The Secretary of Defense has given an ultimatum to the artificial intelligence company Anthropic in an attempt to bully them into making their technology available to the U.S. military without any restrictions for their use. Anthropic should stick by their principles and refuse to allow their technology to be used in the two ways they have publicly stated they would not support: autonomous weapons systems and surveillance. The Department of Defense has reportedly threatened to label Anthropic a “supply chain risk,” in retribution for not lifting restrictions on how their technology is used. According to WIRED, that label would be, “a scarlet letter usually reserved for companies that do business with countries scrutinized by federal agencies, like China, which means the Pentagon would not do business with firms using Anthropic’s AI in their defense work.”

Anthropic should stick by their principles and refuse to allow their technology to be used in the two ways they have publicly stated they would not support: autonomous weapons systems and surveillance.

In 2025, reportedly Anthropic became the first AI company cleared for use in relation to classified operations and to handle classified information. This current controversy, however, began in January 2026 when, through a partnership with defense contractor Palantir, Anthropic came to suspect their AI had been used during the January 3 attack on Venezuela. In January 2026, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote to reiterate that surveillance against US persons and autonomous weapons systems were two “bright red lines” not to be crossed, or at least topics that needed to be handled with “extreme care and scrutiny combined with guardrails to prevent abuses.” You can also read Anthropic’s self-proclaimed core views on AI safety here, as well as their LLM, Claude’s, constitution here. 

Now, the U.S. government is threatening to terminate the government’s contract with the company if it doesn’t switch gears and voluntarily jump right across those lines.  

Companies, especially technology companies, often fail to live up to their public statements and internal policies related to human rights and civil liberties for all sorts of reasons, including profit. Government pressure shouldn’t be one of those reasons. 

Whatever the U.S. government does to threaten Anthropic, the AI company should know that their corporate customers, the public, and the engineers who make their products are expecting them not to cave. They, and all other technology companies, would do best to refuse to become yet another tool of surveillance.

The Secretary of Defense has given an ultimatum to the artificial intelligence company Anthropic in an attempt to bully them into making their technology available to the U.S. military without any restrictions for their use. Anthropic should stick by their principles and refuse to allow their technology to be used in the two ways they have publicly stated they would not support: autonomous weapons systems and surveillance. The Department of Defense has reportedly threatened to label Anthropic a “supply chain risk,” in retribution for not lifting restrictions on how their technology is used. According to WIRED, that label would be, “a scarlet letter usually reserved for companies that do business with countries scrutinized by federal agencies, like China, which means the Pentagon would not do business with firms using Anthropic’s AI in their defense work.”

Anthropic should stick by their principles and refuse to allow their technology to be used in the two ways they have publicly stated they would not support: autonomous weapons systems and surveillance.

In 2025, reportedly Anthropic became the first AI company cleared for use in relation to classified operations and to handle classified information. This current controversy, however, began in January 2026 when, through a partnership with defense contractor Palantir, Anthropic came to suspect their AI had been used during the January 3 attack on Venezuela. In January 2026, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei wrote to reiterate that surveillance against US persons and autonomous weapons systems were two “bright red lines” not to be crossed, or at least topics that needed to be handled with “extreme care and scrutiny combined with guardrails to prevent abuses.” You can also read Anthropic’s self-proclaimed core views on AI safety here, as well as their LLM, Claude’s, constitution here. 

Now, the U.S. government is threatening to terminate the government’s contract with the company if it doesn’t switch gears and voluntarily jump right across those lines.  

Companies, especially technology companies, often fail to live up to their public statements and internal policies related to human rights and civil liberties for all sorts of reasons, including profit. Government pressure shouldn’t be one of those reasons. 

Whatever the U.S. government does to threaten Anthropic, the AI company should know that their corporate customers, the public, and the engineers who make their products are expecting them not to cave. They, and all other technology companies, would do best to refuse to become yet another tool of surveillance.

With the impact artificial intelligence is having on how companies operate, the environment for how MIT students are learning entrepreneurship and choosing to create new ventures is seeing rapid changes as well. To address how these student startups are being built, the Martin Trust Center for MIT Entrepreneurship undertook a months-long series of discussions with key stakeholders to help shape a new direction for delta v, MIT’s capstone entrepreneurship accelerator for student founders.

Two of Boston’s most successful tech entrepreneurs have stepped forward to fund this growth of new MIT ventures through a combined $6 million gift that supports the delta v accelerator run out of the Trust Center. Ed Hallen MBA ’12 and Andrew Bialecki, co-founders of Boston-based customer relationship management firm Klaviyo, are providing the donation to support the next wave of innovation-driven entrepreneurship taking place at MIT.

“In the early days of Klaviyo, we learned almost everything by building, testing assumptions, making mistakes, and figuring things out as we went,” Hallen says. “MIT delta v creates that same learning-by-doing environment for students, while surrounding them with mentorship and resources that help founders build with clarity and momentum. We’ve seen the difference delta v can make for founders, and we’re excited to help the Trust Center extend that opportunity to the next generation of students.”

“We’ve always believed the world needs more entrepreneurs, and that Boston should be one of the places leading the way,” adds Bialecki. “Boston is a hub of innovation with ambitious students and a strong community of builders. MIT delta v plays a critical role in developing founders early, not just helping them start companies but helping them build companies that last. Supporting that mission is something Ed and I care deeply about.”

The Martin Trust Center plans to “accelerate the accelerator” with the funding. Recognizing the opportunity that exists as AI impacts how students are able to build companies, along with the increased interest being shown by students to learn about entrepreneurship during their time on campus, is a major driver for these changes. One of the main impacts will be the ability of delta v participants to earn up to $75,000 in equity-free funding during the program, an increase from $20,000 in years past. 

Also, delta v will be introducing a partner model composed of leading founders from companies such as HubSpot, Okta, and Kayak, C-suite operators, subject matter experts, and early-stage investors who will all be providing significant guidance and mentorship to the student ventures.

“Core to MIT’s mission is developing the innovative technologies and solutions that can help solve tough problems at global scale,” says MIT Provost Anantha Chandrakasan. “The AI revolution is creating exciting new opportunities for MIT students to build the next wave of impactful companies, and the delta v accelerator is a perfect vehicle to help them make that happen.”

In recent years MIT-founded startups such as Cursor and Delve who use AI as a core part of their business have seen explosive growth in both customers and revenue as well as valuation. In addition, delta v alumni entrepreneurs and their companies such as Klarity and Reducto are providing software-as-a-service (SaaS) platforms using AI tools while Vertical Semiconductor is growing thanks to providing the energy solutions that data centers need to power today’s computing demands. These are just some of the businesses MIT students are looking to as models they can follow to build and launch successfully, whether they are working on solutions in health care, climate, finance, the future of work, or another global challenge.

“MIT Sloan is the place for entrepreneurship education, part of a unique ecosystem of collaboration across MIT to solve problems," says Richard M. Locke, the John C Head III Dean at the MIT Sloan School of Management. “The delta v program is a great example of how MIT students dedicate their energy to starting a venture, connect with mentors, and incorporate proven frameworks for disciplined entrepreneurship. This gift from Ed Hallen and Andrew Bialecki will provide additional funding for this important program, and I’m so grateful for their support of entrepreneurship education at MIT.” 

“I remember when Ed and Andrew were giving birth to Klaviyo at the Trust Center,” says Bill Aulet, the Ethernet Inventors Professor of the Practice and managing director of the Trust Center. “Through their ingenuity and drive, they have created an iconic tech company here in Boston with the support of our ecosystem. Through their willingness to give back, many more students will now be able to follow their path and become entrepreneurs who can create extraordinary positive impact in the world.”

Applications for the next delta v cohort will open on March 1 and close on April 1. Teams will be announced in May for the summer 2026 accelerator.

“MIT delta v is about creating belief in our most exceptional entrepreneurial talent — and turning that belief into consequential impact for the world. By supporting early-stage founders who take bold ideas from improbable to possible, we help them build companies that matter,” says Ana Bakshi, the Trust Center’s executive director. “Our students are the next generation of job creators, economic drivers, and thought leaders. To realize this potential, it is critical that we continue to invest in and scale startup programs and spaces so they can build at unprecedented levels. Ed and Andrew’s generosity gives us a powerful opportunity to change velocity—and make that future possible.”

Founded in 1991, the award-winning Martin Trust Center for MIT Entrepreneurship is today focused on teaching entrepreneurship as a craft. It combines evidence-based entrepreneurship frameworks, used in over a thousand other organizations, with experiential learning, experiences, and community building inside and outside the classroom to create the next generation of innovation-driven entrepreneurs. Alumni who have gone through Trust Center programs have started companies including Cursor, Delve, Okta, HubSpot, PillPack, Honey, WHOOP, Reducto, Klarity, and Biobot Analytics, and thousands more in industries as diverse as biotech, climate and energy, AI, health care, fintech, business and consumer software, and more. 

In the first 10 years of delta v, the program's alumni have helped create entrepreneurs who have gone on to experience extraordinary success. The five-year survival rate of their companies has been 69%, and they have raised well over $3 billion in funding while addressing the world’s greatest challenges — evidenced by the fact that 89% are directly aligned with the UN Sustainable Development goals.

Politicians fixate on the global race for technological supremacy between US and China. They debate geopolitical implications of chip exports, latest model releases from each country, and military applications of AI. Someday, they believe, we might see advancements in AI tip the scales in a superpower conflict.

But the most important arms race of the 21st century is already happening elsewhere and, while AI is definitely the weapon of choice, combatants are distributed across dozens of domains.

Academic journals are flooded with AI-generated papers, and are turning to AI to help review submissions. Brazil’s ...

The oil industry's argument that federal law preempts state-level climate cases may be undercut by EPA's retreat from greenhouse gas regulation.

Tuesday’s hearing could be the last, best chance for nonprofits to reclaim green financing withdrawn by the Trump administration.

The Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project is expected to provide enough electricity to power 660,000 homes.

Power constraints, community opposition and grid equipment shortages could slow the opening of 30 percent of this year’s planned facilities.

Nonprofits and think tanks are creating a governance platform that could bring consistency and oversight to projects that reflect sunlight away from the Earth.

The Trump administration’s move to repeal climate rules for motor vehicles may fly against a separate set of climate rules that helps domestic aerospace manufacturers sell and fly their planes overseas.

“We failed in our mission," said the founder of Paris-based Reclaim Finance. "Instead of fighting human-rights violations or standing up for social justice, we narrowed every issue down to climate change.”

A new study calculated that an unusual recent twist in the warming and cooling cycles of the Earth can help explain a scientific mystery.

Julia Wolfe's "unEarth" deals with the damage being done to nature and how to repair it.

One of the best forms of heat relief is pretty simple: trees. In cities, as studies have documented, more tree cover lowers surface temperatures and heat-related health risks.

However, as a new study led by MIT researchers shows, the amount of tree cover varies widely within cities, and is generally connected to wealth levels. After examining a cross-section of cities on four continents at different latitudes, the research finds a consistent link between wealth and neighborhood tree abundance within a city, with better-off residents usually enjoying much more shade on nearby sidewalks.

“Shade is the easiest way to counter warm weather,” says Fabio Duarte, an MIT urban studies scholar and co-author of a new paper detailing the study’s results. “Strictly by looking at which areas are shaded, we can tell where rich people and poor people live.”

That disparity is evident within a range of cities, and is present whether a city contains a large amount of tree cover overall or just a little. Either way, there are more trees in wealthier spots.

“When we compare the most well-shaded city in our study, Stockholm, with the worst-shaded, Belem in northern Brazil, we still see marked inequality,” says Duarte, the associate director of MIT’s Senseable City Lab in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning (DUSP). “Even though the most-shaded parts of Belem are less shaded than the least-shaded parts of Stockholm, shade inequality in Stockholm is greater. Rich people in Stockholm have much better shade provison as pedestrians than we see in poor areas of Stockholm.”

The paper, “Global patterns of pedestrian shade inequality,” is published today in Nature Communications. The authors are Xinyue Gu of Hong Kong Polytechnic University; Lukas Beuster, a research fellow at the Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions and MIT’s Senseable City Lab; Xintao Liu, an associate professor at Hong Kong Polytechnic University; Eveline van Leeuwen, scientific director at the Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions; Titus Venverloo, who leads the MIT Senseable City Amsterdam lab; and Duarte, who is also a lecturer in DUSP.

From Stockholm to Sydney

To conduct the study, the researchers used satellite data from multiple sources, along with urban mapping programs and granular economic data about the cities they examined. There are nine cities in the study: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Belem, Boston, Hong Kong, Milan, Rio de Janeiro, Stockholm, and Sydney. Those places are intended to create a cross-section of cities with different characteristics, including latitude, wealth levels, urban form, and more.

The scholars looked at the amount of shade available on city sidewalks on summer solistice day, as well as the hottest recorded day each year from 1991 to 2020. They then created a scale, ranging from 0 to 1, to rate the amount of shade available on sidewalks, both citywide and within neighborhoods.

“We focused on sidewalks because they are a major counduit of urban activity, even on hot summer days,” Gu says. “Adding tree cover for sidewalks is one crucial way cities can pursue heat-reduction measures.”

Duarte adds: “When it comes to those who are not protected by air conditioning, they are also using the city, walking, taking buses, and anybody who takes a bus is walking or biking to or from bus stops. They are using sidewalks as the main infrastructure.”

The cities in the study offer very different levels of tree coverage. On the 0-to-1 scale the researchers developed, much of Stockholm falls in the 0.6-0.9 range, with some neighborhoods being over 0.9. By contrast, large swaths of Rio de Janeiro are under the 0.1 mark. Much of Boston ranges from 0.15 to 0.4, with a few neighborhoods reaching 0.45 on the scale.

The overall pattern of disparities, however, is very consistent, and includes the more affluent cities. The bottom 20 percent of neighborhoods in Stockholm, in terms of shade coverage, are rated at 0.58 on the scale, while the top 20 percent of Belem neighborhoods rate at 0.37; Stockholm has a greater disparity between most-covered and least-covered. To be sure, there is variety within many cities: Milan and Barcelona have some lower-income neighborhoods with abundant shade, for instance. But the aggregate trend is clear. Amsterdam, another well-off place on average, has a distinct pattern of less shade in lower-income areas.

“In rich cities like Amsterdam, even though it’s relatively well-shaded, the disparity is still very high,” Beuster says. “For us the most surprising point was not that in poor cities and more unequal societies the disparity would be notable — that was expected. What was unexpected was how the disparity still happens and is sometimes more pronounced in rich countries.”

“Follow transit”

If the tree-shade disparity issue is quite persistent, then it raises the matter of what to do about it. The researchers have a basic answer: Add trees in areas with public transit, which generate a lot of pedestrian mileage.

“In each city, from Sydney to Rio to Amsterdam, there are people who, regardless of the weather, need to walk,” Duarte says. “And it’s those people who also take public transportation. Therefore, link a tree-planting scheme to a public transportation network. And secondly, they are also the medium-and low-income part of the population. So the action deriving from this result is quite clear: If you need to increase your tree coverage and don’t know where, follow transit. If you follow transit, you will have the right shading.”

Indeed, one takeaway from the study is to think of trees not just as a nice-to-have part of urban aesthetics, but in functional terms.

“Planners and city officials should think about tree placement at least partly in terms of the heat-mitigating effect they have,” Beuster says.

“It’s not just about planting trees,” Duarte observes. “It’s about providing shade by planting trees. If you remove a tree that’s providing shade in a pedestrian area and you plant two other trees in a park, you are still removing part of the public function of the tree.”

He adds: “With increasing temperatures, providing shade is an essential public amenity. Along with providing transportation, I think providing shade in pedestrian spaces should almost be a public right.”

The Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions and all members of the MIT Senseable City Consortium (including FAE Technology, Dubai Foundation, Sondotécnica, Seoul AI Foundation, Arnold Ventures, Sidara, Toyota, Abu Dhabi’s Department of Municipal Transportation, A2A, UnipolTech, Consiglio per la Ricerca in Agricoltura e l’Analisi dell’Economia Agraria, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, KACST, KAIST, and the cities of Laval, Amsterdam, and Rio de Janeiro) supported the research.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 24 February 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02556-6

Policy and planning increasingly depend on large ensembles of climate and energy scenarios, but these collections can be biased and hard to interpret. A new weighting framework aims to make these ensembles more transparent, balanced and decision relevant.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 24 February 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02573-5

As global temperatures move beyond 1.5 °C, overshoot now defines the landscape ahead, sharpening legal claims, exposing economic risks and revealing how far politics still trail the pace of change.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 24 February 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02570-8

As climate activists escalate disruptive protest, authorities respond by intensifying restrictions on protest. This study examines how protest repression shapes climate activism and indicates distinct effects across collective action types and repression experience, with emotions as mediators.

Nature Climate Change, Published online: 24 February 2026; doi:10.1038/s41558-026-02565-5

Scenario ensembles are widely used in climate change research, while their opportunistic nature could lead to biased outcomes in following analysis. Focusing on relevance, quality and diversity, researchers develop a simple and transparent weighting framework to address these challenges.

Volcanoes and wildfires can inject millions of tons of gases and aerosol particles into the air, affecting temperatures on a global scale. But picking out the specific impact of individual events against a background of many contributing factors is like listening for one person’s voice from across a crowded concourse.

MIT scientists now have a way to quiet the noise and identify the specific signal of wildfires and volcanic eruptions, including their effects on Earth’s global atmospheric temperatures.

In a study appearing this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers report that they detected statistically significant changes in global atmospheric temperatures in response to three major natural events: the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, the Australian wildfires in 2019-2020, and the eruption of the underwater volcano Hunga Tonga in the South Pacific in 2022.

While the specifics of each event differed, all three events appeared to significantly affect temperatures in the stratosphere. The stratosphere lies above the troposphere, which is the lowest layer of the atmosphere, closest to the surface, where global warming has accelerated in recent years. In the new study, Pinatubo showed the classic pattern of stratospheric warming paired with tropospheric cooling. The Australian wildfires and the Hunga Tonga eruption also showed significant warming or cooling in the stratosphere, respectively, but they did not produce a robust, globally detectable tropospheric signal over the first two years following each event. This new understanding will help scientists further pin down the effect of human-related emissions on global temperature change.

“Understanding the climate responses to natural forcings is essential for us to interpret anthropogenic climate change,” says study author Yaowei Li, a former postdoc and currently a visiting scientist in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences (EAPS). “Unlike the global tropospheric and surface cooling caused by Pinatubo, our results also indicate that the Australian wildfires and Hunga Tonga eruption may not have played a role in the acceleration of global surface warming in recent years. So, there must be some other factors.”

The study’s co-authors include Susan Solomon, the Lee and Geraldine Martin Professor of Environmental Studies and Chemistry at MIT, along with Benjamin Santer of the University of East Anglia, David Thompson of the University of East Anglia and Colorado State University, and Qiang Fu of the University of Washington.

Extraordinary events

The past several years have set back-to-back records for global average surface temperatures. The World Meteorological Organization recently confirmed that the years 2023 to 2025 were the three warmest years on record, while the past 11 years have been the 11 warmest years ever recorded. The world is warming, due mainly to human activities that have emitted huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere over centuries.

In addition to greenhouse gases, the atmosphere has been on the receiving end of other large-scale emissions, including sulfur gases and water vapor from volcanic eruptions and smoke particles from wildfires. Li and his colleagues have wondered whether such natural events could have any global impact on temperatures, and whether such an effect would be detectable.

“These events are extraordinary and very unique in terms of the different materials they inject into different altitudes,” Li says. “So we asked the question: Do these events actually perturb the global temperature to a degree that could be identifiable from natural, meteorological noise, and could they contribute to some of the exceptional global surface warming we’ve seen in the last few years?”

In particular, the team looked for signals of global temperature change in response to three large-scale natural events. The Pinatubo eruption resulted in around 20 million tons of volcanic aerosols in the stratosphere, which was the largest volume ever recorded by modern satellite instruments. The Australian fires injected around 1 million tons of smoke particles into the upper troposphere and stratosphere. And the Hunga Tonga eruption produced the largest atmospheric explosion on satellite record, launching nearly 150 million tons of water vapor into the stratosphere.

If any natural event could measurably shift global temperatures, the team reasoned, it would be any of these three.

Natural signals

For their new study, the team took a signal-to-noise approach. They looked to minimize “noise” from other known influences on global temperatures in order to isolate the “signal,” such as a change in temperature associated specifically with one of the three natural events.

To do so, they looked first through satellite measurements taken by the Stratospheric Sounding Unit (SSU) and the Microwave and Advanced Microwave Sounding Units (MSU), which have been measuring global temperatures at different altitudes throughout the atmosphere since 1979. The team compiled SSU and MSU measurements from 1986 to the present day. From these measurements, the researchers could see long-term trends of steady tropospheric warming and stratospheric cooling. Those long-term trends are largely associated with anthropogenic greenhouse gases, which the team subtracted from the dataset.

What was left over was more of a level baseline, which still contained some confounding noise, in the form of natural variability. Global temperature changes can also be affected by phenomena such as El Niño and La Niña, which naturally warm and cool the Earth every few years. The sun also swings global temperatures on a roughly 11-year cycle. The team took this natural variability into account, and subtracted out the effects of these influences.

After minimizing such noise from their dataset, the team reasoned that whatever temperature changes remained could be more easily traced to the three large-scale natural events and quantified. And indeed, when they pinned the events to the temperature measurements, at the times that they occurred, they could plainly see how each event influenced temperatures around the world.

The team found that Pinatubo decreased global tropospheric temperatures by up to about 0.7 degree Celsius, for more than two years following the eruption. The volcanic sulfate aerosols essentially acted as many tiny reflectors, cooling the troposphere and surface by scattering sunlight back into space. At the same time, the aerosols, which remained in the stratosphere, also absorbed heat that was emitted from the surface, subsequently warming the stratosphere.

This finding agreed with many other studies of the event, which confirmed that the team’s approach is accurate. They applied the same method to the 2019-2020 Australian wildfires, and the 2022 underwater eruption — events where the influence on global temperatures is less clear.

For the Australian wildfires, they found that the smoke particles caused the global stratosphere to warm up, by up to about 0.77 degree Celsius, which persisted for about five months but did not produce a clear global tropospheric signal.

“In the end we found that the wildfire smoke caused a very strong warming in the stratosphere, because these materials are very different chemically from sulfate,” Li explains. “They are particles that are dark colored, meaning they are efficient at absorbing solar radiation. So, a relatively small amount of smoke particles can cause a dramatic warming.”

In the case of the Hunga Tonga, the underwater eruption triggered a global cooling effect in the middle-to-upper stratosphere, of up to about half a degree Celsius, lasting for several years.

“The Australian fires and the Hunga Tonga really packed a punch at stratospheric altitudes, and this study shows for the first time how to quantify how strong that punch was,” says Solomon. “I find their impact up high quite remarkable, but the ongoing issue is why the last several years have been so warm lower down, in the troposphere — ruling out those natural events points even more strongly at human influences.”

Good article on password managers that secretly have a backdoor.

New research shows that these claims aren’t true in all cases, particularly when account recovery is in place or password managers are set to share vaults or organize users into groups. The researchers reverse-engineered or closely analyzed Bitwarden, Dashlane, and LastPass and identified ways that someone with control over the server­—either administrative or the result of a compromise­—can, in fact, steal data and, in some cases, entire vaults. The researchers also devised other attacks that can weaken the encryption to the point that ciphertext can be converted to plaintext...