Separating AI reality from hyped-up fiction isn’t always easy. That’s why we’ve created the AI Hype Index—a simple, at-a-glance summary of everything you need to know about the state of the industry.
The Trump administration recently declared war on so-called “woke AI,” issuing an executive order aimed at preventing companies whose models exhibit a liberal bias from landing federal contracts. Simultaneously, the Pentagon inked a deal with Elon Musk’s xAI just days after its chatbot, Grok, spouted harmful antisemitic stereotypes on X, while the White House has partnered with an anti-DEI nonprofit to create AI slop videos of the Founding Fathers. What comes next is anyone’s guess.
This story is part of MIT Technology Review’s “America Undone” series, examining how the foundations of US success in science and innovation are currently under threat. You can read the rest here.
The mechanism that allows the US federal government to regulate climate change is on the chopping block.
On Tuesday, US Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lee Zeldin announced that the agency is taking aim at the endangerment finding, a 2009 rule that’s essentially the tentpole supporting federal greenhouse-gas regulations.
This might sound like an obscure legal situation, but it’s a really big deal for climate policy in the US. So buckle up, and let’s look at what this rule says now, what the proposed change looks like, and what it all means.
To set the stage, we have to go back to the Clean Air Act of 1970, the law that essentially gave the EPA the power to regulate air pollution. (Stick with me—I promise I’ll keep this short and not get too into the legal weeds.)
There were some pollutants explicitly called out in this law and its amendments, including lead and sulfur dioxide. But it also required the EPA to regulate new pollutants that were found to be harmful. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, environmental groups and states started asking for the agency to include greenhouse-gas pollution.
In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that greenhouse gases qualify as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act, and that the EPA should study whether they’re a danger to public health. In 2009, the incoming Obama administration looked at the science and ruled that greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health because they cause climate change. That’s the endangerment finding, and it’s what allows the agency to pass rules to regulate greenhouse gases.
The original case and argument were specifically about vehicles and the emissions from tailpipes, but this finding was eventually used to allow the agency to set rules around power plants and factories, too. It essentially underpins climate regulations in the US.
Fast-forward to today, and the Trump administration wants to reverse the endangerment finding. In a proposed rule released on Tuesday, the EPA argues that the Clean Air Act does not, in fact, authorize the agency to set emissions standards to address global climate change. Zeldin, in an appearance on the conservative politics and humor podcast Ruthless that preceded the official announcement, called the proposal the “largest deregulatory action in the history of America.”
The administration was already moving to undermine the climate regulations that rely on this rule. But this move directly targets a “fundamental building block of EPA’s climate policy,” says Deborah Sivas, an environmental-law professor at Stanford University.
The proposed rule will go up for public comment, and the agency will then take that feedback and come up with a final version. It’ll almost certainly get hit with legal challenges and will likely wind up in front of the Supreme Court.
One note here is that the EPA makes a mostly legal argument in the proposed rule reversal rather than focusing on going after the science of climate change, says Madison Condon, an associate law professor at Boston University. That could make it easier for the Supreme Court to eventually uphold it, she says, though this whole process is going to take a while.
If the endangerment finding goes down, it would have wide-reaching ripple effects. “We could find ourselves in a couple years with no legal tools to try and address climate change,” Sivas says.
To take a step back for a moment, it’s wild that we’ve ended up in this place where a single rule is so central to regulating emissions. US climate policy is held up by duct tape and a dream. Congress could have, at some point, passed a law that more directly allows the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions (the last time we got close was a 2009 bill that passed the House but never made it to the Senate). But here we are.
This move isn’t a surprise, exactly. The Trump administration has made it very clear that it is going after climate policy in every way that it can. But what’s most striking to me is that we’re not operating in a shared reality anymore when it comes to this subject.
While top officials tend to acknowledge that climate change is real, there’s often a “but” followed by talking points from climate denial’s list of greatest hits. (One of the more ridiculous examples is the statement that carbon dioxide is good, actually, because it helps plants.)
Climate change is real, and it’s a threat. And the US has emitted more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than any other country in the world. It shouldn’t be controversial to expect the government to be doing something about it.
This article is from The Spark, MIT Technology Review’s weekly climate newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Wednesday,sign up here.
Amsterdam tried using algorithms to fairly assess welfare applicants, but bias still crept in. Why did Amsterdam fail? And more important, can this ever be done right? Hear from MIT Technology Review editor Amanda Silverman, investigative reporter Eileen Guo, and Lighthouse Reports investigative reporter Gabriel Geiger as they explore if algorithms can ever be fair.
Speakers: Eileen Guo, features & investigations reporter, Amanda Silverman, features & investigations editor, and Gabriel Geiger investigative reporter at Lighthouse Reports
This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.
Exclusive: A record-breaking baby has been born from an embryo that’s over 30 years old
A baby boy has just won the new record for the “oldest baby.” Thaddeus Daniel Pierce, who arrived on July 26, developed from an embryo that had been in storage for 30 and a half years.
Lindsey and her husband, Tim Pierce, who live in London, Ohio, “adopted” the embryo from Linda Archerd, who had it created in 1994. The couple, aged 35 and 34, respectively, had been trying for a baby for seven years. Read more about their remarkable story.
—Jessica Hamzelou
OpenAI is launching a version of ChatGPT for college students
OpenAI is launching Study Mode, a version of ChatGPT for college students that it promises will act less like a lookup tool and more like a friendly, always-available tutor.
The chatbot begins by asking what the student wants to know and then attempts to build an exchange, where the pair work methodically toward the answer together. OpenAI says the tool was built after consulting with pedagogy experts from over 40 institutions.
But there’s an ambitious vision behind Study Mode: It’s part of a wider push by OpenAI to get AI more deeply embedded into classrooms when the new academic year starts in September. Read the full story.
—James O’Donnell
MIT Technology Review Narrated: Are we ready to hand AI agents the keys?
In recent months, a new class of agents has arrived on the scene: ones built using large language models. Any action that can be captured by text—from playing a video game using written commands to running a social media account—is potentially within the purview of this type of system.
LLM agents don’t have much of a track record yet, but to hear CEOs tell it, they will transform the economy—and soon. Despite that, like chatbot LLMs, agents can be chaotic and unpredictable.
This is our latest story to be turned into a MIT Technology Review Narrated podcast, which we publish each week on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Just navigate to MIT Technology Review Narrated on either platform, and follow us to get all our new content as it’s released.
The must-reads
I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.
1 The first tsunami waves have reached the US West Coast But early damage from the powerful Russian earthquake has been thankfully limited. (WP $) + It’ll take some time before we can be confident there’s no danger, though. (WSJ $) + These underwater cables can improve tsunami detection. (MIT Technology Review)
2 Google has signed the EU code of practice Despite criticisms from the US that it stands to stifle growth. (FT $) + Europe and America are taking very different paths. (The Register)
3 NASA is launching a new Earth-observing satellite today It’ll keep a watch over precursors to earthquakes, landslides and volcanoes. (BBC) + Its data will be turned into maps to help scientists better respond. (NYT $)
4 US antibiotics research is likely to suffer without federal funding It plays a critical role in antibiotic discovery. (Undark) + How bacteria-fighting viruses could go mainstream. (MIT Technology Review)
5 Russia is building its own new web And at its heart is VK Co, a social network controlled by its government. (Bloomberg $) + How Russia killed its tech industry. (MIT Technology Review)
6 How Anthropic became so good at coding Everyone else in Silicon Valley is dying to know. (Insider $) + The second wave of AI coding is here. (MIT Technology Review)
7 Demand for Vietnam’s chips is booming It’s reaping the benefits of the world looking for alternatives to China’s products. (Rest of World) + Things aren’t looking great for AI chipmaker Groq. (The Information $)
8 Yelp has started making its own AI restaurant videos And users can’t opt out of having their photos used in them. (The Verge)
9 Are memes the new comics? If comics didn’t have a plot, that is. (Ars Technica) + Generative AI is reshaping South Korea’s webcomics industry. (MIT Technology Review)
10 Starbucks is abandoning launching stores that only accept mobile orders The vibes are off, apparently. (WSJ $)
Quote of the day
“Any lawyer unaware that using generative AI platforms to do legal research is playing with fire is living in a cloud.”
—Judge Michael Slade criticizes a lawyer who used AI-generated citations in a legal case, PC Gamer reports.
One more thing
The return of pneumatic tubes
Pneumatic tubes were once touted as something that would revolutionize the world. In science fiction, they were envisioned as a fundamental part of the future—even in dystopias like George Orwell’s 1984, where they help to deliver orders for the main character, Winston Smith, in his job rewriting history to fit the ruling party’s changing narrative.
In real life, the tubes were expected to transform several industries in the late 19th century through the mid-20th. For a while, the United States took up the systems with gusto.
But by the mid to late 20th century, use of the technology had largely fallen by the wayside, and pneumatic tube technology became virtually obsolete. Except in hospitals. Read the full story.
—Vanessa Armstrong
We can still have nice things
A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.)
+ This sweet baby pudu fawn is just too cute for words. + There’s some great picks in this list of the 100 best podcasts (and some shocking omissions). + The infamous gigantic Home Depot skeleton is getting a voice! + If you’re never not thinking about the Roman empire, here’s what happened after it all came crashing down.
Vincent Anthony Mazzotta Jr has pleaded guilty to money laundering and conspiracy to obstruct justice, which together carry a maximum of 15 years in prison.
