Several years ago, the residents of a manufactured-home neighborhood in southeast suburban Houston, not far from the Buffalo Bayou, took a major step in dealing with climate problems: They bought the land under their homes. Then they installed better drainage and developed strategies to share expertise and tools for home repairs. The result? The neighborhood made it through Hurricane Harvey in 2017 and a winter freeze in 2021 without major damage.

The neighborhood is part of a U.S. movement toward the Resident Owned Community (ROC) model for manufactured home parks. Many people in manufactured homes — mobile homes — do not own the land under them. But if the residents of a manufactured-home park can form an ROC, they can take action to adapt to climate risks — and ease the threat of eviction. With an ROC, manufactured-home residents can be there to stay.

That speaks to a larger issue: In cities, lower-income residents are often especially vulnerable to natural hazards, such as flooding, extreme heat, and wildfire. But efforts aimed at helping cities as a whole withstand these disasters can lead to interventions that displace already-disadvantaged residents — by turning a low-lying neighborhood into a storm buffer, for instance.

“The global climate crisis has very differential effects on cities, and neighborhoods within cities,” says Lawrence Vale, a professor of urban studies at MIT and co-author of a new book on the subject, “The Equitably Resilient City,” published by the MIT Press and co-authored with Zachary B. Lamb PhD ’18, an assistant professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

In the book, the scholars delve into 12 case studies from around the globe which, they believe, have it both ways: Low- and middle-income communities have driven climate progress through tangible built projects, while also keeping people from being displaced, and indeed helping them participate in local governance and neighborhood decision-making.

“We can either dive into despair about climate issues, or think they’re solvable and ask what it takes to succeed in a more equitable way,” says Vale, who is the Ford Professor of Urban Design and Planning at MIT. “This book is asking how people look at problems more holistically — to show how environmental impacts are integrated with their livelihoods, with feeling they can have security from displacement, and feeling they’re not going to be displaced, with being empowered to share in the governance where they live.”

As Lamb notes, “Pursuing equitable urban climate adaptation requires both changes in the physical built environment of cities and innovations in institutions and governance practices to address deep-seated causes of inequality.”

Twelve projects, four elements

Research for “The Equitably Resilient City” began with exploration of about 200 potential cases, and ultimately focused on 12 projects from around the globe, including the U.S., Brazil, Thailand, and France. Vale and Lamb, coordinating with locally-based research teams, visited these diverse sites and conducted interviews in nine languages.

All 12 projects work on multiple levels at once: They are steps toward environmental progress that also help local communities in civic and economic terms. The book uses the acronym LEGS (“livelihood, environment, governance, and security”) to encapsulate this need to make equitable progress on four different fronts.

“Doing one of those things well is worth recognition, and doing all of them well is exciting,” Vale says. “It’s important to understand not just what these communities did, but how they did it and whose views were involved. These 12 cases are not a random sample. The book looks for people who are partially succeeding at difficult things in difficult circumstances.”

One case study is set in São Paolo, Brazil, where low-income residents of a hilly favela benefitted from new housing in the area on undeveloped land that is less prone to slides. In San Juan, Puerto Rico, residents of low-lying neighborhoods abutting a water channel formed a durable set of community groups to create a fairer solution to flooding: Although the channel needed to be re-widened, the local coalition insisted on limiting displacement, supporting local livelihoods and improving environmental conditions and public space.

“There is a backlash to older practices,” Vale says, referring to the large-scale urban planning and infrastructure projects of the mid-20th century, which often ignored community input. “People saw what happened during the urban renewal era and said, ‘You’re not going to do that to us again.’”

Indeed, one through-line in “The Equitably Resilient City” is that cities, like all places, can be contested political terrain. Often, solid solutions emerge when local groups organize, advocate for new solutions, and eventually gain enough traction to enact them.

“Every one of our examples and cases has probably 15 or 20 years of activity behind it, as well as engagements with a much deeper history,” Vale says. “They’re all rooted in a very often troubled [political] context. And yet these are places that have made progress possible.”

Think locally, adapt anywhere

Another motif of “The Equitably Resilient City” is that local progress matters greatly, for a few reasons — including the value of having communities develop projects that meet their own needs, based on their input. Vale and Lamb are interested in projects even if they are very small-scale, and devote one chapter of the book to the Paris OASIS program, which has developed a series of cleverly designed, heavily tree-dotted school playgrounds across Paris. These projects provide environmental education opportunities and help mitigate flooding and urban heat while adding CO2-harnessing greenery to the cityscape.

An individual park, by itself, can only do so much, but the concept behind it can be adopted by anyone.

“This book is mostly centered on local projects rather than national schemes,” Vale says. “The hope is they serve as an inspiration for people to adapt to their own situations.”

After all, the urban geography and governance of places such as Paris or São Paulo will differ widely. But efforts to make improvements to public open space or to well-located inexpensive housing stock applies in cities across the world.

Similarly, the authors devote a chapter to work in the Cully neighborhood in Portland, Oregon, where community leaders have instituted a raft of urban environmental improvements while creating and preserving more affordable housing. The idea in the Cully area, as in all these cases, is to make places more resistant to climate change while enhancing them as good places to live for those already there.

“Climate adaptation is going to mobilize enormous public and private resources to reshape cities across the globe,” Lamb notes. “These cases suggest pathways where those resources can make cities both more resilient in the face of climate change and more equitable. In fact, these projects show how making cities more equitable can be part of making them more resilient.”

Other scholars have praised the book. Eric Klinenberg, director of New York University’s Institute for Public Knowledge has called it “at once scholarly, constructive, and uplifting, a reminder that better, more just cities remain within our reach.”

Vale also teaches some of the book’s concepts in his classes, finding that MIT students, wherever they are from, enjoy the idea of thinking creatively about climate resilience.

“At MIT, students want to find ways of applying technical skills to urgent global challenges,” Vale says. “I do think there are many opportunities, especially at a time of climate crisis. We try to highlight some of the solutions that are out there. Give us an opportunity, and we’ll show you what a place can be.”

Businesses and developers often face a steep learning curve when installing clean energy technologies, such as solar installations and EV chargers. To get a fair deal, they need to navigate a complex bidding process that involves requesting proposals, evaluating bids, and ultimately contracting with a provider.

Now the startup Station A, founded by a pair of MIT alumni and their colleagues, is streamlining the process of deploying clean energy. The company has developed a marketplace for clean energy that helps real estate owners and businesses analyze properties to calculate returns on clean energy projects, create detailed project listings, collect and compare bids, and select a provider.

The platform helps real estate owners and businesses adopt clean energy technologies like solar panels, batteries, and EV chargers at the lowest possible prices, in places with the highest potential to reduce energy costs and emissions.

“We do a lot to make adopting clean energy simple,” explains Manos Saratsis SMArchS ’15, who co-founded Station A with Kevin Berkemeyer MBA ’14. “Imagine if you were trying to buy a plane ticket and your travel agent only used one carrier. It would be more expensive, and you couldn’t even get to some places. Our customers want to have multiple options and easily learn about the track record of whoever they’re working with.”

Station A has already partnered with some of the largest real estate companies in the country, some with thousands of properties, to reduce the carbon footprint of their buildings. The company is also working with grocery chains, warehouses, and other businesses to accelerate the clean energy transition.

“Our platform uses a lot of AI and machine learning to turn addresses into building footprints and to understand their electricity costs, available incentives, and where they can expect the highest ROI,” says Saratsis, who serves as Station A’s head of product. “This would normally require tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of consulting time, and we can do it for next to no money very quickly.”

Building the foundation

As a graduate student in MIT’s Department of Architecture, Saratsis studied environmental design modeling, using data from sources like satellite imagery to understand how communities consume energy and to propose the most impactful potential clean energy solutions. He says classes with professors Christoph Reinhart and Kent Larson were particularly eye-opening.

“My ability to build a thermal energy model and simulate electricity usage in a building started at MIT,” Saratsis says.

Berkemeyer served as president of the MIT Energy Club while at the MIT Sloan School of Management. He was also a research assistant at the MIT Energy Initiative as part of the Future of Solar report and a teacher’s assistant for course 15.366 (Climate and Energy Ventures). He says classes in entrepreneurship with professor of the practice Bill Aulet and in sustainability with Senior Lecturer Jason Jay were formative. Prior to his studies at MIT, Berkemeyer had extensive experience developing solar and storage projects and selling clean energy products to commercial customers. The eventual co-founders didn’t cross paths at MIT, but they ended up working together at the utility NRG Energy after graduation.

“As co-founders, we saw an opportunity to transform how businesses approach clean energy,” said Berkemeyer, who is now Station A’s CEO. “Station A was born out of a shared belief that data and transparency could unlock the full potential of clean energy technologies for everyone.”

At NRG, the founders built software to help identify decarbonization opportunities for customers without having to send analysts to the sites for in-person audits.

“If they worked with a big grocery chain or a big retailer, we would use proprietary analytics to evaluate that portfolio and come up with recommendations for things like solar projects, energy efficiency, and demand response that would yield positive returns within a year,” Saratsis explains.

The tools were a huge success within the company. In 2018, the pair, along with co-founders Jeremy Lucas and Sam Steyer, decided to spin out the technology into Station A.

The founders started by working with energy companies but soon shifted their focus to real estate owners with huge portfolios and large businesses with long-term leasing contracts. Many customers have hundreds or even thousands of addresses to evaluate. Using just the addresses, Station A can provide detailed financial return estimates for clean energy investments.

In 2020, the company widened its focus from selling access to its analytics to creating a marketplace for clean energy transactions, helping businesses run the competitive bidding process for clean energy projects. After a project is installed, Station A can also evaluate whether it’s achieving its expected performance and track financial returns.

“When I talk to people outside the industry, they’re like, ‘Wait, this doesn’t exist already?’” Saratsis says. “It’s kind of crazy, but the industry is still very nascent, and no one’s been able to figure out a way to run the bidding process transparently and at scale.”

From the campus to the world

Today, about 2,500 clean energy developers are active on Station A’s platform. A number of large real estate investment trusts also use its services, in addition to businesses like HP, Nestle, and Goldman Sachs. If Station A were a developer, Saratsis says it would now rank in the top 10 in terms of annual solar deployments.

The founders credit their time at MIT with helping them scale.

“A lot of these relationships originated within the MIT network, whether through folks we met at Sloan or through engagement with MIT,” Saratsis says. “So much of this business is about reputation, and we’ve established a really good reputation.”

Since its founding, Station A has also been sponsoring classes at the Sustainability Lab at MIT, where Saratsis conducted research as a student. As they work to grow Station A’s offerings, the founders say they use the skills they gained as students every day.

“Everything we do around building analysis is inspired in some ways by the stuff that I did when I was at MIT,” Saratsis says.

“Station A is just getting started,” Berkemeyer says. “Clean energy adoption isn’t just about technology — it’s about making the process seamless and accessible. That’s what drives us every day, and we’re excited to lead this transformation.”

Government must stop restricting website access with laws requiring age verification.

Some advocates of these censorship schemes argue we can nerd our way out of the many harms they cause to speech, equity, privacy, and infosec. Their silver bullet? “Age estimation” technology that scans our faces, applies an algorithm, and guesses how old we are – before letting us access online content and opportunities to communicate with others. But when confronted with age estimation face scans, many people will refrain from accessing restricted websites, even when they have a legal right to use them. Why?

Because quite simply, age estimation face scans are creepy AF – and harmful. First, age estimation is inaccurate and discriminatory. Second, its underlying technology can be used to try to estimate our other demographics, like ethnicity and gender, as well as our names. Third, law enforcement wants to use its underlying technology to guess our emotions and honesty, which in the hands of jumpy officers is likely to endanger innocent people. Fourth, age estimation face scans create privacy and infosec threats for the people scanned. In short, government should be restraining this hazardous technology, not normalizing it through age verification mandates.

Error and discrimination

Age estimation is often inaccurate. It’s in the name: age estimation. That means these face scans will regularly mistake adults for adolescents, and wrongfully deny them access to restricted websites. By the way, it will also sometimes mistake adolescents for adults.

Age estimation also is discriminatory. Studies show face scans are more likely to err in estimating the age of people of color and women. Which means that as a tool of age verification, these face scans will have an unfair disparate impact.

Estimating our identity and demographics

Age estimation is a tech sibling of face identification and the estimation of other demographics. To users, all face scans look the same and we shouldn’t allow them to become a normal part of the internet. When we submit to a face scan to estimate our age, a less scrupulous company could flip a switch and use the same face scan, plus a slightly different algorithm, to guess our name or other demographics.

Some companies are in both the age estimation business and the face identification business.

Other developers claim they can use age estimation’s underlying technology – application of an algorithm to a face scan – to estimate our gender (like these venders) and our ethnicity (like these venders). But these scans are likely to misidentify the many people whose faces do not conform to gender and ethnic averages (such as transgender people). Worse, powerful institutions can harm people with this technology. China uses face scans to identify ethnic Uyghurs. Transphobic legislators may try to use them to enforce bathroom bans. For this reason, advocates have sought to prohibit gender estimation face scans.

Estimating our emotions and honesty

Developers claim they can use face estimation’s underlying technology to estimate our emotions (like these venders). But this will always have a high error rate, because people express emotions differently, based on culture, temperament, and neurodivergence. Worse, researchers are trying to use face scans to estimate deception, and even criminality. Mind-reading technologies have a long and dubious history, from phrenology to polygraphs.

Unfortunately, powerful institutions may believe the hype. In 2008, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security disclosed its efforts to use “image analysis” of “facial features” (among other biometrics) to identify “malintent” of people being screened. Other policing agencies are using algorithms to analyze emotions and deception.

When police technology erroneously identifies a civilian as a threat, many officers overreact. For example, ALPR errors recurringly prompt police officers to draw guns on innocent drivers. Some government agencies now advise drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel during a traffic stop, to reduce the risk that the driver’s movements will frighten the officer. Soon such agencies may be advising drivers not to roll their eyes, because the officer’s smart glasses could misinterpret that facial expression as anger or deception.

Privacy and infosec

The government should not be forcing tech companies to collect even more personal data from users. Companies already collect too much data and have proved they cannot be trusted to protect it.

Age verification face scans create new threats to our privacy and information security. These systems collect a scan of our face and guess our age. A poorly designed system might store this personal data, and even correlate it to the online content that we look at. In the hands of an adversary, and cross-referenced to other readily available information, this information can expose intimate details about us. Our faces are unique, immutable, and constantly on display – creating risk of biometric tracking across innumerable virtual and IRL contexts. Last year, hackers breached an age verification company (among many other companies).

Of course, there are better and worse ways to design a technology. Some privacy and infosec risks might be reduced, for example, by conducting face scans on-device instead of in-cloud, or by deleting everything immediately after a visitor passes the age test. But lower-risk does not mean zero-risk. Clever hackers might find ways to breach even well-designed systems, companies might suddenly change their systems to make them less privacy-protective (perhaps at the urging of government), and employees and contractors might abuse their special access. Numerous states are mandating age verification with varying rules for how to do so; numerous websites are subject to these mandates; and numerous vendors are selling face scanning services. Inevitably, many of these websites and services will fail to maintain the most privacy-preserving systems, because of carelessness or greed.

Also, face scanning algorithms are often trained on data that was collected using questionable privacy methods—whether it be from users with murky-consent or non-users. The government data sets used to test biometric algorithms sometimes come from prisoners and immigrants.

Most significant here, when most people arrive at most age verification checkpoints, they will have no idea whether the face scan system has minimized the privacy and infosec risks. So many visitors will turn away, and forego the content and conversations available on restricted website.

Next steps

Algorithmic face scans are dangerous, whether used to estimate our age, our other demographics, our name, our emotions, or our honesty. Thus, EFF supports a ban on government use of this technology, and strict regulation (including consent and minimization) for corporate use.

At a minimum, government must stop coercing websites into using face scans, as a means of complying with censorious age verification mandates. Age estimation does not eliminate the privacy and security issues that plague all age verification systems. And these face scans cause many people to refrain from accessing websites they have a legal right to access. Because face scans are creepy AF.

In a major win for creator communities, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has once again handed video streaming site Vimeo a solid win in its long-running legal battle with Capitol Records and a host of other record labels.

The labels claimed that Vimeo was liable for copyright infringement on its site, and specifically that it can’t rely on the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s safe harbor because Vimeo employees “interacted” with user-uploaded videos that included infringing recordings of musical performances owned by the labels. Those interactions included commenting on, liking, promoting, demoting , or posting them elsewhere on the site. The record labels contended that these videos contained popular songs, and it would’ve been obvious to Vimeo employees that this music was unlicensed.

But as EFF explained in an amicus brief filed in support of Vimeo, even rightsholders themselves mistakenly demand takedowns. Labels often request takedowns of music they don’t own or control, and even request takedowns of their own content. They also regularly target fair uses. When rightsholders themselves cannot accurately identify infringement, courts cannot presume that a service provider can do so, much less a blanket presumption as to hundreds of videos.

In an earlier ruling, the court  held that the labels had to show that it would be apparent to a person without specialized knowledge of copyright law that the particular use of the music was unlawful, or prove that the Vimeo workers had expertise in copyright law. The labels argued that Vimeo’s own efforts to educate its employees and user about copyright, among other circumstantial evidence, were enough to meet that burden. The Second Circuit disagreed, finding that:

Vimeo’s exercise of prudence in instructing employees not to use copyrighted music and advising users that use of copyrighted music “generally (but not always) constitutes copyright infringement” did not educate its employees about how to distinguish between infringing uses and fair use.

The Second Circuit also rejected another equally dangerous argument: that Vimeo lost safe harbor protection by receiving a “financial benefit” from infringing activity, such as user-uploaded videos, that the platform had a “right and ability to control.” The labels contended that any website that exercises editorial judgment—for example, by removing, curating, or organizing content—would necessarily have the “right and ability to control” that content. If they were correct, ordinary content moderation would put a platform at risk of crushing copyright liability.

As the Second Circuit put it, the labels’ argument:

would substantially undermine what has generally been understood to be one of Congress’s major objectives in passing the DMCA: encouraging entrepreneurs to establish websites that can offer the public rapid, efficient, and inexpensive means of communication by shielding service providers from liability for infringements placed on the sites by users.

Fortunately, the Second Circuit’s decisions in this case help preserve the safe harbors and the expression and innovation that they make possible. But it should not have taken well over a decade of litigation—and likely several millions of dollars in legal fees—to get there.

Related Cases: Capitol v. Vimeo

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.*

Jillian York: Welcome, let’s start here. What does free speech or free expression mean to you personally?

Lina Attalah: Being able to think without too many calculations and without fear.

York: What are the qualities that make you passionate about the work that you do, and also about telling stories and utilizing your free expression in that way? 

Well, it ties in with your first question. Free speech is basically being able to express oneself without fear and without too many calculations. These are things that are not granted, especially in the context I work in. I know that it does not exist in any absolute way anywhere, and increasingly so now, but even more so in our context, and historically it hasn't existed in our context. So this has also drawn me to try to unearth what is not being said, what is not being known, what is not being shared. I guess the passion came from that lack more than anything else. Perhaps, if I lived in a democracy, maybe I wouldn't have wanted to be a journalist. 

York: I’d like to ask you about Syria, since you just traveled there. I know that you're familiar with the context there in terms of censorship and the Internet in particular. What do you see in terms of people's hopes for more expression in Syria in the future?

I think even though we share an environment where freedom of expression has been historically stifled, there is an exception to Syria when it comes to the kind of controls there have been on people's ability to express, let alone to organize and mobilize. I think there's also a state of exception when it comes to the price that had to be paid in Syrian prisons for acts of free expression and free speech. This is extremely exceptional to the fabric of Syrian society. So going there and seeing that this condition was gone, after so much struggle, after so much loss, is a situation that is extremely palpable. From the few days I spent there, what was clear to me is that everybody is pretty much uncertain about the future, but there is an undoubted relief that this condition is gone for now, this fear. It literally felt like it's a lower sky, sort of repressing people's chests somehow, and it's just gone. This burden was just gone. It's not all flowery, it's not all rosy. Everybody is uncertain. But the very fact that this fear is gone is very palpable and cannot be taken away from the experience we're living through now in Syria.

York: I love that. Thank you. Okay, let’s go to Egypt a little bit. What can you tell us about the situation for free speech in the context of Egypt? We're coming up on fourteen years since the uprising in 2011 and eleven years since Sisi came to power. And I mean, I guess, contextualize that for our readers who don't know what's happened in Egypt in the past decade or so.

For a quick summary, the genealogy goes as follows. There was a very tight margin through which we managed to operate as journalists, as activists, as people trying to sort of enlarge the space through which we can express ourselves on matters of public concerns in the last years of Mubarak's rule. And this is the time that coincided with the opening up of the internet—back in the time when the internet was also more of a public space, before the overt privatization that we experience in that virtual space as well. Then the Egyptian revolution happened in 2011 and that space further exploded in expression and diversity of voices and people speaking to different issues that had previously been reserved to the hideouts of activist circles. 

Then you had a complete reversal of all of this with the takeover of a military appointed government. Subsequently, with the election of President Sisi in 2014, it became clear that it was a government that believed that the media's role—this is just one example focusing on the media—is to basically support the government in a very sort of 1960s nasserite understanding that there is a national project, that he's leading it, and we are his soldiers. We should basically endorse, support, not criticize, not weaken, basically not say anything differently from him. And you know this, of course, transcends the media. Everybody should be a soldier in a way and also the price of doing otherwise has been hefty, in the sense that a lot of people ended up under prosecution, serving prolonged jail sentences, or even spending prolonged times in pre-trial detention without even getting prosecuted.

So you have this total reversal from an unfolding moment of free speech that sort of exploded for a couple of years starting in 2011, and then everything closing up, closing up, closing up to the point where that margin that I started off talking about at the beginning is almost no longer even there. And, on a personal note, I always ask myself if the margin has really tightened or if one just becomes more scared as they grow older? But the margin has indeed tightened quite extensively. Personally, I'm aging and getting more scared. But another objective indicator is that almost all of my friends and comrades who have been with me on this path are no longer around because they are either in prison or in exile or have just opted out from the whole political apparatus. So that says that there isn't the kind of margin through which we managed to maneuver before the revolution.

 York: Earlier you touched on the privatization of online spaces. Having watched the way tech companies have behaved over the past decade, what do you think that these companies fail to understand about the Egyptian and the regional context?

It goes back to how we understand this ecosystem, politically, from the onset. I am someone who thinks of governments and markets, or governments and corporations, as the main actors in a market, as dialectically interchangeable. Let's say they are here to control, they are here to make gains, and we are here to contest them even though we need them. We need the state, we need the companies. But there is no reason on earth to believe that either of them want our best. I'm putting governments and companies in the same bucket, because I think it's important not to fall for the liberals’ way of thinking that the state has certain politics, but the companies are freer or are just after gains. I do think of them as formidable political edifices that are self-serving. For us, the political game is always how to preserve the space that we've created for ourselves, using some of the leverage from these edifices without being pushed over and over. 

For me, this is a very broad political thing, and I think about them as a duality, because, operating as a media organization in a country like Egypt, I have to deal with the dual repression of those two edifices. To give you a very concrete example, in 2017 the Egyptian government blocked my website, Mada Masr, alongside a few other media websites, shortly before going on and blocking hundreds of websites. All independent media websites, without exception, have been blocked in Egypt alongside sites through which you can download VPN services in order to be able to also access these blocked websites. And that's done by the government, right? So one of the things we started doing when this happened in 2017 is we started saying, “Okay, we should invest in Meta. Or back then it was still Facebook, so we should invest in Facebook more. Because the government monitors you.” And this goes back to the relation, the interchangeability of states and companies. The government would block Mada Masr, but would never block Facebook, because it's bad for business. They care about keeping Facebook up and running. 

It's not Syria back in the time of Assad. It's not Tunisia back in the time of Ben Ali. They still want some degree of openness, so they would keep social media open. So we let go of our poetic triumphalism when we said, we will try to invest in more personalized, communitarian dissemination mechanisms when building our audiences, and we'll just go on Facebook. Because what option do we have? But then what happens is that is another track of censorship in a different way that still blocks my content from being able to reach its audiences through all the algorithmic developments that happened and basically the fact that—and this is not specific to Egypt—they just want to think of themselves as the publishers. They started off by treating us as the publishers and themselves as the platforms, but at this point, they want to be everything. And what would we expect from a big company, a profitable company, besides them wanting to be everything? 

York: I don't disagree at this point. I think that there was a point in time where I would have disagreed. When you work closely with companies, it’s easy to fall into the trap of believing that change is possible because you know good people who work there, people who really are trying their best. But those people are rarely capable of shifting the direction of the company, and are often the ones to leave first.

Let’s shift to talking about our friend, Egyptian political prisoner Alaa Abd El-Fattah. You mentioned the impact that the past 11 years, really the past 14 years, have had on people in Egypt. And, of course, there are many political prisoners, but one of the prisoners that that EFF readers will be familiar with is Alaa. You recently accepted the English PEN Award on his behalf. Can you tell us more about what he has meant to you?

One way to start talking about Alaa is that I really hope that 2025 is the year when he will get released. It's just ridiculous to keep making that one single demand over and over without seeing any change there. So Alaa has been imprisoned on account of his free speech, his attempt to speak freely. And he attempted to speak, you know, extremely freely in the sense that a lot of his expression is his witty sort of engagement with surrounding political events that came through his personal accounts on social media, in additional to the writing that he's been doing for different media platforms, including ours and yours and so on. And in that sense, he's so unmediated, he’s just free. A truly free spot. He has become the icon of the Egyptian revolution, the symbol of revolutionary spirit who you know is fighting for people's right to free speech and, more broadly, their dignity. I guess I'm trying to make a comment, a very basic comment, on abolition and, basically, the lack of utility of prisons, and specifically political prisons. Because the idea is to mute that voice. But what has happened throughout all these years of Alaa’s incarceration is that his voice has only gotten amplified by this very lack, by this very absence, right? I always lament about the fact that I do not know if I would have otherwise become very close to Alaa. Perhaps if he was free and up and running, we wouldn't have gotten this close. I have no idea. Maybe he would have just gone working on his tech projects and me on my journalism projects. Maybe we would have tried to intersect, and we had tried to intersect, but maybe we would have gone on without interacting much. But then his imprisonment created this tethering where I learned so much through his absence. 

Somehow I've become much more who I am in terms of the journalism, in terms of the thinking, in terms of the politics, through his absence, through that lack. So there is something that gets created with this aggressive muting of a voice that should be taken note of. That being said, I don't mean to romanticize absence, because he needs to be free. You know it's, it's becoming ridiculous at this point. His incarceration is becoming ridiculous at this point. 

York: I guess I also have to ask, what would your message be to the UK Government at this point?

Again, it's a test case for what so-called democratic governments can still do to their citizens. There needs to be something more forceful when it comes to demanding Alaa’s release, especially in view of the condition of his mother, who has been on a hunger strike for over 105 days as of the day of this interview. So I can't accept that this cannot be a forceful demand, or this has to go through other considerations pertaining to more abstract bilateral relations and whatnot. You know, just free the man. He's your citizen. You know, this is what's left of what it means to be a democratic government.

York: Who is your free speech hero? 

It’s Alaa. He always warns us of over-symbolizing him or the others. Because he always says, when we over symbolize heroes, they become abstract. And we stop being able to concretize the fights and the resistance. We stop being able to see that this is a universal battle where there are so many others fighting it, albeit a lot more invisible, but at the same time. Alaa, in his person and in what he represents, reminds me of so much courage. A lot of times I am ashamed of my fear. I'm ashamed of not wanting to pay the price, and I still don't want to pay the price. I don't want to be in prison. But at the same time, I look up at someone like Alaa, fearlessly saying what he wants to say, and I’m just always in awe of him. 

As age verification bills pass across the world under the guise of “keeping children safe online,” governments are increasingly giving themselves the authority to decide what topics are deemed “safe” for young people to access, and forcing online services to remove and block anything that may be deemed “unsafe.” This growing legislative trend has sparked significant concerns and numerous First Amendment challenges, including a case currently pending before the Supreme Court–Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton. The Court is now considering how government-mandated age verification impacts adults’ free speech rights online.

These challenges keep arising because this isn’t just about safety—it’s censorship. Age verification laws target a slew of broadly-defined topics. Some block access to websites that contain some "sexual material harmful to minors," but define the term so loosely that “sexual material” could encompass anything from sex education to R-rated movies; others simply list a variety of vaguely-defined harms. In either instance, lawmakers and regulators could use the laws to target LGBTQ+ content online.

This risk is especially clear given what we already know about platform content policies. These policies, which claim to "protect children" or keep sites “family-friendly,” often label LGBTQ+ content as “adult” or “harmful,” while similar content that doesn't involve the LGBTQ+ community is left untouched. Sometimes, this impact—the censorship of LGBTQ+ content—is implicit, and only becomes clear when the policies (and/or laws) are actually implemented. Other times, this intended impact is explicitly spelled out in the text of the policies and bills.

In either case, it is critical to recognize that age verification bills could block far more than just pornography.

Take Oklahoma’s bill, SB 1959, for example. This state age verification law aims to prevent young people from accessing content that is “harmful to minors” and went into effect last November 1st. It incorporates definitions from another Oklahoma statute, Statute 21-1040, which defines material “harmful to minors” as any description or exhibition, in whatever form, of nudity and “sexual conduct.” That same statute then defines “sexual conduct” as including acts of “homosexuality.” Explicitly, then, SB 1959 requires a site to verify someone’s age before showing them content about homosexuality—a vague enough term that it could potentially apply to content from organizations like GLAAD and Planned Parenthood.

This vague definition will undoubtedly cause platforms to over-censor content relating to LGBTQ+ life, health, or rights out of fear of liability. Separately, bills such as SB 1959 might also cause users to self-police their own speech for the same reasons, fearing de-platforming. The law leaves platforms unsure and unable to precisely exclude the minimum amount of content that fits the bill's definition, leading them to over censorship of content that may just also include this very blog post. 

Beyond Individual States: Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA)

Laws like the proposed federal Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) make government officials the arbiters of what young people can see online and will lead platforms to implement invasive age verification measures to avoid the threat of liability. If KOSA passes, it will lead to people who make online content about sex education, and LGBTQ+ identity and health, being persecuted and shut down as well. All it will take is one member of the Federal Trade Commission seeking to score political points, or a state attorney general seeking to ensure re-election, to start going after the online speech they don’t like. These speech burdens will also affect regular users as platforms mass-delete content in the name of avoiding lawsuits and investigations under KOSA. 

Senator Marsha Blackburn, co-sponsor of KOSA, has expressed a priority in “protecting minor children from the transgender [sic] in this culture and that influence.” KOSA, to Senator Blackburn, would address this problem by limiting content in the places “where children are being indoctrinated.” Yet these efforts all fail to protect children from the actual harms of the online world, and instead deny vulnerable young people a crucial avenue of communication and access to information. 

LGBTQ+ Platform Censorship by Design

While the censorship of LGBTQ+ content through age verification laws can be represented as an “unintended consequence” in certain instances, barring access to LGBTQ+ content is part of the platforms' design. One of the more pervasive examples is Meta suppressing LGBTQ+ content across its platforms under the guise of protecting younger users from "sexually suggestive content.” According to a recent report, Meta has been hiding posts that reference LGBTQ+ hashtags like #lesbian, #bisexual, #gay, #trans, and #queer for users that turned the sensitive content filter on, as well as showing users a blank page when they attempt to search for LGBTQ+ terms. This leaves teenage users with no choice in what content they see, since the sensitive content filter is turned on for them by default. 

This policy change came on the back of a protracted effort by Meta to allegedly protect teens online. In January last year, the corporation announced a new set of “sensitive content” restrictions across its platforms (Instagram, Facebook, and Threads), including hiding content which the platform no longer considered age-appropriate. This was followed later by the introduction of Instagram For Teens to further limit the content users under the age of 18 could see. This feature sets minors’ accounts to the most restrictive levels by default, and teens under 16 can only reverse those settings through a parent or guardian. 

Meta has apparently now reversed the restrictions on LGBTQ+ content after calling the issue a “mistake.” This is not good enough. In allowing pro-LGBTQ+ content to be integrated into the sensitive content filter, Meta has aligned itself with those that are actively facilitating a violent and harmful removal of rights for LGBTQ+ people—all under the guise of keeping children and teens safe. Not only is this a deeply flawed strategy, it harms everyone who wishes to express themselves on the internet. These policies are written and enforced discriminatorily and at the expense of transgender, gender-fluid, and nonbinary speakers. They also often convince or require platforms to implement tools that, using the laws' vague and subjective definitions, end up blocking access to LGBTQ+ and reproductive health content. 

The censorship of this content prevents individuals from being able to engage with such material online to explore their identities, advocate for broader societal acceptance and against hate, build communities, and discover new interests. With corporations like Meta intervening to decide how people create, speak, and connect, a crucial form of engagement for all kinds of users has been removed and the voices of people with less power are regularly shut down. 

And at a time when LGBTQ+ individuals are already under vast pressure from violent homophobic threats offline, these online restrictions have an amplified impact. 

LGBTQ+ youth are at a higher risk of experiencing bullying and rejection, often turning to online spaces as outlets for self-expression. For those without family support or who face the threat of physical or emotional abuse at home because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, the internet becomes an essential resource. A report from the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) highlights that LGBTQ+ youth engage with the internet at higher rates than their peers, often showing greater levels of civic engagement online compared to offline. Access to digital communities and resources is critical for LGBTQ+ youth, and restricting access to them poses unique dangers.

Call to Action: Digital Rights Are LGBTQ+ Rights

These laws have the potential to harm us all—including the children they are designed to protect. 

As more U.S. states and countries pass age verification laws, it is crucial to recognize the broader implications these measures have on privacy, free speech, and access to information. This conglomeration of laws poses significant challenges for users trying to maintain anonymity online and access critical content—whether it’s LGBTQ+ resources, reproductive health information, or otherwise. These policies threaten the very freedoms they purport to protect, stifling conversations about identity, health, and social justice, and creating an environment of fear and repression. 

The fight against these laws is not just about defending online spaces; it’s about safeguarding the fundamental rights of all individuals to express themselves and access life-saving information.

We need to stand up against these age verification laws—not only to protect users’ free expression rights, but also to safeguard the free flow of information that is vital to a democratic society. Reach out to your state and federal legislators, raise awareness about the consequences of these policies, and support organizations like the LGBT Tech, ACLU, the Woodhull Freedom Foundation, and others that are fighting for digital rights of young people alongside EFF.

The fight for the safety and rights of LGBTQ+ youth is not just a fight for visibility—it’s a fight for their very survival. Now more than ever, it’s essential for allies, advocates, and marginalized communities to push back against these dangerous laws and ensure that the internet remains a space where all voices can be heard, free from discrimination and censorship.

A new experimental vaccine developed by researchers at MIT and Caltech could offer protection against emerging variants of SARS-CoV-2, as well as related coronaviruses, known as sarbecoviruses, that could spill over from animals to humans.

In addition to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, sarbecoviruses — a subgenus of coronaviruses — include the virus that led to the outbreak of the original SARS in the early 2000s. Sarbecoviruses that currently circulate in bats and other mammals may also hold the potential to spread to humans in the future.

By attaching up to eight different versions of sarbecovirus receptor-binding proteins (RBDs) to nanoparticles, the researchers created a vaccine that generates antibodies that recognize regions of RBDs that tend to remain unchanged across all strains of the viruses. That makes it much more difficult for viruses to evolve to escape vaccine-induced antibodies.

“This work is an example of how bringing together computation and immunological experiments can be fruitful,” says Arup K. Chakraborty, the John M. Deutch Institute Professor at MIT and a member of MIT’s Institute for Medical Engineering and Science and the Ragon Institute of MIT, MGH and Harvard University.

Chakraborty and Pamela Bjorkman, a professor of biology and biological engineering at Caltech, are the senior authors of the study, which appears today in Cell. The paper’s lead authors are Eric Wang PhD ’24, Caltech postdoc Alexander Cohen, and Caltech graduate student Luis Caldera.

Mosaic nanoparticles

The new study builds on a project begun in Bjorkman’s lab, in which she and Cohen created a “mosaic” 60-mer nanoparticle that presents eight different sarbecovirus RBD proteins. The RBD is the part of the viral spike protein that helps the virus get into host cells. It is also the region of the coronavirus spike protein that is usually targeted by antibodies against sarbecoviruses.

RBDs contain some regions that are variable and can easily mutate to escape antibodies. Most of the antibodies generated by mRNA COVID-19 vaccines target those variable regions because they are more easily accessible. That is one reason why mRNA vaccines need to be updated to keep up with the emergence of new strains.

If researchers could create a vaccine that stimulates production of antibodies that target RBD regions that can’t easily change and are shared across viral strains, it could offer broader protection against a variety of sarbecoviruses.

Such a vaccine would have to stimulate B cells that have receptors (which then become antibodies) that target those shared, or “conserved,” regions. When B cells circulating in the body encounter a vaccine or other antigen, their B cell receptors, each of which have two “arms,” are more effectively activated if two copies of the antigen are available for binding to each arm. The conserved regions tend to be less accessible to B cell receptors, so if a nanoparticle vaccine presents just one type of RBD, B cells with receptors that bind to the more accessible variable regions, are most likely to be activated.

To overcome this, the Caltech researchers designed a nanoparticle vaccine that includes 60 copies of RBDs from eight different related sarbecoviruses, which have different variable regions but similar conserved regions. Because eight different RBDs are displayed on each nanoparticle, it’s unlikely that two identical RBDs will end up next to each other. Therefore, when a B cell receptor encounters the nanoparticle immunogen, the B cell is more likely to become activated if its receptor can recognize the conserved regions of the RBD.

“The concept behind the vaccine is that by co-displaying all these different RBDs on the nanoparticle, you are selecting for B cells that recognize the conserved regions that are shared between them,” Cohen says. “As a result, you’re selecting for B cells that are more cross-reactive. Therefore, the antibody response would be more cross-reactive and you could potentially get broader protection.”

In studies conducted in animals, the researchers showed that this vaccine, known as mosaic-8, produced strong antibody responses against diverse strains of SARS-CoV-2 and other sarbecoviruses and protected from challenges by both SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV (original SARS).

Broadly neutralizing antibodies

After these studies were published in 2021 and 2022, the Caltech researchers teamed up with Chakraborty’s lab at MIT to pursue computational strategies that could allow them to identify RBD combinations that would generate even better antibody responses against a wider variety of sarbecoviruses.

Led by Wang, the MIT researchers pursued two different strategies — first, a large-scale computational screen of many possible mutations to the RBD of SARS-CoV-2, and second, an analysis of naturally occurring RBD proteins from zoonotic sarbecoviruses.

For the first approach, the researchers began with the original strain of SARS-CoV-2 and generated sequences of about 800,000 RBD candidates by making substitutions in locations that are known to affect antibody binding to variable portions of the RBD. Then, they screened those candidates for their stability and solubility, to make sure they could withstand attachment to the nanoparticle and injection as a vaccine.

From the remaining candidates, the researchers chose 10 based on how different their variable regions were. They then used these to create mosaic nanoparticles coated with either two or five different RBD proteins (mosaic-2COM and mosaic-5COM).

In their second approach, instead of mutating the RBD sequences, the researchers chose seven naturally occurring RBD proteins, using computational techniques to select RBDs that were different from each other in regions that are variable, but retained their conserved regions. They used these to create another vaccine, mosaic-7COM.

Once the researchers produced the RBD-nanoparticles, they evaluated each one in mice. After each mouse received three doses of one of the vaccines, the researchers analyzed how well the resulting antibodies bound to and neutralized seven variants of SARS-CoV-2 and four other sarbecoviruses. 

They also compared the mosaic nanoparticle vaccines to a nanoparticle with only one type of RBD displayed, and to the original mosaic-8 particle from their 2021, 2022, and 2024 studies. They found that mosaic-2COM and mosaic-5COM outperformed both of those vaccines, and mosaic-7COM showed the best responses of all. Mosaic-7COM elicited antibodies with binding to most of the viruses tested, and these antibodies were also able to prevent the viruses from entering cells.

The researchers saw similar results when they tested the new vaccines in mice that were previously vaccinated with a bivalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

“We wanted to simulate the fact that people have already been infected and/or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2,” Wang says. “In pre-vaccinated mice, mosaic-7COM is consistently giving the highest binding titers for both SARS-CoV-2 variants and other sarbecoviruses.”

Bjorkman’s lab has received funding from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations to do a clinical trial of the mosaic-8 RBD-nanoparticle. They also hope to move mosaic-7COM, which performed better in the current study, into clinical trials. The researchers plan to work on redesigning the vaccines so that they could be delivered as mRNA, which would make them easier to manufacture.

The research was funded by a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, the National Institutes of Health, Wellcome Leap, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, and the Caltech Merkin Institute for Translational Research.

As the capabilities of generative AI models have grown, you've probably seen how they can transform simple text prompts into hyperrealistic images and even extended video clips.

More recently, generative AI has shown potential in helping chemists and biologists explore static molecules, like proteins and DNA. Models like AlphaFold can predict molecular structures to accelerate drug discovery, and the MIT-assisted “RFdiffusion,” for example, can help design new proteins. One challenge, though, is that molecules are constantly moving and jiggling, which is important to model when constructing new proteins and drugs. Simulating these motions on a computer using physics — a technique known as molecular dynamics — can be very expensive, requiring billions of time steps on supercomputers.

As a step toward simulating these behaviors more efficiently, MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) and Department of Mathematics researchers have developed a generative model that learns from prior data. The team’s system, called MDGen, can take a frame of a 3D molecule and simulate what will happen next like a video, connect separate stills, and even fill in missing frames. By hitting the “play button” on molecules, the tool could potentially help chemists design new molecules and closely study how well their drug prototypes for cancer and other diseases would interact with the molecular structure it intends to impact.

Co-lead author Bowen Jing SM ’22 says that MDGen is an early proof of concept, but it suggests the beginning of an exciting new research direction. “Early on, generative AI models produced somewhat simple videos, like a person blinking or a dog wagging its tail,” says Jing, a PhD student at CSAIL. “Fast forward a few years, and now we have amazing models like Sora or Veo that can be useful in all sorts of interesting ways. We hope to instill a similar vision for the molecular world, where dynamics trajectories are the videos. For example, you can give the model the first and 10th frame, and it’ll animate what’s in between, or it can remove noise from a molecular video and guess what was hidden.”

The researchers say that MDGen represents a paradigm shift from previous comparable works with generative AI in a way that enables much broader use cases. Previous approaches were “autoregressive,” meaning they relied on the previous still frame to build the next, starting from the very first frame to create a video sequence. In contrast, MDGen generates the frames in parallel with diffusion. This means MDGen can be used to, for example, connect frames at the endpoints, or “upsample” a low frame-rate trajectory in addition to pressing play on the initial frame.

This work was presented in a paper shown at the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) this past December. Last summer, it was awarded for its potential commercial impact at the International Conference on Machine Learning’s ML4LMS Workshop.

Some small steps forward for molecular dynamics

In experiments, Jing and his colleagues found that MDGen’s simulations were similar to running the physical simulations directly, while producing trajectories 10 to 100 times faster.

The team first tested their model’s ability to take in a 3D frame of a molecule and generate the next 100 nanoseconds. Their system pieced together successive 10-nanosecond blocks for these generations to reach that duration. The team found that MDGen was able to compete with the accuracy of a baseline model, while completing the video generation process in roughly a minute — a mere fraction of the three hours that it took the baseline model to simulate the same dynamic.

When given the first and last frame of a one-nanosecond sequence, MDGen also modeled the steps in between. The researchers’ system demonstrated a degree of realism in over 100,000 different predictions: It simulated more likely molecular trajectories than its baselines on clips shorter than 100 nanoseconds. In these tests, MDGen also indicated an ability to generalize on peptides it hadn’t seen before.

MDGen’s capabilities also include simulating frames within frames, “upsampling” the steps between each nanosecond to capture faster molecular phenomena more adequately. It can even ​​“inpaint” structures of molecules, restoring information about them that was removed. These features could eventually be used by researchers to design proteins based on a specification of how different parts of the molecule should move.

Toying around with protein dynamics

Jing and co-lead author Hannes Stärk say that MDGen is an early sign of progress toward generating molecular dynamics more efficiently. Still, they lack the data to make these models immediately impactful in designing drugs or molecules that induce the movements chemists will want to see in a target structure.

The researchers aim to scale MDGen from modeling molecules to predicting how proteins will change over time. “Currently, we’re using toy systems,” says Stärk, also a PhD student at CSAIL. “To enhance MDGen’s predictive capabilities to model proteins, we’ll need to build on the current architecture and data available. We don’t have a YouTube-scale repository for those types of simulations yet, so we’re hoping to develop a separate machine-learning method that can speed up the data collection process for our model.”

For now, MDGen presents an encouraging path forward in modeling molecular changes invisible to the naked eye. Chemists could also use these simulations to delve deeper into the behavior of medicine prototypes for diseases like cancer or tuberculosis.

“Machine learning methods that learn from physical simulation represent a burgeoning new frontier in AI for science,” says Bonnie Berger, MIT Simons Professor of Mathematics, CSAIL principal investigator, and senior author on the paper. “MDGen is a versatile, multipurpose modeling framework that connects these two domains, and we’re very excited to share our early models in this direction.”

“Sampling realistic transition paths between molecular states is a major challenge,” says fellow senior author Tommi Jaakkola, who is the MIT Thomas Siebel Professor of electrical engineering and computer science and the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society, and a CSAIL principal investigator. “This early work shows how we might begin to address such challenges by shifting generative modeling to full simulation runs.”

Researchers across the field of bioinformatics have heralded this system for its ability to simulate molecular transformations. “MDGen models molecular dynamics simulations as a joint distribution of structural embeddings, capturing molecular movements between discrete time steps,” says Chalmers University of Technology associate professor Simon Olsson, who wasn’t involved in the research. “Leveraging a masked learning objective, MDGen enables innovative use cases such as transition path sampling, drawing analogies to inpainting trajectories connecting metastable phases.”

The researchers’ work on MDGen was supported, in part, by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, the Machine Learning for Pharmaceutical Discovery and Synthesis Consortium, the Abdul Latif Jameel Clinic for Machine Learning in Health, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

MIT physicists have created a new ultrathin, two-dimensional material with unusual magnetic properties that initially surprised the researchers before they went on to solve the complicated puzzle behind those properties’ emergence. As a result, the work introduces a new platform for studying how materials behave at the most fundamental level — the world of quantum physics.

Ultrathin materials made of a single layer of atoms have riveted scientists’ attention since the discovery of the first such material — graphene, composed of carbon — about 20 years ago. Among other advances since then, researchers have found that stacking individual sheets of the 2D materials, and sometimes twisting them at a slight angle to each other, can give them new properties, from superconductivity to magnetism. Enter the field of twistronics, which was pioneered at MIT by Pablo Jarillo-Herrero, the Cecil and Ida Green Professor of Physics at MIT.

In the current research, reported in the Jan. 7 issue of Nature Physics, the scientists, led by Jarillo-Herrero, worked with three layers of graphene. Each layer was twisted on top of the next at the same angle, creating a helical structure akin to the DNA helix or a hand of three cards that are fanned apart.

“Helicity is a fundamental concept in science, from basic physics to chemistry and molecular biology. With 2D materials, one can create special helical structures, with novel properties which we are just beginning to understand. This work represents a new twist in the field of twistronics, and the community is very excited to see what else we can discover using this helical materials platform!” says Jarillo-Herrero, who is also affiliated with MIT’s Materials Research Laboratory.

Do the twist

Twistronics can lead to new properties in ultrathin materials because arranging sheets of 2D materials in this way results in a unique pattern called a moiré lattice. And a moiré pattern, in turn, has an impact on the behavior of electrons.

“It changes the spectrum of energy levels available to the electrons and can provide the conditions for interesting phenomena to arise,” says Sergio C. de la Barrera, one of three co-first authors of the recent paper. De la Barrera, who conducted the work while a postdoc at MIT, is now an assistant professor at the University of Toronto.

In the current work, the helical structure created by the three graphene layers forms two moiré lattices. One is created by the first two overlapping sheets; the other is formed between the second and third sheets.

The two moiré patterns together form a third moiré, a supermoiré, or “moiré of a moiré,” says Li-Qiao Xia, a graduate student in MIT physics and another of the three co-first authors of the Nature Physics paper. “It’s like a moiré hierarchy.” While the first two moiré patterns are only nanometers, or billionths of a meter, in scale, the supermoiré appears at a scale of hundreds of nanometers superimposed over the other two. You can only see it if you zoom out to get a much wider view of the system.

A major surprise

The physicists expected to observe signatures of this moiré hierarchy. They got a huge surprise, however, when they applied and varied a magnetic field. The system responded with an experimental signature for magnetism, one that arises from the motion of electrons. In fact, this orbital magnetism persisted to -263 degrees Celsius — the highest temperature reported in carbon-based materials to date.

But that magnetism can only occur in a system that lacks a specific symmetry — one that the team’s new material should have had. “So the fact that we saw this was very puzzling. We didn’t really understand what was going on,” says Aviram Uri, an MIT Pappalardo postdoc in physics and the third co-first author of the new paper.

Other authors of the paper include MIT professor of physics Liang Fu; Aaron Sharpe of Sandia National Laboratories; Yves H. Kwan of Princeton University; Ziyan Zhu, David Goldhaber-Gordon, and Trithep Devakul of Stanford University; and Kenji Watanabe and Takashi Taniguchi of the National Institute for Materials Science in Japan.

What was happening?

It turns out that the new system did indeed break the symmetry that prohibits the orbital magnetism the team observed, but in a very unusual way. “What happens is that the atoms in this system aren’t very comfortable, so they move in a subtle orchestrated way that we call lattice relaxation,” says Xia. And the new structure formed by that relaxation does indeed break the symmetry locally, on the moiré length scale.

This opens the possibility for the orbital magnetism the team observed. However, if you zoom out to view the system on the supermoiré scale, the symmetry is restored. “The moiré hierarchy turns out to support interesting phenomena at different length scales,” says de la Barrera.

Concludes Uri: “It’s a lot of fun when you solve a riddle and it’s such an elegant solution. We’ve gained new insights into how electrons behave in these complex systems, insights that we couldn’t have had unless our experimental observations forced to think about these things.”

This work was supported by the Army Research Office, the National Science Foundation, the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the Ross M. Brown Family Foundation, an MIT Pappalardo Fellowship, the VATAT Outstanding Postdoctoral Fellowship in Quantum Science and Technology, the JSPS KAKENHI, and a Stanford Science Fellowship.

MIT.nano has announced seven new companies to join START.nano, a program aimed at speeding the transition of hard-tech innovation to market. The program supports new ventures through discounted use of MIT.nano’s facilities and access to the MIT innovation ecosystem.

The advancements pursued by the newly engages startups include wearables for health care, green alternatives to fossil fuel-based energy, novel battery technologies, enhancements in data systems, and interconnecting nanofabrication knowledge networks, among others.

“The transition of the grand idea that is imagined in the laboratory to something that a million people can use in their hands is a journey fraught with many challenges,” MIT.nano Director Vladimir Bulović said at the 2024 Nano Summit, where nine START.nano companies presented their work. The program provides resources to ease startups over the first two hurdles — finding stakeholders and building a well-developed prototype.

In addition to access to laboratory tools necessary to advance their technologies, START.nano companies receive advice from MIT.nano expert staff, are connected to MIT.nano Consortium companies, gain a broader exposure at MIT conferences and community events, and are eligible to join the MIT Startup Exchange.

“MIT.nano has allowed us to push our project to the frontiers of sensing by implementing advanced fabrication techniques using their machinery,” said Uroš Kuzmanović, CEO and founder of Biosens8. “START.nano has surrounded us with exciting peers, a strong support system, and a spotlight to present our work. By taking advantage of all that the program has to offer, BioSens8 is moving faster than we could anywhere else.”

Here are the seven new START.nano participants:

Analog Photonics is developing lidar and optical communications technology using silicon photonics.

Biosens8 is engineering novel devices to enable health ownership. Their research focuses on multiplexed wearables for hormones, neurotransmitters, organ health markers, and drug use that will give insight into the body's health state, opening the door to personalized medicine and proactive, data-driven health decisions.

Casimir, Inc. is working on power-generating nanotechnology that interacts with quantum fields to create a continuous source of power. The team compares their technology to a solar panel that works in the dark or a battery that never needs to be recharged.

Central Spiral focuses on lossless data compression. Their technology allows for the compression of any type of data, including those that are already compressed, reducing data storage and transmission costs, lowering carbon dioxide emissions, and enhancing efficiency.

FabuBlox connects stakeholders across the nanofabrication ecosystem and resolves issues of scattered, unorganized, and isolated fab knowledge. Their cloud-based platform combines a generative process design and simulation interface with GitHub-like repository building capabilities.

Metal Fuels is converting industrial waste aluminum to onsite energy and high-value aluminum/aluminum-oxide powders. Their approach combines existing mature technologies of molten metal purification and water atomization to develop a self-sustaining reactor that produces alumina of higher value than our input scrap aluminum feedstock, while also collecting the hydrogen off-gas.

PolyJoule, Inc. is an energy storage startup working on conductive polymer battery technology. The team’s goal is a grid battery of the future that is ultra-safe, sustainable, long living, and low-cost.

In addition to the seven startups that are actively using MIT.nano, nine other companies have been invited to join the latest START.nano cohort:

• Acorn Genetics
• American Boronite Corp.
• Copernic Catalysts
• Envoya Bio
• Helix Carbon
• Minerali
• Plaid Semiconductors
• Quantum Network Technologies
• Wober Tech

Launched in 2021, START.nano now comprises over 20 companies and eight graduates — ventures that have moved beyond the initial startup stages and some into commercialization. 

Last month, Henry Farrell and I convened the Third Interdisciplinary Workshop on Reimagining Democracy (IWORD 2024) at Johns Hopkins University’s Bloomberg Center in Washington DC. This is a small, invitational workshop on the future of democracy. As with the previous two workshops, the goal was to bring together a diverse set of political scientists, law professors, philosophers, AI researchers and other industry practitioners, political activists, and creative types (including science fiction writers) to discuss how democracy might be reimagined in the current century...

The orders themselves are seen as having limited direct impact, but clean energy advocates worry they’ll eventually tilt investment toward traditional fossil fuels.

State water restrictions, fueled by historic drought and climate change, have taken a toll on Southern California golf courses in recent years.

The president revoked a 1994 directive requiring agencies to protect minority or low-income areas from pollution and health hazards.

Gov. Wes Moore has set an aggressive clean energy goal. But he faces a budget crunch and a new White House hostile to climate action.

OMB released an update on a previous executive order pausing certain disbursements for infrastructure and energy projects — but even that was vague.

The new maps will show more areas at high fire hazard than before, reflecting new science incorporating the risk of wind-fueled fires.

Three members of the Climate Justice Working Group stepped down and criticized Gov. Kathy Hochul for failing to take action to ensure reduced pollution.

The contours of a mammoth industrial decarbonization strategy are taking shape ahead of its Feb. 26 unveiling.

An AP report found that South Korea imported biomass from Indonesia that was linked to deforestation of natural, intact forest.