Last week, EFF, along with the Criminal Defense Attorneys of Michigan, ACLU, and ACLU of Michigan, filed an amicus brief in People v. Carson in the Supreme Court of Michigan, challenging the constitutionality of the search warrant of Mr. Carson's smart phone.

In this case, Mr. Carson was arrested for stealing money from his neighbor's safe with a co-conspirator. A few months later, law enforcement applied for a search warrant for Mr. Carson's cell phone. The search warrant enumerated the claims that formed the basis for Mr. Carson's arrest, but the only mention of a cell phone was a law enforcement officer's general assertion that phones are communication devices often used in the commission of crimes. A warrant was issued which allowed the search of the entirety of Mr. Carson's smart phone, with no temporal or category limits on the data to be searched. Evidence found on the phone was then used to convict Mr. Carson.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals made a number of rulings in favor of Mr. Carson, including that evidence from the phone should not have been admitted because the search warrant lacked particularity and was unconstitutional. The government's appeal to the Michigan Supreme Court was accepted and we filed an amicus brief.

In our brief, we argued that the warrant was constitutionally deficient and overbroad, because there was no probable cause for searching the cell phone and that the warrant was insufficiently particular because it failed to limit the search to within a time frame or certain categories of information.

As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in Riley v. California, electronic devices such as smart phones “differ in both a quantitative and a qualitative sense” from other objects. The devices contain immense storage capacities and are filled with sensitive and revealing data, including apps for everything from banking to therapy to religious practices to personal health. As the refrain goes, whatever the need, “there's an app for that.” This special nature of digital devices requires courts to review warrants to search digital devices with heightened attention to the Fourth Amendment’s probable cause and particularity requirements.

In this case, the warrant fell far short. In order for there to be probable cause to search an item, the warrant application must establish a “nexus” between the incident being investigated and the place to be searched. But the application in this case gave no reason why evidence of the theft would be found on Mr. Carson's phone. Instead, it only stated the allegations leading to Mr. Carson's arrest and boilerplate language about cell phone use among criminals. While those facts may establish probable cause to arrest Mr. Carson, they did not establish probable cause to search Mr. Carson's phone. If it were otherwise, the government would always be able to search the cell phone of someone they had probable cause to arrest, thereby eradicating the independent determination of whether probable cause exists to search something. Without a nexus between the crime and Mr. Carson’s phone, there was no probable cause.

Moreover, the warrant allowed for the search of “any and all data” contained on the cell phone, with no limits whatsoever. This type of "all content" warrants are the exact type of general warrants against which the Fourth Amendment and its state corollaries were meant to protect. Cell phone search warrants that have been upheld have contained temporal constraints and a limit to the categories of data to be searched. Neither limitations—or any other limitations—were in the issued search warrant. The police should have used date limitations in applying for the search warrant, as they do in their warrant applications for other searches in the same investigation. Additionally, the warrant allowed the search of all the information on the phone, the vast majority of which did not—and could not—contain evidence related to the investigation.

As smart phones become more capacious and entail more functions, it is imperative that courts adhere to the narrow construction of warrants for the search of electronic devices to support the basic purpose of the Fourth Amendment to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials.

A Travers’ beaked whale (Mesoplodon traversii) washed ashore in New Zealand, and scientists conlcuded that “the prevalence of squid remains [in its stomachs] suggests that these deep-sea cephalopods form a significant part of the whale’s diet, similar to other beaked whale species.”

Blog moderation policy.

In biology textbooks, the endoplasmic reticulum is often portrayed as a distinct, compact organelle near the nucleus, and is commonly known to be responsible for protein trafficking and secretion. In reality, the ER is vast and dynamic, spread throughout the cell and able to establish contact and communication with and between other organelles. These membrane contacts regulate processes as diverse as fat metabolism, sugar metabolism, and immune responses.

Exploring how pathogens manipulate and hijack essential processes to promote their own life cycles can reveal much about fundamental cellular functions and provide insight into viable treatment options for understudied pathogens.

New research from the Lamason Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT recently published in the Journal of Cell Biology has shown that Rickettsia parkeri, a bacterial pathogen that lives freely in the cytosol, can interact in an extensive and stable way with the rough endoplasmic reticulum, forming previously unseen contacts with the organelle.

It’s the first known example of a direct interkingdom contact site between an intracellular bacterial pathogen and a eukaryotic membrane.

The Lamason Lab studies R. parkeri as a model for infection of the more virulent Rickettsia rickettsii. R. rickettsii, carried and transmitted by ticks, causes Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever. Left untreated, the infection can cause symptoms as severe as organ failure and death.

Rickettsia is difficult to study because it is an obligate pathogen, meaning it can only live and reproduce inside living cells, much like a virus. Researchers must get creative to parse out fundamental questions and molecular players in the R. parkeri life cycle, and much remains unclear about how R. parkeri spreads.

Detour to the junction

First author Yamilex Acevedo-Sánchez, a BSG-MSRP-Bio program alum and a graduate student at the time, stumbled across the ER and R. parkeri interactions while trying to observe Rickettsia reaching a cell junction.

The current model for Rickettsia infection involves R. parkeri spreading cell to cell by traveling to the specialized contact sites between cells and being engulfed by the neighboring cell in order to spread. Listeria monocytogenes, which the Lamason Lab also studies, uses actin tails to forcefully propel itself into a neighboring cell. By contrast, R. parkeri can form an actin tail, but loses it before reaching the cell junction. Somehow, R. parkeri is still able to spread to neighboring cells.

After an MIT seminar about the ER’s lesser-known functions, Acevedo-Sánchez developed a cell line to observe whether Rickettsia might be spreading to neighboring cells by hitching a ride on the ER to reach the cell junction.

Instead, she saw an unexpectedly high percentage of R. parkeri surrounded and enveloped by the ER, at a distance of about 55 nanometers. This distance is significant because membrane contacts for interorganelle communication in eukaryotic cells form connections from 10-80 nanometers wide. The researchers ruled out that what they saw was not an immune response, and the sections of the ER interacting with the R. parkeri were still connected to the wider network of the ER.

“I’m of the mind that if you want to learn new biology, just look at cells,” Acevedo-Sánchez says. “Manipulating the organelle that establishes contact with other organelles could be a great way for a pathogen to gain control during infection.” 

The stable connections were unexpected because the ER is constantly breaking and reforming connections, lasting seconds or minutes. It was surprising to see the ER stably associating around the bacteria. As a cytosolic pathogen that exists freely in the cytosol of the cells it infects, it was also unexpected to see R. parkeri surrounded by a membrane at all.

Small margins

Acevedo-Sánchez collaborated with the Center for Nanoscale Systems at Harvard University to view her initial observations at higher resolution using focused ion beam scanning electron microscopy. FIB-SEM involves taking a sample of cells and blasting them with a focused ion beam in order to shave off a section of the block of cells. With each layer, a high-resolution image is taken. The result of this process is a stack of images.

From there, Acevedo-Sánchez marked what different areas of the images were — such as the mitochondria, Rickettsia, or the ER — and a program called ORS Dragonfly, a machine learning program, sorted through the thousand or so images to identify those categories. That information was then used to create 3D models of the samples. 

Acevedo-Sánchez noted that less than 5 percent of R. parkeri formed connections with the ER — but small quantities of certain characteristics are known to be critical for R. parkeri infection. R. parkeri can exist in two states: motile, with an actin tail, and nonmotile, without it. In mutants unable to form actin tails, R. parkeri are unable to progress to adjacent cells — but in nonmutants, the percentage of R. parkeri that have tails starts at about 2 percent in early infection and never exceeds 15 percent at the height of it.

The ER only interacts with nonmotile R. parkeri, and those interactions increased 25-fold in mutants that couldn’t form tails.

Creating connections

Co-authors Acevedo-Sánchez, Patrick Woida, and Caroline Anderson also investigated possible ways the connections with the ER are mediated. VAP proteins, which mediate ER interactions with other organelles, are known to be co-opted by other pathogens during infection.

During infection by R. parkeri, VAP proteins were recruited to the bacteria; when VAP proteins were knocked out, the frequency of interactions between R. parkeri and the ER decreased, indicating R. parkeri may be taking advantage of these cellular mechanisms for its own purposes during infection.

Although Acevedo-Sánchez now works as a senior scientist at AbbVie, the Lamason Lab is continuing the work of exploring the molecular players that may be involved, how these interactions are mediated, and whether the contacts affect the host or bacteria’s life cycle.

Senior author and associate professor of biology Rebecca Lamason noted that these potential interactions are particularly interesting because bacteria and mitochondria are thought to have evolved from a common ancestor. The Lamason Lab has been exploring whether R. parkeri could form the same membrane contacts that mitochondria do, although they haven’t proven that yet. So far, R. parkeri is the only cytosolic pathogen that has been observed behaving this way.

“It’s not just bacteria accidentally bumping into the ER. These interactions are extremely stable. The ER is clearly extensively wrapping around the bacterium, and is still connected to the ER network,” Lamason says. “It seems like it has a purpose — what that purpose is remains a mystery.” 

“There is no treatment available for your son. We can’t do anything to help him.”

When Fernando Goldsztein MBA ’03 heard those words, something inside him snapped.

“I refused to accept what the doctors were saying. I transformed my fear into my greatest strength and started fighting.”

Goldsztein’s 12-year-old son Frederico was diagnosed with relapsing medulloblastoma, a life-threatening pediatric brain tumor. Goldsztein's life — and career plan — changed in an instant. He had to learn to become a different kind of leader altogether.

While Goldsztein never set out to become a founder, the MIT Sloan School of Management taught him the importance of networking, building friendships, and making career connections with peers and faculty from all walks of life. He began using those skills in a new way — boldly reaching out to the top medulloblastoma doctors and scientists at hospitals around the world to ask for help.

“I knew that I had to do something to save Frederico, but also the other estimated 15,000 children diagnosed with the disease around the world each year,” he says.

In 2021, Goldsztein launched The Medulloblastoma Initiative (MBI), a nonprofit organization dedicated to finding a cure using a remarkable new model for funding rare disease research.

In just 18 months, the organization — which is still in startup mode — has raised $11 million in private funding and brought together 14 of the world’s most prestigious labs and hospitals from across North America, Europe, and Brazil.

Two promising trials will launch in the coming months, and three additional trials are in the pipeline and currently awaiting U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval.

All of this in an industry that is notorious for bureaucratic red tape, and where the timeline from an initial lab discovery to a patient receiving a first treatment averages seven to 15 years.

While government research grants typically allocate just 4 cents on the dollar toward pediatric cancer research — pennies doled out across multiple labs pursuing uncoordinated efforts — MBI is laser-focused on pushing 100 percent of their funding toward a singular goal, without any overhead or administrative costs.

“There is no time to lose,” Goldsztein says. “We are making science move faster than it ever has before.”

The MBI blueprint for funding cures for rare diseases is replicable, and likely to disrupt the standard way health care research is funded and carried out by radically shortening the timeline.

From despair to strength

After his initial diagnosis at age 9, Frederico went through a nine-hour brain surgery and came to the United States to receive standard treatment. Goldsztein looked on helplessly as his son received radiation and then nine grueling rounds of chemotherapy.

First pioneered in the 1980s, this standard treatment protocol cures 70 percent of children. Still, it leaves most of them with lifelong side effects like cognitive problems, endocrine issues that stunt growth, and secondary tumors. Frederico was on the wrong side of that statistic. Just three years later, his tumor relapsed.

Goldsztein grimaces as he recalls the prognosis he and his wife heard from the doctors.

“It was unbelievable to me that there had been almost no discoveries in 40 years,” he says.

Ultimately, he found hope and partnership in Roger Packer, the director of the Brain Tumor Institute and the Gilbert Family Neurofibromatosis Institute of Children’s National Hospital. He is also the very doctor who created the standard treatment years before.

Packer explains that finding effective therapies for medulloblastoma was complex for 30 years because it is an umbrella term for 13 types of tumors. Frederico suffers from the most common one, Group 4.

Part of the reason the treatment has not changed is that, until recently, medicine has not advanced enough to detect differences between the different tumor types. Packer explains, “Now with molecular genetic testing and methylation, which is a way to essentially sort tumors, that has changed.”

The problem for Frederico was that very few researchers were working on Group 4, the sub-type of medulloblastoma that is the most common tumor, yet also the one that scientists know the least about.

Goldsztein challenged Packer: “If I can get you the funding, what can your lab do to advance medulloblastoma research quickly?”

An open-source consortium model

Packer advised that they work together to “try something different,” instead of just throwing money at research without any guideposts.

“We set up a consortium of leading institutions around the world doing medulloblastoma research, asked them to change their lab approach to focus on the Group 4 tumor, and assigned each lab a question to answer. We charged them with coming up with therapy — not in seven to 10 years, which is the normal transition from discovery to developing a drug and getting it to a patient, but within a two-year timeline,” he says.

Initially, seven labs signed on. Today, the Cure Group 4 Consortium is made up of 14 partners and reads like a who’s who of medulloblastoma heavy hitters: Children’s National Hospital, SickKids, Hopp Children’s Cancer Center, and Texas Children’s Hospital.

Labs can only join the consortium if they agree to follow some unusual rules. As Goldsztein explains, “To be accepted into this group and receive funding, there are no silos, and there is no duplicated work. Everyone has a piece of the puzzle, and we work together to move fast. That is the magic of our model.”

Inspired by MIT’s open-source methods, researchers must share data freely with one another to accelerate the group’s overall progress. This kind of partnership across labs and borders is unprecedented in a highly competitive sector.

Mariano Gargiulo MBA ’03 met Goldsztein on the first day of their MIT Sloan Fellows MBA program orientation and has been his dear friend ever since. An early-stage donor to MBI and a Houston-based executive in the energy sector, Gargiulo sat down with Goldsztein as he first conceptualized MBI’s operating model.

“Usually, startup business models plot out the next 10-15 years; Fernando’s timeline was only two years, and his benchmarks were in three-month increments.” It was audaciously optimistic, says Gargiulo, but so was the founder.

“When I saw it, I did not doubt that he would achieve his goals. I’m seeing Fernando hit those first targets now and it’s amazing to watch,” Gargiulo says.

Children’s National Hospital endorsed MBI in 2023 and invited Goldsztein to sit on its foundation’s board, adding credibility to the initiative and his ability to fundraise more ambitiously.

According to Packer, in the next few months, the first two MBI protocols will reach patients for the first time: an immunotherapy protocol, which “leverages the body’s immune response to target cancer cells more effectively and safely than traditional therapies,” and a medulloblastoma vaccine, which “adapts similar methodologies used in Covid-19 vaccine development. This approach aims to provide a versatile and mobile treatment that could be distributed globally.”

A matter of when

When Goldsztein is not with his own family in Brazil, fundraising, or managing MBI, he is on Zoom with a network of more than 70 other families with children with relapsed medulloblastoma. “I’m not a doctor and I don’t give out medical advice, but with these trials, we are giving each other hope,” he explains.

Hope and purpose are commodities that Goldsztein has in spades. “I don’t understand the idea of doing business and accumulating assets, but not helping others,” he says. He shared that message with an auditorium of his fellow alumni at his 2023 MIT Sloan Reunion.

Frederico, who defied all odds and lived with the threat of recurrence, recently graduated high school. He is interested in international relations and passionate about photography. “This is about finding a cure for Frederico and for all kids,” Goldsztein says.

When asked how the world would be impacted if MBI found a cure for medulloblastoma, Goldsztein shakes his head.

“We are going to find the cure. It’s not if, it’s a matter of when.”

His next goal is to scale MBI and have it serve as a resource for groups that want to replicate its playbook to solve other childhood diseases.

“I’m never going to stop,” he says.

Silicon Valley loudly criticized President Donald Trump when he quit the climate accord in his first term. This time? Crickets.

The Los Angeles wildfires — and the president’s environmental rollbacks — could spur more lawsuits to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for climate change.

FEMA “gets in the way,” Trump says, hinting at a reduced role for the agency. “I’d rather see states take care of their own problems.”

The president’s social media broadsides represent a big risk for Atlantic Shores, the only active project with a federal permit to build turbines off the state’s coast.

The president's picks indicate that the council will eschew climate priorities and focus on artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency.

DOJ said it will reevaluate the appeal in light of a new executive order rescinding CEQ's regulatory authority.

The emergency provisions in environmental laws are narrow and limited, and the president’s plans to use them could backfire, legal experts say.

USDA designated $3.1 billion for the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities under former President Joe Biden.

It comes as the Trump White House plows ahead on its efforts to roll back the Biden administration’s climate agenda.

Instead of fuming over President Donald Trump’s moves this week, climate advocates stayed mostly mum and plotted ways to make climate change MAGA-friendly.

Buildings cost a lot these days. But when concrete buildings are being constructed, there’s another material that can make them less expensive: mud.

MIT researchers have developed a method to use lightly treated mud, including soil from a building site, as the “formwork” molds into which concrete is poured. The technique deploys 3D printing and can replace the more costly method of building elaborate wood formworks for concrete construction.

“What we’ve demonstrated is that we can essentially take the ground we’re standing on, or waste soil from a construction site, and transform it into accurate, highly complex, and flexible formwork for customized concrete structures,” says Sandy Curth, a PhD student in MIT’s Department of Architecture who has helped spearhead the project.

The approach could help concrete-based construction take place more quickly and efficiently. It could also reduce costs and carbon emissions.

“It has the potential for immediate impact and doesn’t require changing the nature of the construction industry,” says Curth, who doubles as director of the Programmable Mud Initiative.

Curth has co-authored multiple papers about the method, most recently, “EarthWorks: Zero waste 3D printed earthen formwork for shape-optimized, reinforced concrete construction,” published in the journal Construction and Building Materials. Curth wrote that paper with nine co-authors, including Natalie Pearl, Emily Wissemann, Tim Cousin, Latifa Alkhayat, Vincent Jackow, Keith Lee, and Oliver Moldow, all MIT students; and Mohamed Ismail of the University of Virginia.

The paper’s final two co-authors are Lawrence Sass, professor and chair of the Computation Group in MIT’s Department of Architecture, and Caitlin Mueller, an associate professor at MIT in the Department of Architecture and the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Sass is Curth’s graduate advisor.

Building a structure once, not twice

Constructing wooden formwork for a building is costly and time-consuming. There is saying in the industry that concrete structures have to be built twice — once through the wooden formwork, then again in the concrete poured into the forms.

Using soil for the formwork could change that process. While it might seem like an unusual material compared to the solidity of wooden formwork, soil is firm enough to handle poured concrete. The EarthWorks method, as its known, introduces some additive materials, such as straw, and a wax-like coating for the soil material to prevent any water from draining out of the concrete. Using large-scale 3D printing, the researchers can take soil from a construction site and print it into a custom-designed formwork shape.

“What we’ve done is make a system where we are using what is largely straightforward, large-scale 3D printing technology, and making it highly functional for the material,” Curth says. “We found a way to make formwork that is infinitely recyclable. It’s just dirt.”

Beyond cost and ease of acquiring the materials, the method offers at least two other interrelated advantages. One is environmental: Concrete construction accounts for as much as 8 percent of global carbon emissions, and this approach supports substantial emissions reductions, both through the formwork material itself and the ease of shaping the resulting concrete to only use what is structurally required. Using a method called shape optimization, developed for reinforced concrete in previous research by Ismail and Mueller, it is possible to reduce the carbon emissions of concrete structural frames by more than 50 percent.  

“The EarthWorks technique brings these complex, optimized structures much closer to built reality by offering a low-cost, low-carbon fabrication technique for formwork that can be deployed anywhere in the world,” Mueller says.

“It’s an enabling technology to make reinforced concrete buildings much, much more materially efficient, which has a direct impact on global carbon emissions,” Curth adds.

More generally, the EarthWorks method allows architects and engineers to create customized concrete shapes more easily, due to the flexibility of the formwork material. It is easier to cast concrete in an unusual shape when molding it with soil, not wood.

“What’s cool here is we’re able to make shape-optimized building elements for the same amount of time and energy it would take to make rectilinear building elements,” Curth says.

Group project

As Curth notes, the projects developed by the Programmable Mud group are highly collaborative. He emphasizes the roles played by both Sass, a leader in using computation to help develop low-cost housing, and Mueller, whose work also deploys new computational methods to assess innovative structural ideas in architecture.

“Concrete is a wonderful material when it is used thoughtfully and efficiently, which is inherently connected to how it is shaped,” Mueller says. “However, the minimal forms that emerge from optimization are at odds with conventional construction logics. It is very exciting to advance a technique that subverts this supposed tradeoff, showing that performance-driven complexity can be achieved with low carbon emissions and low cost.”

While finishing his doctorate at MIT, Curth has also founded a firm, FORMA Systems, through which he hopes to take the EarthWorks method into the construction industry. Using this approach does mean builders would need to have a large 3D printer on-site. However, they would also save significantly on materials costs, he says.

Further in the future, Curth envisions a time when the method could be used not just for formworks, but to construct templates for, say, two-story residential building made entirely out of earth. Of course, some parts of the world, including the U.S., extensively use adobe architecture already, but the idea here would be to systematize the production of such homes and make them inexpensive in the process.

In either case, Curth says, as formwork for concrete or by itself, we now have new ways to apply soil to construction.

“People have built with earth for as long as we’ve had buildings, but given contemporary demands for urban concrete buildings, this approach basically decouples cost from complexity,” Curth says. “I guarantee you we can start to make higher-performance buildings for less money.”

The project  was supported by the Sidara Urban Research Seed Fund administered by MIT’s Leventhal Center for Advanced Urbanism.

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.