State attorneys general said the event is anti-fossil fuel and that the United States shouldn’t attend.

A 2023 marine heat wave laid waste to elkhorn and staghorn coral, which have thrived for centuries off Florida’s coast.

Once again the U.S. is using its economic might to pressure other countries to back down from an effort to limit greenhouse gas pollution.

The decision text offers only vague guidance to ministers ahead of a crunch climate target vote on Nov. 4.

Heat exposure has been linked to many extra risks for pregnant people, and while protections exist, experts say they need better enforcement and more safeguards.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 24 October 2025; doi:10.1038/s41558-025-02452-5

It is important to understand how much long-term sea-level rise is already committed due to historical and near-term emissions. Here the authors use a modelling framework to show how decisions on global emissions reductions in the coming decades alter multi-century sea-level rise projections.

How can you use science to build a better gingerbread house?

That was something Miranda Schwacke spent a lot of time thinking about. The MIT graduate student in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (DMSE) is part of Kitchen Matters, a group of grad students who use food and kitchen tools to explain scientific concepts through short videos and outreach events. Past topics included why chocolate “seizes,” or becomes difficult to work with when melting (spoiler: water gets in), and how to make isomalt, the sugar glass that stunt performers jump through in action movies.

Two years ago, when the group was making a video on how to build a structurally sound gingerbread house, Schwacke scoured cookbooks for a variable that would produce the most dramatic difference in the cookies.

“I was reading about what determines the texture of cookies, and then tried several recipes in my kitchen until I got two gingerbread recipes that I was happy with,” Schwacke says.

She focused on butter, which contains water that turns to steam at high baking temperatures, creating air pockets in cookies. Schwacke predicted that decreasing the amount of butter would yield denser gingerbread, strong enough to hold together as a house.

“This hypothesis is an example of how changing the structure can influence the properties and performance of material,” Schwacke said in the eight-minute video.

That same curiosity about materials properties and performance drives her research on the high energy cost of computing, especially for artificial intelligence. Schwacke develops new materials and devices for neuromorphic computing, which mimics the brain by processing and storing information in the same place. She studies electrochemical ionic synapses — tiny devices that can be “tuned” to adjust conductivity, much like neurons strengthening or weakening connections in the brain.

“If you look at AI in particular — to train these really large models — that consumes a lot of energy. And if you compare that to the amount of energy that we consume as humans when we’re learning things, the brain consumes a lot less energy,” Schwacke says. “That’s what led to this idea to find more brain-inspired, energy-efficient ways of doing AI.”

Her advisor, Bilge Yildiz, underscores the point: One reason the brain is so efficient is that data doesn’t need to be moved back and forth.

“In the brain, the connections between our neurons, called synapses, are where we process information. Signal transmission is there. It is processed, programmed, and also stored in the same place,” says Yildiz, the Breene M. Kerr (1951) Professor in the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering and DMSE. Schwacke’s devices aim to replicate that efficiency.

Scientific roots

The daughter of a marine biologist mom and an electrical engineer dad, Schwacke was immersed in science from a young age. Science was “always a part of how I understood the world.”

“I was obsessed with dinosaurs. I wanted to be a paleontologist when I grew up,” she says. But her interests broadened. At her middle school in Charleston, South Carolina, she joined a FIRST Lego League robotics competition, building robots to complete tasks like pushing or pulling objects. “My parents, my dad especially, got very involved in the school team and helping us design and build our little robot for the competition.”

Her mother, meanwhile, studied how dolphin populations are affected by pollution for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That had a lasting impact.

“That was an example of how science can be used to understand the world, and also to figure out how we can improve the world,” Schwacke says. “And that’s what I’ve always wanted to do with science.”

Her interest in materials science came later, in her high school magnet program. There, she was introduced to the interdisciplinary subject, a blend of physics, chemistry, and engineering that studies the structure and properties of materials and uses that knowledge to design new ones.

“I always liked that it goes from this very basic science, where we’re studying how atoms are ordering, all the way up to these solid materials that we interact with in our everyday lives — and how that gives them their properties that we can see and play with,” Schwacke says.

As a senior, she participated in a research program with a thesis project on dye-sensitized solar cells, a low-cost, lightweight solar technology that uses dye molecules to absorb light and generate electricity.

“What drove me was really understanding, this is how we go from light to energy that we can use — and also seeing how this could help us with having more renewable energy sources,” Schwacke says.

After high school, she headed across the country to Caltech. “I wanted to try a totally new place,” she says, where she studied materials science, including nanostructured materials thousands of times thinner than a human hair. She focused on materials properties and microstructure — the tiny internal structure that governs how materials behave — which led her to electrochemical systems like batteries and fuel cells.

AI energy challenge

At MIT, she continued exploring energy technologies. She met Yildiz during a Zoom meeting in her first year of graduate school, in fall 2020, when the campus was still operating under strict Covid-19 protocols. Yildiz’s lab studies how charged atoms, or ions, move through materials in technologies like fuel cells, batteries, and electrolyzers.

The lab’s research into brain-inspired computing fired Schwacke’s imagination, but she was equally drawn to Yildiz’s way of talking about science.

“It wasn’t based on jargon and emphasized a very basic understanding of what was going on — that ions are going here, and electrons are going here — to understand fundamentally what’s happening in the system,” Schwacke says.

That mindset shaped her approach to research. Her early projects focused on the properties these devices need to work well — fast operation, low energy use, and compatibility with semiconductor technology — and on using magnesium ions instead of hydrogen, which can escape into the environment and make devices unstable.

Her current project, the focus of her PhD thesis, centers on understanding how the insertion of magnesium ions into tungsten oxide, a metal oxide whose electrical properties can be precisely tuned, changes its electrical resistance. In these devices, tungsten oxide serves as a channel layer, where resistance controls signal strength, much like synapses regulate signals in the brain.

“I am trying to understand exactly how these devices change the channel conductance,” Schwacke says.

Schwacke’s research was recognized with a MathWorks Fellowship from the School of Engineering in 2023 and 2024. The fellowship supports graduate students who leverage tools like MATLAB or Simulink in their work; Schwacke applied MATLAB for critical data analysis and visualization.

Yildiz describes Schwacke’s research as a novel step toward solving one of AI’s biggest challenges.

“This is electrochemistry for brain-inspired computing,” Yildiz says. “It’s a new context for electrochemistry, but also with an energy implication, because the energy consumption of computing is unsustainably increasing. We have to find new ways of doing computing with much lower energy, and this is one way that can help us move in that direction.”

Like any pioneering work, it comes with challenges, especially in bridging the concepts between electrochemistry and semiconductor physics.

“Our group comes from a solid-state chemistry background, and when we started this work looking into magnesium, no one had used magnesium in these kinds of devices before,” Schwacke says. “So we were looking at the magnesium battery literature for inspiration and different materials and strategies we could use. When I started this, I wasn’t just learning the language and norms for one field — I was trying to learn it for two fields, and also translate between the two.”

She also grapples with a challenge familiar to all scientists: how to make sense of messy data.

“The main challenge is being able to take my data and know that I’m interpreting it in a way that’s correct, and that I understand what it actually means,” Schwacke says.

She overcomes hurdles by collaborating closely with colleagues across fields, including neuroscience and electrical engineering, and sometimes by just making small changes to her experiments and watching what happens next.

Community matters

Schwacke is not just active in the lab. In Kitchen Matters, she and her fellow DMSE grad students set up booths at local events like the Cambridge Science Fair and Steam It Up, an after-school program with hands-on activities for kids.

“We did ‘pHun with Food’ with ‘fun’ spelled with a pH, so we had cabbage juice as a pH indicator,” Schwacke says. “We let the kids test the pH of lemon juice and vinegar and dish soap, and they had a lot of fun mixing the different liquids and seeing all the different colors.”

She has also served as the social chair and treasurer for DMSE’s graduate student group, the Graduate Materials Council. As an undergraduate at Caltech, she led workshops in science and technology for Robogals, a student-run group that encourages young women to pursue careers in science, and assisted students in applying for the school’s Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowships.

For Schwacke, these experiences sharpened her ability to explain science to different audiences, a skill she sees as vital whether she’s presenting at a kids’ fair or at a research conference.

“I always think, where is my audience starting from, and what do I need to explain before I can get into what I’m doing so that it’ll all make sense to them?” she says.

Schwacke sees the ability to communicate as central to building community, which she considers an important part of doing research. “It helps with spreading ideas. It always helps to get a new perspective on what you’re working on,” she says. “I also think it keeps us sane during our PhD.”

Yildiz sees Schwacke’s community involvement as an important part of her resume. “She’s doing all these activities to motivate the broader community to do research, to be interested in science, to pursue science and technology, but that ability will help her also progress in her own research and academic endeavors.”

After her PhD, Schwacke wants to take that ability to communicate with her to academia, where she’d like to inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers. Yildiz has no doubt she’ll thrive.

“I think she’s a perfect fit,” Yildiz says. “She’s brilliant, but brilliance by itself is not enough. She’s persistent, resilient. You really need those on top of that.”

Physicists at MIT have developed a new way to probe inside an atom’s nucleus, using the atom’s own electrons as “messengers” within a molecule.

In a study appearing today in the journal Science, the physicists precisely measured the energy of electrons whizzing around a radium atom that had been paired with a fluoride atom to make a molecule of radium monofluoride. They used the environments within molecules as a sort of microscopic particle collider, which contained the radium atom’s electrons and encouraged them to briefly penetrate the atom’s nucleus.

Typically, experiments to probe the inside of atomic nuclei involve massive, kilometers-long facilities that accelerate beams of electrons to speeds fast enough to collide with and break apart nuclei. The team’s new molecule-based method offers a table-top alternative to directly probe the inside of an atom’s nucleus.

Within molecules of radium monofluoride, the team measured the energies of a radium atom’s electrons as they pinged around inside the molecule. They discerned a slight energy shift and determined that electrons must have briefly penetrated the radium atom’s nucleus and interacted with its contents. As the electrons winged back out, they retained this energy shift, providing a nuclear “message” that could be analyzed to sense the internal structure of the atom’s nucleus.

The team’s method offers a new way to measure the nuclear “magnetic distribution.” In a nucleus, each proton and neutron acts like a small magnet, and they align differently depending on how the nucleus’ protons and neutrons are spread out. The team plans to apply their method to precisely map this property of the radium nucleus for the first time. What they find could help to answer one of the biggest mysteries in cosmology: Why do we see much more matter than antimatter in the universe?

“Our results lay the groundwork for subsequent studies aiming to measure violations of fundamental symmetries at the nuclear level,” says study co-author Ronald Fernando Garcia Ruiz, who is the Thomas A. Franck Associate Professor of Physics at MIT. “This could provide answers to some of the most pressing questions in modern physics.”

The study’s MIT co-authors include Shane Wilkins, Silviu-Marian Udrescu, and Alex Brinson, along with collaborators from multiple institutions including the Collinear Resonance Ionization Spectroscopy Experiment (CRIS) at CERN in Switzerland, where the experiments were performed.

Molecular trap

According to scientists’ best understanding, there must have been almost equal amounts of matter and antimatter when the universe first came into existence. However, the overwhelming majority of what scientists can measure and observe in the universe is made from matter, whose building blocks are the protons and neutrons within atomic nuclei.

This observation is in stark contrast to what our best theory of nature, the Standard Model, predicts, and it is thought that additional sources of fundamental symmetry violation are required to explain the almost complete absence of antimatter in our universe. Such violations could be seen within the nuclei of certain atoms such as radium.

Unlike most atomic nuclei, which are spherical in shape, the radium atom’s nucleus has a more asymmetrical configuration, similar to a pear. Scientists predict that this pear shape could significantly enhance their ability to sense the violation of fundamental symmetries, to the extent that they may be potentially observable.

“The radium nucleus is predicted to be an amplifier of this symmetry breaking, because its nucleus is asymmetric in charge and mass, which is quite unusual,” says Garcia Ruiz, whose group has focused on developing methods to probe radium nuclei for signs of fundamental symmetry violation.

Peering inside the nucleus of a radium atom to investigate fundamental symmetries is an incredibly tricky exercise.

“Radium is naturally radioactive, with a short lifetime and we can currently only produce radium monofluoride molecules in tiny quantities,” says study lead author Shane Wilkins, a former postdoc at MIT. “We therefore need incredibly sensitive techniques to be able measure them.”

The team realized that by placing a radium atom in a molecule, they could contain and amplify the behavior of its electrons.

“When you put this radioactive atom inside of a molecule, the internal electric field that its electrons experience is orders of magnitude larger compared to the fields we can produce and apply in a lab,” explains Silviu-Marian Udrescu PhD ’24, a study co-author. “In a way, the molecule acts like a giant particle collider and gives us a better chance to probe the radium’s nucleus.”

Energy shift

In their new study, the team first paired radium atoms with fluoride atoms to create molecules of radium monofluoride. They found that in this molecule, the radium atom’s electrons were effectively squeezed, increasing the chance for electrons to interact with and briefly penetrate the radium nucleus.

The team then trapped and cooled the molecules and sent them through a system of vacuum chambers, into which they also sent lasers, which interacted with the molecules. In this way the researchers were able to precisely measure the energies of electrons inside each molecule.

When they tallied the energies, they found that the electrons appeared to have a slightly different energy compared to what physicists expect if they did not penetrate the nucleus. Although this energy shift was small — just a millionth of the energy of the laser photon used to excite the molecules — it gave unambiguous evidence of the molecules’ electrons interacting with the protons and neutrons inside the radium nucleus.

“There are many experiments measuring interactions between nuclei and electrons outside the nucleus, and we know what those interactions look like,” Wilkins explains. “When we went to measure these electron energies very precisely, it didn’t quite add up to what we expected assuming they interacted only outside of the nucleus. That told us the difference must be due to electron interactions inside the nucleus.”

“We now have proof that we can sample inside the nucleus,” Garcia Ruiz says. “It’s like being able to measure a battery’s electric field. People can measure its field outside, but to measure inside the battery is far more challenging. And that’s what we can do now.”

Going forward, the team plans to apply the new technique to map the distribution of forces inside the nucleus. Their experiments have so far involved radium nuclei that sit in random orientations inside each molecule at high temperature. Garcia Ruiz and his collaborators would like to be able to cool these molecules and control the orientations of their pear-shaped nuclei such that they can precisely map their contents and hunt for the violation of fundamental symmetries.

“Radium-containing molecules are predicted to be exceptionally sensitive systems in which to search for violations of the fundamental symmetries of nature,” Garcia Ruiz says. “We now have a way to carry out that search.”

This research was supported, in part, by the U.S. Department of Energy. 

Back and better than ever, the Cambridge Science Carnival, an annual free family-friendly science extravaganza, was held on Sunday, Sept. 21, at the Kendall/MIT Open Space.

Founded by the MIT Museum in 2007, and organized with the support of MIT and the City of Cambridge, the 2025 event drew approximately 20,000 attendees and featured more than 140 activities, demonstrations, and installations tied to the topics of science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM).

Among the carnival’s wide variety of activities was the popular robot petting zoo, an annual showcase involving more than a dozen companies and local robotics clubs, including FIRST Tech Challenge and FIRST Robotics Competition. Participants were invited to engage with a range of different robots, from building with LEGOs and erector sets to piloting underwater robots to learning about the science of automation.

“Every exhibit and every moment of discovery today reinforces why Cambridge remains a global leader in STEAM,” Cambridge Mayor Denise Simmons said in her remarks at the event. “The creativity, ingenuity, and joy on display here today are a powerful reminder that science isn’t just for labs and lecture halls — it’s for everyone.”

Other activities included an appearance from the popular kid-friendly podcast “Tumble Science,” with co-host Marshall Escamilla testing fans’ knowledge of different STEAM topics drawn from “Tumble Science.” Clark University’s smoke-ring air cannons were a particular hit with the under-7-year-old set, while “Cycle To Science” showed off a gravity-defying bicycle wheel that, while spinning, was suspended on one side by a simple piece of string. Attendees also enjoyed live music, food trucks, and activities exploring everything from pipette art to the chemistry of glass. 

At the robot petting zoo, FIRST Robotics volunteer mentor Dominique Regli reflected on the event as someone who was herself first inspired by similar festivals more than a decade earlier. 

“Seeing kids of all ages interact with the robots made me think back to when I was a seventh grader, and how getting to see some of these robots for the first time was truly life-changing for me,” said Regli, who has been involved with FIRST Robotics since 2018 and is now an MIT computer science PhD student and affiliate of the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL). “These types of events are so important to expose students to what's possible.”

Throughout its history, a key aspect of the carnival has been MIT’s close collaboration with the City of Cambridge, which ran several activities. Cambridge Public School teachers led and the Public Works Department hosted a “Trash or Treasure” activity, which helped teach kids about recycling and composting. The carnival is a major contribution to the Institute’s objective of connecting the MIT ecosystem with Cambridge residents and local communities. 

“Cambridge is one of the world’s leading science cities, with more Nobel laureates per capita than any other city on the planet,” says Michael John Gorman, director of the MIT Museum. “The Cambridge Science Carnival is a beloved day in the Cambridge calendar which brings science out of the labs and onto the streets.” 

With a focus on engaging families and kids ranging from kindergarten to the eighth grade, one important outcome this year was to give undergraduate and graduate students the opportunity to showcase their work and hone their skills in clearly communicating science concepts to the public. There were over 50 activities led by MIT students, as well as participants from other local schools such as Boston College and Boston, Clark, Harvard, Northeastern, and Tufts universities.

Typically organized as part of the annual Cambridge Science Festival, this year the Cambridge Science Carnival returned as a standalone event while the larger festival undergoes a strategic transition for its relaunch in 2026. The MIT Museum offered free admission during the carnival and is always free to Cambridge residents, as well as active military, EBT cardholders, members of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, and MIT ID holders.

“For MIT researchers, discovery often happens in a lab or a classroom, but the truth is, the spark of discovery can happen anywhere,” said Alfred Ironside, MIT vice president for communications, in remarks at the event. “That’s really what today is about: feeding curiosity, encouraging questions, and showing that science is not locked away behind closed doors. It’s for everyone.”

Both Google and Apple are cramming new AI features into their phones and other devices, and neither company has offered clear ways to control which apps those AI systems can access. Recent issues around WhatsApp on both Android and iPhone demonstrate how these interactions can go sideways, risking revealing chat conversations beyond what you intend. Users deserve better controls and clearer documentation around what these AI features can access.

After diving into how Google Gemini and Apple Intelligence (and in some cases Siri) currently work, we didn’t always find clear answers to questions about how data is stored, who has access, and what it can be used for.

At a high level, when you compose a message with these tools, the companies can usually see the contents of those messages and receive at least a temporary copy of the text on their servers.

When receiving messages, things get trickier. When you use an AI like Gemini or a feature like Apple Intelligence to summarize or read notifications, we believe companies should be doing that content processing on-device. But poor documentation and weak guardrails create issues that have lead us deep into documentation rabbit holes and still fail to clarify the privacy practices as clearly as we’d like.

We’ll dig into the specifics below as well as potential solutions we’d like to see Apple, Google, and other device-makers implement, but first things first, here’s what you can do right now to control access:

Control AI Access to Secure Chat on Android and iOS

Here are some steps you can take to control access if you want nothing to do with the device-level AI features' integration and don’t want to risk accidentally sharing the text of a message outside of the app you’re using.

How to Check and Limit What Gemini Can Access

If you’re using Gemini on your Android phone, it’s a good time to review your settings to ensure things are set up how you want. Here’s how to check each of the relevant settings:

• Disable Gemini App Activity: Gemini App Activity is a history Google stores of all your interactions with Gemini. It’s enabled by default. To disable it, open Gemini (depending on your phone model, you may or may not even have the Google Gemini app installed. If you don’t have it installed, you don’t really need to worry about any of this). Tap your profile picture > Gemini Apps Activity, then change the toggle to either “Turn off,” or “Turn off and delete activity” if you want to delete previous conversations. If the option reads “Turn on,” then Gemini Apps Activity is already turned off. 
• Control app and notification access: You can control which apps Gemini can access by tapping your profile picture > Apps, then scrolling down and disabling the toggle next to any apps you do not want Gemini to access. If you do not want Gemini to potentially access the content that appears in notifications, open the Settings app and revoke notification access from the Google app.
• Delete the Gemini app: Depending on your phone model, you might be able to delete the Gemini app and revert to using Google Assistant instead. You can do so by long-pressing the Gemini app and selecting the option to delete. 

How to Check and Limit what Apple Intelligence and Siri Can Access

Similarly, there are a few things you can do to clamp down on what Apple Intelligence and Siri can do: 

• Disable the “Use with Siri Requests” option: If you want to continue using Siri, but don’t want to accidentally use it to send messages through secure messaging apps, like WhatsApp, then you can disable that feature by opening Settings > Apps > [app name], and disabling “Use with Siri Requests,” which turns off the ability to compose messages with Siri and send them through that app.
• Disable Apple Intelligence entirely: Apple Intelligence is an all-or-nothing setting on iPhones, so if you want to avoid any potential issues your only option is to turn it off completely. To do so, open Settings > Apple Intelligence & Siri, and disable “Apple Intelligence” (you will only see this option if your device supports Apple Intelligence, if it doesn’t, the menu will only be for “Siri”). You can also disable certain features, like “writing tools,” using Screen Time restrictions. Siri can’t be universally turned off in the same way, though you can turn off the options under “Talk to Siri” to make it so you can’t speak to it. 

For more information about cutting off AI access at different levels in other apps, this Consumer Reports article covers other platforms and services.

Why It Matters  Sending Messages Has Different Privacy Concerns than Receiving Them

Let’s start with a look at how Google and Apple integrate their AI systems into message composition, using WhatsApp as an example.

Google Gemini and WhatsApp

On Android, you can optionally link WhatsApp and Gemini together so you can then initiate various actions for sending messages from the Gemini app, like “Call Mom on WhatsApp” or “Text Jason on WhatsApp that we need to cancel our secret meeting, but make it a haiku.” This feature raised red flags for users concerned about privacy.

By default, everything you do in Gemini is stored in the “Gemini Apps Activity,” where messages are stored forever, subject to human review, and are used to train Google’s products. So, unless you change it, when you use Gemini to compose and send a message in WhatsApp then the message you composed is visible to Google.

If you turn the activity off, interactions are still stored for 72 hours. Google’s documentation claims that even though messages are stored, those conversations aren't reviewed or used to improve Google machine learning technologies, though that appears to be an internal policy choice with no technical limits preventing Google from accessing those messages.

By default, everything you do in Gemini is stored in the “Gemini Apps Activity,” where messages are stored forever, subject to human review, and are used to train Google’s products.

The simplicity of invoking Gemini to compose and send a message may lead to a false sense of privacy. Notably, other secure messaging apps, like Signal, do not offer this Gemini integration.

For comparison’s sake, let’s see how this works with Apple devices.

Siri and WhatsApp

The closest comparison to this process on iOS is to use Siri, which it is claimed, will eventually be a part of Apple Intelligence. Currently, Apple’s AI message composition tools are not available for third-party apps like Signal and WhatsApp.

According to its privacy policy, when you dictate a message through Siri to send to WhatsApp (or anywhere else), the message, including metadata like the recipient phone number and other identifiers, is sent to Apple’s servers. This was confirmed by researchers to include the text of messages sent to WhatsApp. When you use Siri to compose a WhatsApp message, the message gets routed to both Apple and WhatsApp. Apple claims it does not store this transcript unless you’ve opted into “Improve Siri and Dictation.” WhatsApp defers to Apple’s support for data handling concerns. This is similar to how Google handles speech-to-text prompts.

In response to that research, Apple said this was expected behavior with an app that uses SiriKit—the extension that allows third-party apps to integrate with Siri—like WhatsApp does.

Both Siri and Apple Intelligence can sometimes run locally on-device, and other times need to rely on Apple-managed cloud servers to complete requests. Apple Intelligence can use the company’s Private Cloud Compute, but Siri doesn’t have a similar feature.

The ambiguity around where data goes makes it overly difficult to decide on whether you are comfortable with the sort of privacy trade-off that using features like Siri or Apple Intelligence might entail.

How Receiving Messages Works

Sending encrypted messages is just one half of the privacy puzzle. What happens on the receiving end matters too. 

Google Gemini

By default, the Gemini app doesn’t have access to the text inside secure messaging apps or to notifications. But you can grant access to notifications using the Utilities app. Utilities can read, summarize, and reply to notifications, including in WhatsApp and Signal (it can also read notifications in headphones).

This could open up any notifications routed through the Utilities app to the Gemini app to access internally or from third-parties.

We could not find anything in Google’s Utilities documentation that clarifies what information is collected, stored, or sent to Google from these notifications. When we reached out to Google, the company responded that it “builds technical data protections that safeguard user data, uses data responsibly, and provides users with tools to control their Gemini experience.” Which means Google has no technical limitation around accessing the text from notifications if you’ve enabled the feature in the Utilities app. This could open up any notifications routed through the Utilities app to the Gemini app to be accessed internally or from third-parties. Google needs to publicly make its data handling explicit in its documentation.

If you use encrypted communications apps and have granted access to notifications, then it is worth considering disabling that feature or controlling what’s visible in your notifications on an app-level.

Apple Intelligence

Apple is more clear about how it handles this sort of notification access.

Siri can read and reply to messages with the “Announce Notifications” feature. With this enabled, Siri can read notifications out loud on select headphones or via CarPlay. In a press release, Apple states, “When a user talks or types to Siri, their request is processed on device whenever possible. For example, when a user asks Siri to read unread messages… the processing is done on the user’s device. The contents of the messages aren’t transmitted to Apple servers, because that isn’t necessary to fulfill the request.”

Apple Intelligence can summarize notifications from any app that you’ve enabled notifications on. Apple is clear that these summaries are generated on your device, “when Apple Intelligence provides you with preview summaries of your emails, messages, and notifications, these summaries are generated by on-device models.” This means there should be no risk that the text of notifications from apps like WhatsApp or Signal get sent to Apple’s servers just to summarize them.

New AI Features Must Come With Strong User Controls

As more device-makers cram AI features into their devices, the more necessary it is for us to have clear and simple controls over what personal data these features can access on our devices. If users do not have control over when a text leaves a device for any sort of AI processing—whether that’s to a “private” cloud or not—it erodes our privacy and potentially threatens the foundations of end-to-end encrypted communications.

Per-app AI Permissions

Google, Apple, and other device makers should add a device-level AI permission, just like they do for other potentially invasive privacy features, like location sharing, to their phones. You should be able to tell the operating system’s AI to not access an app, even if that comes at the “cost” of missing out on some features. The setting should be straightforward and easy to understand in ways the Gemini an Apple Intelligence controls currently are not.

Offer On-Device-Only Modes

Device-makers should offer an “on-device only” mode for those interested in using some features without having to try to figure out what happens on device or on the cloud. Samsung offers this, and both Google and Apple would benefit from a similar option.

Improve Documentation

Both Google and Apple should improve their documentation about how these features interact with various apps. Apple doesn’t seem to clarify notification processing privacy anywhere outside of a press release, and we couldn’t find anything about Google’s Utilities privacy at all. We appreciate tools like Gemini Apps Activity as a way to audit what the company collects, but vague information like “Prompted a Communications query” is only useful if there’s an explanation somewhere about what that means.

The current user options are not enough. It’s clear that the AI features device-makers add come with significant confusion about their privacy implications, and it’s time to push back and demand better controls. The privacy problems introduced alongside new AI features should be taken seriously, and remedies should be offered to both users and developers who want real, transparent safeguards over how a company accesses their private data and communications.

Creating and sharing knowledge are defining traits of humankind, yet copyright law has grown so restrictive that it can require acts of civil disobedience to ensure that students and scholars have the books they need and to preserve swaths of culture from being lost forever.

Reputable research generally follows a familiar pattern: Scientific articles are written by scholars based on their research—often with public funding. Those articles are then peer-reviewed by other scholars in their fields and revisions are made according to those comments. Afterwards, most large publishers expect to be given the copyright on the article as a condition of packaging it up and selling it back to the institutions that employ the academics who did the research and to the public at large. Because research is valuable and because copyright is a monopoly on disseminating the articles in question, these publishers can charge exorbitant fees that place a strain even on wealthy universities and are simply out of reach for the general public or universities with limited budgets, such as those in the global south. The result is a global human rights problem.

This model is broken, yet science goes on thanks to widespread civil disobedience of the copyright regime that locks up the knowledge created by researchers. Some turn to social media to ask that a colleague with access share articles they need (despite copyright’s prohibitions on sharing). Certainly, at least some such sharing is protected fair use, but scholars should not have to seek a legal opinion or risk legal threats from publishers to share the collective knowledge they generate.

Even more useful, though on shakier legal ground, are so-called “shadow archives” and aggregators such as SciHub, Library Genesis (LibGen), Z-Library, or Anna’s Archive. These are the culmination of efforts from volunteers dedicated to defending science.

SciHub alone handles tens of millions of requests for scientific articles each year and remains operational despite adverse court rulings thanks both to being based in Russia, and to the community of academics who see it as an ethical response to the high access barriers that publishers impose and provide it their log-on credentials so it can retrieve requested articles. SciHub and LibGen are continuations of samizdat, the Soviet-era practice of disobeying state censorship in the interests of learning and free speech.

Unless publishing gatekeepers adopt drastically more equitable practices and become partners in disseminating knowledge, they will continue to lose ground to open access alternatives, legal or otherwise.

EFF is proud to celebrate Open Access Week.

In early September, EFF submitted an amicus brief to Ecuador’s Constitutional Court supporting a constitutional challenge filed by Ecuadorian NGOs, including INREDH and LaLibre. The case challenges the constitutionality of the Ley Orgánica de Inteligencia (LOI) and its implementing regulation, the General Regulation of the LOI.

EFF’s amicus brief argues that the LOI enables disproportionate surveillance and secrecy that undermine constitutional and Inter-American human rights standards. EFF urges the Constitutional Court to declare the LOI and its regulation unconstitutional in their entirety.

More specifically, our submission notes that:

“The LOI presents a structural flaw that undermines compliance with the principles of legality, legitimate purpose, suitability, necessity, and proportionality; it inverts the rule and the exception, with serious harm to rights enshrined constitutionally and under the Convention; and it prioritizes indeterminate state interests, in contravention of the ultimate aim of intelligence activities and state action, namely the protection of individuals, their rights, and freedoms.”

Core Legal Problems Identified

Vague and Overbroad Definitions

The LOI contains key terms like “national security,” “integral security of the State,” “threats,” and “risks” that are left either undefined or so broadly framed that they could mean almost anything. This vagueness grants intelligence agencies wide, unchecked discretion, and fails short of the standard of legal certainty required under the American Convention on Human Rights (CADH).

Secrecy and Lack of Transparency

The LOI makes secrecy the rule rather than the exception, reversing the Inter-American principle of maximum disclosure, which holds that access to information should be the norm and secrecy a narrowly justified exception. The law establishes a classification system—“restricted,” “secret,” and “top secret”—for intelligence and counterintelligence information, but without clear, verifiable parameters to guide its application on a case-by-case basis. As a result, all information produced by the governing body (ente rector) of the National Intelligence System is classified as secret by default. Moreover, intelligence budgets and spending are insulated from meaningful public oversight, concentrated under a single authority, and ultimately destroyed, leaving no mechanism for accountability.

Weak or Nonexistent Oversight Mechanisms

The LOI leaves intelligence agencies to regulate themselves, with almost no external scrutiny. Civilian oversight is minimal, limited to occasional, closed-door briefings before a parliamentary commission that lacks real access to information or decision making power. This structure offers no guarantee of independent or judicial supervision and instead fosters an environment where intelligence operations can proceed without transparency or accountability.

Intrusive Powers Without Judicial Authorization

The LOI allows access to communications, databases, and personal data without prior judicial order, which enables the mass surveillance of electronic communications, metadata, and databases across public and private entities—including telecommunication operators. This directly contradicts rulings of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which establish that any restriction of the right to privacy must be necessary, proportionate, and subject to independent oversight. It also runs counter to CAJAR vs. Colombia, which affirms that intrusive surveillance requires prior judicial authorization.

International Human Rights Standards Applied

Our amicus curiae draws on the CAJAR vs. Colombia judgment, which set strict standards for intelligence activities. Crucially, Ecuador’s LOI fall short of all these tests: it doesn’t constitute an adequate legal basis for limiting rights; contravenes necessary and proportionate principles; fails to ensure robust controls and safeguards, like prior judicial authorization and solid civilian oversight; and completely disregards related data protection guarantees and data subject’s rights.

At its core, the LOI structurally prioritizes vague notions of “state interest” over the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. It legalizes secrecy, unchecked surveillance, and the impunity of intelligence agencies. For these reasons, we urge Ecuador’s Constitutional Court to declare the LOI and its regulations unconstitutional, as they violate both the Ecuadorian Constitution and the American Convention on Human Rights (CADH).

Read our full amicus brief here to learn more about how Ecuador’s intelligence framework undermines privacy, transparency, and the human rights protected under Inter-American human rights law.

This is bad:

F5, a Seattle-based maker of networking software, disclosed the breach on Wednesday. F5 said a “sophisticated” threat group working for an undisclosed nation-state government had surreptitiously and persistently dwelled in its network over a “long-term.” Security researchers who have responded to similar intrusions in the past took the language to mean the hackers were inside the F5 network for years.

During that time, F5 said, the hackers took control of the network segment the company uses to create and distribute updates for BIG IP, a line of server appliances that F5 ...

The administration says the shutdown prevented its work on the case. But greens say EPA is “racing” to repeal the endangerment finding.

GE Vernova reported increasing sales of grid equipment to technology companies racing to plug in new data centers.

The move comes as the Trump administration has set its sights on stopping the industry’s growth.

Private companies — led by Tesla — constructed thousands of new EV ports during the third quarter.

A new study says the region has shifted into a new climate state — and the transition began decades ago.

Researchers found that 90 percent of organic aerosols over Long Island were affected by climate events like extreme heat and wildfire smoke.

The EU should learn from losing its solar panel industry to China and protect its share of green tech as it surges around the world.