GPS Tracking Upends Rural Uganda’s Schistosomiasis Transmission Assumptions

In Uganda’s fishing villages along lakes and rivers, wearable GPS devices are offering a new, detailed picture of how schistosomiasis spreads, helping refine control strategies for a disease affecting about 250 million people globally, mostly in rural sub-Saharan Africa.

A Nature Health study by researchers at the University of Oxford’s Big Data Institute shows that simple models using GPS-tracked movement can accurately predict which open-water sites people use, how often they visit them, and which sites are most likely to drive transmission of Schistosoma mansoni, the parasite that causes schistosomiasis. 

“Snail fever”

Schistosomiasis, or “snail fever,” is caused by Schistosoma mansoni flatworms that parasitize freshwater snails. Infection occurs when people contact contaminated water where larval forms of the flatworm penetrate the skin. Repeated exposure leads to reinfection and chronic disease, including liver damage, portal hypertension, bladder fibrosis, kidney damage, and increased cancer risk.

While praziquantel can cure infection, mass drug administration (MDA) with the antiparasitic medication has failed to interrupt transmission of the parasite. The World Health Organization (WHO) notes that MDA alone is insufficient, since transmission persists in localized hotspots. Focal interventions are needed, but researchers have limited them due to poor data on where water contact actually occurs. 

Conventional assumptions have limited modeling of human contact with open-water sites. Though open-water contact is heterogeneous within villages and households, it is often assumed that people use only the site closest to their household or village. However, how mobility affects site usage patterns and whether assignment rules beyond nearest distance can be more realistic are unclear.

Along with praziquantel MDA, the 2022 WHO schistosomiasis control guidelines recommend safe water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) as the main intervention, but evidence is mixed. Lack of reliable data has made it difficult to determine why the intervention did not improve biannual MDA. Most water contact and WASH studies use self-reported data or household distance to sites and taps, which lacks objective, spatially granular data to characterize fine-scale water usage patterns and quantify WASH’s impact on water contact and (re)infection.

Focal exposure

Lead author Fabian Reitzug, PhD, and colleagues from Goylette F. Chami’s lab tracked 452 people using GPS loggers in three Ugandan districts for 10 days. A total of 8,200 water contact events occurred at 69 open-water sites and 32 improved sources like taps and boreholes—deep drilling to groundwater. Of the participants, 63.9% used open water and 33.2% improved sources.

Reitzug and colleagues found, unsurprisingly, that distance strongly predicted behavior: usage dropped sharply with distance. Open-water contact was ~70% at 20 meters from home and 11% at 500 meters. Nearly all tap and borehole use occurred within 1 km of home, and over 99.5% of open-water contact occurred within 3 km, showing highly localized exposure.

Adding mobility metrics (such as “radius of gyration”) did not improve predictions. This simple finding challenges the assumption that mobile phone tracking can reliably estimate infection risk. Schistosomiasis exposure appears to be caused by local, routine movements, not long-distance travel.

The study found little evidence that safe water infrastructure reduces risky water contact. Taps and boreholes rarely replaced open-water use; fewer than 2% of people fully substituted safe water for natural sources. Daily activities like bathing, fishing, and washing still require lake or river contact. Behavior varied by location. In the Western Ugandan district of Buliisa, nearly 90% visited open water, compared with 44% in the Eastern Ugandan district of Mayuge.

When incorporated into transmission models, GPS-informed movement patterns closely reproduced observed reinfection rates. Simple “nearest-water-source” assumptions overestimated risk. The improved model also identified high-risk water sites by combining human use with ecological suitability for snail habitats.

Targeted interventions at key sites

These findings suggest control programs could shift toward targeted interventions at key transmission sites, such as focal snail control, environmental modification, or localized treatment. The study also indicates that a 1 km intervention radius may be more realistic than the current 500 m guideline. Importantly, reliable spatial patterns emerged from as few as 15 participants over 10 days, suggesting the approach is scalable. Key limitations include using proximity as a proxy for water contact and limited seasonal coverage.

Overall, the study reframes schistosomiasis transmission as a highly local, measurable process, enabling more precise, data-driven control strategies. Future research should examine whether similar models apply to other waterborne diseases. Identifying pathogen-specific exposure pathways and collecting GPS logger data from various locations could test this approach’s generalizability.

The post GPS Tracking Upends Rural Uganda’s Schistosomiasis Transmission Assumptions appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.

Rethinking organizational design in the age of agentic AI

Amid rapidly growing adoption of enterprise-level AI agents, there’s a disconnect emerging between ambition and execution. 

Although 85% of organizations say they want to be agentic within the next three years, 76% say their current operations and infrastructure can’t support that change. They cite a lack of readiness across people, processes, and workflows. 

The sticky tape problem

The challenge is that many organisations are often layering AI agents onto existing operations, rather than reimagine the operating model and how work will need to be rewired, explains Prasun Shah, global CTO for workforce consulting and chief AI officer at PwC UK Consulting. “They’re embedding AI employees into what is a human operating model,” layering on AI agents to existing workplace structures when “this is like adding sticky tapes to parts of an operating model that is breaking.”

Doing so may be preventing organizations from unlocking the full value agentic AI offers, creating circumstances where disillusionment can quickly creep in. That full value lies in agents’ capacity to execute entire workflows with limited human input. They can coordinate complex tasks, make independent decisions, adjust to changing conditions, and iterate performance. 

In early proving grounds that span customer service, HR, and sales, it’s already estimated that AI agents could accelerate business processes by as much as 30% to 50% and low-value work time by 25% to 40% when deployed at scale. But with this capability comes greater complexity and the need for an enterprise-wide change.

Growing the AI vocabulary 

Enterprise agentic AI platform Ema describes this change as agentic business transformation (ABT), a term it coined last year in partnership with HFS Research, in an attempt to plug what it sees as a gap in the existing lexicon about AI agents, and to provide enterprises with a new framework with which to think about their own adoption of the technology. 

“None of the existing vocabulary captures the full scope of the change,” explains Ema CEO and founder Surojit Chatterjee. “Digital transformation was about moving from paper to software. AI transformation was about adding artificial intelligence to existing processes. Co-pilot is about AI assisting in various human tasks. But ABT is something categorically different: It’s the integration of AI agents into the fabric of the organization.” 

For Shah, the dedicated term (ABT) “helps drive the need to redesign an organization in its entirety: its operating model, its workflows, decision rights, and performance management systems.” He emphasizes that “everything that’s needed to ensure those agents are actually active participants in value creation, rather than just point tools or productivity aids.”

According to Ema, ABT encompasses three core pillars: an organization’s technology stack, its workforce, and the metrics used for success. 

AI agents as connective tissue

The first pillar of ABT is the technology stack. “Your existing tech stack was designed for human-operated, application-centric workflows,” says Chatterjee. “It needs to be reconsidered when the actor is an AI agent operating at machine speed across multiple systems simultaneously.”

 As AI agents are integrated into an organization, enterprises will need to pivot from a set of linear processes and steps, to rewiring work in a very different way, explains Shah. That’s because the value in AI agents isn’t as another layer in an existing technology stack but as a connective tissue, he explains, moving between or across layers to coordinate a high-level task or retrieve and interpret data from multiple discrete applications. AI agents can create “a true competitive differentiation for an enterprise” by making decisions based on this capacity to contextualize, he says. “That is where the next battleground will be.”

To build this connective tissue, leaders need to adapt their technology stack to surface higher quality decisions from AI agents, prioritizing access to multiple datasets and applications simultaneously to develop tacit knowledge. “Organizations that make this architectural shift become genuinely more adaptive,” says Chatterjee. “When a new business requirement emerges, you don’t wait six months for a software vendor to build a feature. You configure an AI employee using natural language and connect it to the systems it needs. The time from business to production workflow drops from months to days.”

The workforce, redesigned

As AI agents are deployed for more use cases, enterprise leaders must consider what this means for dynamics across their workforce, the second pillar of ABT.

Workforce structures today deviate little from the hierarchical model of the early days of industrialization. To maximize efficiency and scale, processes are standardized, tasks are clearly delineated between strategic business units (SBUs), and employees progress up through an organization based on their capacity to optimize output from teams below them. But with AI agents that can execute, coordinate, and optimize tasks—often without managerial coordination—the lines of that established hierarchy become blurred.

In a workforce that blends AI agents and human employees, managers will be freed up from many execution-based tasks but take on new responsibilities associated with managing hybrid teams. Managers “will need to be able to manage issues around trust, explainability, psychological safety, and even status dynamics” to navigate new tensions that could arise in a hybrid workforce, says Shah.

The impact of agentic AI on existing workforce structures goes far beyond the management layer, too. McKinsey predicts that by 2030, three-quarters of current jobs will require redesign, upskilling, or redeployment, and organizations will need to act swiftly to amend recruitment, retention, and remuneration. 

From output to outcome

Success metrics are the third and final pillar of ABT. 

As AI agents assume greater ownership of core enterprise processes, taking on collaborative roles alongside human employees, traditional workforce metrics that focus on activity or output—such as calls handled or reports filed—no longer make sense. 

“When you add AI employees into the workforce, activity metrics become meaningless or actively misleading,” says Chatterjee. “An AI employee can handle a thousand customer interactions in the time it takes a human to handle ten. If you measure success by interactions handled, you’ll conclude the AI is working brilliantly while missing whether any of those interactions actually drove customer satisfaction, retention, or revenue.” To correct this, enterprises must develop a new set of metrics that focus on outcome rather than output. That is, metrics on the broader benefits or changes achieved, rather than individual deliverables. 

For example, when one of Ema’s large enterprise customers overhauled its own metrics, switching from tool metrics like cost per query and AI accuracy, to outcomes like the percentage of contracts reviewed without human escalation, the measured ROI from agentic AI tripled within two quarters. The changes meant “this customer stopped building point solutions in high-volume, low-complexity workflows and started deploying AI employees where the outcome value was highest,” says Chatterjee.

Integrating new metrics may also require a complete reconfiguration of reward and talent management processes, as well as accountability and ownership within organizations, points out Shah. In human-AI teams, for example, although ethical and fiduciary responsibilities will likely remain with human employees, operational accountability will become significantly more diffused to reflect the systemic role of AI agents.

This change will raise new questions that senior leadership teams will need to wrestle with, Shah adds. They’ll need to consider: Who is accountable when an AI employee makes a mistake? What happens when AI and humans disagree? What guardrails should be erected to safeguard customers? 

Laying the groundwork for systems-level change

Systems-level change is gradual. These are complex lines of inquiry that experts continue to grapple with. But in kickstarting internal dialogue about the core pillars of ABT—the workforce, the technology stack, and the metrics by which success can be gauged—leaders can lay the groundwork for an enterprise better poised to embrace AI agents at a systems level and start to close the gap between their ambition and execution. 

This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff. It was researched, designed, and written by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.

The Download: coding’s future, the ‘Steroid Olympics,’ and AI-driven science

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.

Anthropic’s Code with Claude showed off coding’s future—whether you like it or not

At Anthropic’s developer event in London this week, Code with Claude, attendees were asked if they’d shipped code written entirely by Claude. Almost half the room raised their hands. Many admitted they hadn’t even read the code before pushing it live.

As tools like Claude Code get better, more and more developers are happy to hand their work off to AI. Anthropic says it wants to push automation as far as it will go. But not everyone is convinced that’s the right approach. 

Read the full story on how AI is reshaping coding for good.

—Will Douglas Heaven

The Enhanced Games fit right in with the rest of 2026’s longevity vibes

This Sunday, 42 athletes will gather in Las Vegas for the inaugural Enhanced Games, a controversial sporting competition that allows the use of performance-enhancing drugs. The goal? To “push the boundaries of human performance.”

The event embodies a zeitgeist of peptide-crazed looksmaxxing, where consumers are encouraged to get thinner than ever, optimize for longevity, and have their “best baby.” In 2026, if you’re not enhancing, what are you even doing?

Find out how the competition reflects our enhancement-obsessed era.

—Jessica Hamzelou

This story is from The Checkup, our weekly newsletter giving you the inside track on all things biotech. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Thursday.

Google I/O showed how the path for AI-driven science is shifting

—Grace Huckins

During Tuesday’s Google I/O keynote, Demis Hassabis, the CEO of Google DeepMind, proclaimed that we are “standing in the foothills of the singularity.” But what struck me as I listened in the audience was the context in which he said those words.

The contrast reflects two directions for AI in science. One builds specialized systems like WeatherNext for specific problems. The other pushes toward agentic, LLM-based systems that could eventually execute cutting-edge research projects without human involvement.

The big scientific announcement at I/O was Gemini for Science, which leans further into this agent-driven future. It can still call on specialized systems, but Google appears to be transitioning away from them.

Here’s how the shift could affect science.

Can AI learn to understand the world?

Many leading AI researchers have turned their attention to a new kind of system that understands the physical environment: world models. 

Backed by researchers at Google DeepMind, Fei-Fei Li’s World Labs, and Meta’s former Chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun, the idea is gaining serious momentum. Could it change how AI understands reality?

MIT Technology Review editor in chief Mat Honan, senior AI editor Will Douglas Heaven, and AI reporter Grace Huckins unpacked it all in an exclusive Roundtables discussion yesterday.

Subscribers can watch the full recording now.

World models are also one of MIT Technology Review’s 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now, our list of what’s really worth your attention in the busy, buzzy world of AI.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 Trump has postponed an AI order due to overregulation fears
He said he was concerned it would be “a blocker.” (CNBC)
+ And that he wants to preserve the US’s lead over China in AI. (Reuters $)
+ A source said the delay was because he “just hates regulation.” (Axios)
+ A war over regulation is coming to America. (MIT Technology Review)

2 OpenClaw’s engineers warn that a “vibe-coded slop” crisis is coming
They say AI is flooding the world with bad and even dangerous code. (WSJ $)
+ Now vibe coding is coming to your phone, too. (The Verge)
+ What exactly is vibe coding? (MIT Technology Review)

3 SpaceX has called off the launch of a new Starship prototype
Engineers discovered a ground system glitch. (CNBC)
+ They hope to try again tonight. (Ars Technica)
+ The launch could play a key role in SpaceX’s IPO. (NPR)

4 Meta has settled a school district’s social media addiction lawsuit
It had been sued over the alleged harm caused to students. (BBC)
+ Snap, TikTok, and YouTube have also settled with the district. (NYT $)

5 Bluesky says it’s being hacked by the Kremlin to spread propaganda
It’s fighting Russian efforts to hijack real users’ accounts to post. (NYT $)
+ Now is a good time for doing crime. (MIT Technology Review)

6 Africa’s biggest economies are pushing for AI sovereignty
They aim to reduce their dependence on Big Tech. (Rest of World)
+ New strategies could make Africa a major AI player. (MIT Technology Review)

7 Undersea cables threaten the Gulf’s AI expansion plans
Conflicts have put the fragile critical infrastructure at risk. (Wired $)

8 Waymo is pausing services as robotaxis keep driving into floods
It suspended services in four US cities. (TechCrunch)

9 Microscopic silica spheres may help cool the planet
But some researchers need further convincing. (The Economist $)

10 Spotify will now let subscribers create AI remixes

It’s the first time they can use AI to create content on Spotify. (Guardian)

Quote of the day

“You have AI — actual intelligence.” 

—Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak reassures college graduates about AI’s impact and draws applause, in contrast to the boos received by former Google CEO Eric Schmidt earlier this week, Business Insider reports.

One More Thing

Looking down a neighborhood street where a man in wheelchair has crossed with wife and daughter.

GETTY IMAGES


The future is disabled

Technologies for disability, access, and mobility are often portrayed as objects of empowerment or heroic, life-changing panaceas for social ills. But their benefits are often temporary, lopsided, or reliant on constant investment, care, and attention.

Often, accessibility tech assumes levels of access that don’t exist: reliable internet, smartphones, or affordable devices. Projects frequently overlook the very communities they claim to serve. Yet there’s another way: opening ourselves up to all-access thinking and disabled expertise.

Discover how that approach could create a more livable world for everyone.

—Ashley Shew

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.)

+ Treat your eyes to this magical footage of a lake floating above an ocean.
+ Test your visual recall with this clever game that recreates colors from memory.
+ Take back control of your internet with this dashboard that brings together your favourite social feeds.
+ Peer into the heart of a barred spiral galaxy in this stunning new capture from the James Webb Space Telescope.

Anthropic’s Code with Claude showed off coding’s future—whether you like it or not

The vibes were strong at Code with Claude, Anthropic’s two-day event for software developers in London that kicked off on May 19, the same day as Google’s I/O in Palo Alto. (A coincidence, not a flex, Anthropic staffers assured me.)

“Who here has shipped a pull request in the last week that was completely written by Claude?” Jeremy Hadfield, an engineer at Anthropic, asked from the main stage. Almost half the people in the packed room—many sitting with laptops on their knees, coding or prompting as they watched the talks—raised their hands.

Pull requests are fixes or updates to existing software that are submitted for review before they go live. They are the bread and butter of software development, the chunks of code that most professional developers spend their lives writing—or did until now.

“Who here has shipped a pull request that was completely written by Claude where they did not read the code at all?” Hadfield asked next. Nervous laughter. Most of the hands stayed up.

It’s not news that LLM-powered tools like Anthropic’s Claude Code and OpenAI’s Codex have upended the way software gets made. Top tech companies now like to boast of how little code their developers write by hand. (“Most software at Anthropic is now written by Claude,” Hadfield said. “Claude has written most of the code in Claude Code.”) OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft make similar claims. Many others wish they could.

Even so, it is striking how normal this new paradigm already seems, and how fast it has set in. This was the second year that Anthropic has put on developer events, which also run in San Francisco and Tokyo. This time last year, the company had just released Claude 4. It could code, kind of. But with Anthropic’s latest string of updates—especially Claude 4.6 and then 4.7, released in February and April—Claude Code is a tool that more and more developers seem happy to hand their work off to.   

An 8-bit character with a chef's hat in a pixel kitchen flips food in a fry pan over a pixel stove
Let Claude cook.
ANTHROPIC (GRAPHIC) / WILL DOUGLAS HEAVEN (PHOTO)

Anthropic says its goal is to push automation as far as it will go. Instead of using AI to generate code and then having humans clean it up and fix the mistakes, it wants Claude to check and correct its own work. “The default isn’t ‘I’m going to prompt Claude’—the default is now ‘I’m going to have Claude prompt itself,’” Boris Cherny, who heads Claude Code, said in the opening keynote.

If all goes well, human developers shouldn’t even see the error messages when something doesn’t work. That will all be handled by Claude, which will test and tweak, test and tweak, until everything runs as it should. As Ravi Trivedi, an engineer at Anthropic, put it in another talk: “The key principle is getting out of Claude’s way. We like to say: ‘Let it cook.’”

Trivedi presented a new feature in Claude Code, announced two weeks ago, which Anthropic calls dreaming. Claude Code agents write notes to themselves, recording and saving useful information about specific tasks. When another coding agent later starts to work on the same code, it can use the notes to get up to speed faster and learn from any errors that previous agents may have made.

Dreaming is a system that Claude Code uses to read through all these notes and consolidate the information they contain, spotting patterns and common issues across different tasks. In theory, dreaming should help Claude Code learn about a particular code base and get better and better at working on it.

Success stories

Code with Claude is an event aimed at developers. As well as product showcases and hands-on workshops from Anthropic, there were how-tos from a range of companies that had reshaped their software development teams around Claude Code, including Spotify and Delivery Hero as well as Lovable, Base44, and Monday.com—three startups vibe-coding apps that help people vibe-code apps.

There were no signs of unease at Code with Claude. Everybody I met wanted in.

And yet outside the conference there have been a number of reports that many coders are starting to question this bright new future. Some gripe in online forums like Reddit and Hacker News that AI coding tools are being pushed by managers chasing productivity gains, when in practice the technology makes software development harder because of all the extra code developers now have to review. “The only people I’ve heard saying that generated code is fine are those who don’t read it,” a user called pron posted on Hacker News last week. 

Others claim that their coding abilities have fallen off as they hand more tasks to AI. And researchers have warned that AI tools can produce unsafe code that will make software more vulnerable to attacks.  

I sat down with Claude engineering lead Katelyn Lesse and Claude product lead Angela Jiang and asked them what they made of the concerns that a sudden flood of code generated (and shipped) without proper human oversight was kicking serious security and maintenance problems down the road.

“All of the old software development best practices still apply. They’ve applied this entire time,” said Lesse. “I think there are a lot of people and teams that may have lost sight of them in this moment.” 

And yet as Anthropic and others push for greater automation and tools like Claude Code improve, the temptation increases to offload more and more tasks, including oversight. Lesse told me that some of the technical managers at Anthropic are exhausted by keeping up with all the code their teams now produce. “Part of things happening so much more quickly is just managing your time,” she said.

“I think that right now Claude is probably as good as a midlevel engineer at writing code,” she added. You still need expert engineers to design a system and troubleshoot harder problems, she said, “But over time we want Claude to get better and better at all different types of engineering.”

Jiang agreed: “I think the absolute end state we’re trying to get to is Claude basically being able to build itself.”

The Download: online safety’s future and climate tech’s big pivot

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.

Tech researchers are suing the Trump administration over the future of online safety

For months, the Trump administration has been going after researchers who study and try to counter hate speech, harassment, propaganda, and disinformation online. Now, some of those researchers are fighting back. 

In a new lawsuit, they’re seeking to strike down a visa restriction policy against “foreign officials and other persons” announced last year by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

They say the policy violates the speech and due process rights of foreign-born workers whose “work supports greater moderation of content on the [tech] platforms.” Find out how the case could impact online safety and free speech.

—Eileen Guo

Climate tech companies are pivoting to critical minerals

We’re over a year into the second Trump administration, and support for climate causes in the US is weak. But climate tech companies are finding ways to survive and even thrive in this new environment, including by looking beyond decarbonization.

One example is Boston Metal. The startup has raised a $75 million round to produce critical metals, MIT Technology Review can exclusively report.

The company is best known for its efforts to clean up steel production, an industry that’s responsible for about 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. But the new focus and fresh funds could help it survive a period of waning support for industrial decarbonization.

Read the full story on its high-stakes shift. And discover more about the new strategy for climate tech companies in our analysis of how they’re reframing their missions.

—Casey Crownhart 

Our story on the climate tech pivot is from The Spark, our weekly newsletter giving you the inside track on all things climate. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Wednesday.

Can AI learn to understand the world?

As the limits of LLMs become clearer, researchers are developing a new kind of AI designed to understand the physical environment: world models. 

Recent developments from Google DeepMind, Fei-Fei Li’s World Labs, and Yann LeCun’s new startup have pushed these systems to the forefront of AI. At an exclusive virtual event today, MIT Technology Review will examine the progress—and what comes next.

Join editor in chief Mat Honan, senior AI editor Will Douglas Heaven, and AI reporter Grace Huckins for the subscriber-only Roundtables discussion on world models. Register here to take part in the session at 19:30 GMT / 2:30 PM ET / 11:30 AM PT.

World models are one of our 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now, MIT Technology Review’s new list of the technologies and ideas shaping the future of AI.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 SpaceX has filed for an IPO expected to be the largest ever
It could make Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaire. (BBC
+ But he’s also a risk factor in the prospectus. (The Verge)
+ The filing exposes SpaceX’s finances for the first time. (NYT $)
+ AI spending pushed it to a $1.94 billion loss in Q1 2026. (Reuters $)
+ And rivals are challenging its launch dominance. (MIT Technology Review)

2 Nvidia reported record revenues thanks to the AI boom
It’s blown past Wall Street expectations, despite losing the Chinese market. (Guardian)
+ It has “largely conceded” China’s AI chip market to Huawei. (CNBC)
+ It generated no revenue from H200 chip sales in China. (SCMP)

3 Samsung has averted a massive strike over AI profit-sharing
It reached a tentative deal on bonuses with workers. (FT $)
+ The last-minute deal averts an 18-day walkout. (Engadget
+ But the compromise has exposed deep divisions. (Reuters $)
+ Anti-AI protests are increasing. (MIT Technology Review)

4 President Trump will sign a cybersecurity directive as soon as today
But it stops short of mandatory federal approval of models before they’re released. (Bloomberg $)
+ AI is making online crimes easier. (MIT Technology Review)

5 OpenAI may file for an IPO within days
The ChatGPT-maker wants to go public as early as September. (WSJ $)

6 Robotics won’t be transformed by a single AI breakthrough
Don’t expect a ChatGPT moment. (IEE Spectrum)
+ Human work behind humanoid robots is being hidden. (MIT Technology Review)

7 Rocks could generate hydrogen while storing CO2
New research shows they could also produce geothermal power. (New Scientist)
+ AI is uncovering hidden geothermal energy resources. (MIT Technology Review)

8 The EU is accelerating a Trump-fueled breakup with Big Tech
Geopolitical tensions are driving a shift toward homegrown software. (Wired $)

9 Solid-state breakthroughs could soon transform commercial batteries
They’d be faster and safer than today’s lithium-ion equivalents. (The Economist $)

10 Two researchers are rebuilding math from the ground up
By replacing the most fundamental concept in topology. (Quanta)
+ OpenAI claims its solved an 80-year-old math problem. (TechCrunch)

Quote of the day

“This isn’t a blip, it’s an inflection point.” 

—Gurjeet Grewal, CEO of UK-based Octopus Electric Vehicles, tells Reuters that the Iran war has been a boon for European EV sales.

One More Thing

""
Keisy Plaza looks at her daughter Arantza Plaza with disappointment after failing to get an appointment on the CBP One app in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.
ALICIA FERNáNDEZ


The new US border wall is an app

At the US southern border in 2023, asylum seekers had to request appointments with immigration officials via a mobile app. The Biden administration said the app, named CBP One, would make migration more orderly and discourage unauthorized crossings. But for many migrants, it became another obstacle.

While waiting in dangerous border cities, they reported frozen screens, facial recognition issues, spotty connectivity, and difficulty securing appointments. Advocates argue that requiring vulnerable people to rely on smartphones, internet access, and digital literacy creates a system that leaves many behind.

Find out how CBP One endangered some of the people most in need of protection.

—Lorena Ríos

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.)

+ See how big countries really are with this interactive tool.
+ Explore the entire Star Wars galaxy in detail through this interactive map.
+ Chart the origins of historical events with this interactive cause-and-effect explorer.
+ Discover the surprising origins of global currency symbols in this deep dive into financial history.