fight over reproductive rights. That would be a mistake. For people seeking care, the immediate harm is obvious: the internet is often the only place to find accurate, potentially life-saving information, and every letter, lawsuit, and takedown threat makes that information harder to find and riskier to share.

But the damage doesn’t stop there. We’re witnessing a live experiment in how to use consumer-protection laws, criminal statutes, and pressure on intermediaries to suppress a disfavored viewpoint, pull information offline, and make websites disappear. To think these tactics can only be used against abortion speech would be naïve. 

We hope courts and legislatures will continue to protect free speech online. But the continued drumbeat of threatening letters, lawsuits, and investigations is its own kind of harm. Here at EFF, we’ll keep defending the right to share and read information online—about abortion, and about everything else.

The Federal Communications Commission wants to require telecommunications providers to collect vast amounts of personal information from every person who wants a phone number in the name of combatting scam and spam calls. This plan will fail to combat the deluge of unwanted calls people in the United States receive every day while giving untrustworthy companies a gold mine of information that would harm everyday consumer’s privacy, access to communications, and ability to speak freely. 

The requirement to provide ID and an address would completely cut off the ability to have an anonymous phone line, which would mean many people in the most precarious situations imaginable: domestic violence and human trafficking survivors, unhoused people, and children without stable homes, would not be able to gain access to a crucial lifeline. EFF, along with ACLU, has submitted comments advising the FCC to abandon this proposal entirely. 

This Rule Will Not Decrease Spam Calls 

Requiring phone providers to collect consumers’ information will not appreciably decrease or eliminate unwanted calls. The FCC knows this because it confesses in its own rulemaking that “the most effective way to prevent unwanted calls from reaching American consumers is by ensuring they never enter the network.” Further, the Federal Trade Commission found that “a significant proportion, if not the majority, of unwanted robocalls originate from overseas.” Collecting the personal information of everyone who wants to make a phone call will not put a dent in fraudulent calls. 

What will address unwanted calls is the FCC’s STIR/SHAKEN technical standards, which already exist. While STIR/SHAKEN is not perfect, it is actually a technical solution to the problem of spam calls. And where less than 50% of American telecommunication providers have fully implemented the protocol, the FCC should put its energy toward 100% compliance to reduce the scale of unwanted calls, instead of collecting consumer’s private information. 

The FCC gives away the true reason for this proposal in their own comments: this is a move to shut down the very existence of anonymous phones, aka burner phones. FCC says in their comments: 

“Enhanced KYC information can assist law enforcement to more easily identify callers that use the network to perpetuate crimes by ensuring that voice providers have accurate and complete customer information. The KYC information gathered and verified would help ensure that law enforcement gets accurate information in response to subpoenas when investigating crimes. For example, can enhanced KYC rules assist law enforcement in investigating organized criminal groups that use the network to facilitate illegal activities? Can they be used to deter or detect trafficking operations that use communication networks to buy and sell illicit goods?”

Anonymous phones are not just used by people to break the law, they are also used by activists who wish to remain anonymous, privacy conscious consumers, people escaping domestic violence, people escaping human trafficking, journalists who need to reach out to confidential sources, and other people in desperate situations. Anonymous phone lines are a lifeline to many, one which this proposal would cut off without any alternative. 

Mass Data Collection Makes Us All Less Safe

Mass data collection of individuals does not address unwanted calls, but it does 

make us all less safe online. The telecommunications industry has proven time and again that they’re poor stewards of personal information. They’ve been at the center of several large-scale data breaches in recent years and their data practices leave much to be desired.

In 2024, AT&T disclosed two large data breaches. One in which 7.6 million existing account holders and more than 65 million former customers had their information leaked onto the dark web, and another in which more than 100 million customer account call and text logs were downloaded. Another large provider, Comcast, suffered a data breach in 2023 where nearly 36 million account holder’s information was stolen, including the last four digits of their Social Security Number and date of birth. 

In 2024, the nation’s CALEA infrastructure, which law enforcement uses to tap and trace calls, was breached in the Salt Typhoon attacks. Experts maintain that U.S. communications networks remain vulnerable, and even this administration acknowledges these attacks as an ongoing threat. 

If telecoms can’t even protect the most sensitive communications infrastructure in the nation how can we expect that they will protect our identities?

In addition to their poor cybersecurity practice, these providers themselves abuse the information in their possession. In Scott v AT&T, AT&T, among others, made consumer information available to hundreds of third parties without the consumer’s express consent. Though the case was dismissed because AT&T forces its consumers to sign arbitration agreements, it shows the complete lack of care for their consumers' privacy. 

A Lack of Anonymity Silences People 

Mass data collection of individuals just to have a phone number will also harm and silence people. Anonymity in calls provides people the safety they may require to organize themselves, speak freely, and seek services. Anonymous phone calls give people the courage to participate in politics, organize themselves, reach out to a suicide or sexual-assault hotline, an addiction-recovery sponsor, seek medical care, seek escape from a violent and coercive situation, and do much more. Without this anonymity, people may otherwise not do any of these things. 

It will prevent many from obtaining phone numbers at all. 

Not everyone has all the information the FCC wants to require. The FCC wants people’s physical addresses, defined so narrowly that it’s essentially a home address. Not everyone has a stable home address, so those individuals would be not able to get phone service. 

FCC suggests that a government-issued identification should be required for any phone service. About 15 million adult U.S. citizens do not have a driver’s license, while about 2.6 million do not have any form of government-issued photo ID. Others don’t have access to their identifying documents, they may be controlled by an abusive spouse or parent, human trafficker, cult, or someone else from whom a secondary phone line could help a person escape. Estimates show another 21 million adult U.S. citizens do not have a non-expired driver’s license, and over 34.5 million adult citizens have neither a driver’s license nor a state ID card with their current name or address. 

These numbers do not include non-U.S. citizens who do not have current government-issued identification, including undocumented immigrants who cannot obtain a state ID or driver’s license. Black American and Hispanic Americans are disproportionately less likely to have current drivers’ licenses, and Americans with disabilities and Americans with lower annual incomes are also less likely to have current driver’s licenses. 

The FCC’s proposal will not decrease the amount of unwanted calls. All it will do is set up a data collection regime that harms everyday, law abiding Americans. This proposal makes us less secure online, strips away our right to anonymous speech in calls, and actively disconnects those Americans who are already at the margins. EFF recommends the FCC discard this proposal in its entirety. 

The window for reply comments can still be filed until July 26th. Express comments, which are appropriate for most individuals, can be filed on the FCC website. See the suggested language below to help you get started. 

Earlier this month, a German court ruled that Google is liable for its AI search summaries. Rejecting defenses like “users can check for themselves,” and that they generally know “that information generated with AI should not be blindly trusted,” the court held that the AI’s summaries are reflections of the company and “above all an expression of Google’s business activities.”

This is the latest skirmish in a decades-old battle over internet publishing. Historically, there were two different types of information distributors: carriers and publishers. A phone company is a carrier. It’ll transmit whatever you say, even discussions about committing a crime. Words are words, and the phone company does not know—nor is it liable for—the words you choose to speak. A newspaper, on the other hand, is a publisher. It decides the words it publishes, and what quotes to include in its articles. If those words or quotes are defamatory or otherwise illegal, it’s liable...