syndication

can-walls-of-oysters-protect-shores-against-hurricanes?-darpa-wants-to-know.

Can walls of oysters protect shores against hurricanes? Darpa wants to know.


Colonized artificial reef structures could absorb the power of storms.

picture of some shoreline

Credit: Kemter/Getty Images

On October 10, 2018, Tyndall Air Force Base on the Gulf of Mexico—a pillar of American air superiority—found itself under aerial attack. Hurricane Michael, first spotted as a Category 2 storm off the Florida coast, unexpectedly hulked up to a Category 5. Sustained winds of 155 miles per hour whipped into the base, flinging power poles, flipping F-22s, and totaling more than 200 buildings. The sole saving grace: Despite sitting on a peninsula, Tyndall avoided flood damage. Michael’s 9- to 14-foot storm surge swamped other parts of Florida. Tyndall’s main defense was luck.

That $5 billion disaster at Tyndall was just one of a mounting number of extreme-weather events that convinced the US Department of Defense that it needed new ideas to protect the 1,700 coastal bases it’s responsible for globally. As hurricanes Helene and Milton have just shown, beachfront residents face compounding threats from climate change, and the Pentagon is no exception. Rising oceans are chewing away the shore. Stronger storms are more capable of flooding land.

In response, Tyndall will later this month test a new way to protect shorelines from intensified waves and storm surges: a prototype artificial reef, designed by a team led by Rutgers University scientists. The 50-meter-wide array, made up of three chevron-shaped structures each weighing about 46,000 pounds, can take 70 percent of the oomph out of waves, according to tests. But this isn’t your grandaddy’s seawall. It’s specifically designed to be colonized by oysters, some of nature’s most effective wave-killers.

If researchers can optimize these creatures to work in tandem with new artificial structures placed at sea, they believe the resulting barriers can take 90 percent of the energy out of waves. David Bushek, who directs the Haskin Shellfish Research Laboratory at Rutgers, swears he’s not hoping for a megastorm to come and show what his team’s unit is made of. But he’s not not hoping for one. “Models are always imperfect. They’re always a replica of something,” he says. “They’re not the real thing.”

Playing defense Reefense

The project is one of three being developed under a $67.6 million program launched by the US government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or Darpa. Cheekily called Reefense, the initiative is the Pentagon’s effort to test if “hybrid” reefs, combining manmade structures with oysters or corals, can perform as well as a good ol’ seawall. Darpa chose three research teams, all led by US universities, in 2022. After two years of intensive research and development, their prototypes are starting to go into the water, with Rutgers’ first up.

Today, the Pentagon protects its coastal assets much as civilians do: by hardening them. Common approaches involve armoring the shore with retaining walls or arranging heavy objects, like rocks or concrete blocks, in long rows. But hardscape structures come with tradeoffs. They deflect rather than absorb wave energy, so protecting one’s own shoreline means exposing someone else’s. They’re also static: As sea levels rise and storms get stronger, it’s getting easier for water to surmount these structures. This wears them down faster and demands constant, expensive repairs.

In recent decades, a new idea has emerged: using nature as infrastructure. Restoring coastal habitats like marshes and mangroves, it turns out, helps hold off waves and storms. “Instead of armoring, you’re using nature’s natural capacity to absorb wave energy,” says Donna Marie Bilkovic, a professor at the Virginia Institute for Marine Science. Darpa is particularly interested in two creatures whose numbers have been decimated by humans but which are terrific wave-breakers when allowed to thrive: oysters and corals.

Oysters are effective wave-killers because of how they grow. The bivalves pile onto each other in large, sturdy mounds. The resulting structure, unlike a smooth seawall, is replete with nooks, crannies, and convolutions. When a wave strikes, its energy gets diffused into these gaps, and further spent on the jagged, complex surfaces of the oysters. Also unlike a seawall, an oyster wall can grow. Oysters have been shown to be capable of building vertically at a rate that matches sea-level rise—which suggests they’ll retain some protective value against higher tides and stronger storms.

Today hundreds of human-tended oyster reefs, particularly on America’s Atlantic coast, use these principles to protect the shore. They take diverse approaches; some look much like natural reefs, while others have an artificial component. Some cultivate oysters for food, with coastal protection a nice co-benefit; others are built specifically to preserve shorelines. What’s missing amid all this experimentation, says Bilkovic, is systematic performance data—the kind that could validate which approaches are most effective and cost-effective. “Right now the innovation is outpacing the science,” she says. “We need to have some type of systematic monitoring of projects, so we can better understand where the techniques work the best. There just isn’t funding, frankly.”

Hybrid deployments

Rather than wait for the data needed to engineer the perfect reef, Darpa wants to rapidly innovate them through a burst of R&D. Reefense has given awardees five years to deploy hybrid reefs that take up to 90 percent of the energy out of waves, without costing significantly more than traditional solutions. The manmade component should block waves immediately. But it should be quickly enhanced by organisms that build, in months or years, a living structure that would take nature decades.

The Rutgers team has built its prototype out of 788 interlocked concrete modules, each 2 feet wide and ranging in height from 1 to 2 feet tall. They have a scalloped appearance, with shelves jutting in all directions. Internally, all these shelves are connected by holes.

A Darpa-funded team will install sea barriers, made of hundreds of concrete modules, near a Florida military base. The scalloped shape should not only dissipate wave energy but invite oysters to build their own structures.

What this means is that when a wave strikes this structure, it smashes into the internal geometry, swirls around, and exits with less energy. This effect alone weakens the wave by 70 percent, according to the US Army Corps of Engineers, which tested a scale model in a wave simulator in Mississippi. But the effect should only improve as oysters colonize the structure. Bushek and his team have tried to design the shelves with the right hardness, texture, and shading to entice them.

But the reef’s value would be diminished if, say, disease were to wipe the mollusks out. This is why Darpa has tasked Rutgers with also engineering oysters resistant to dermo, a protozoan that’s dogged Atlantic oysters for decades. Darpa prohibited them using genetic-modification techniques. But thanks to recent advances in genomics, the Rutgers team can rapidly identify individual oysters with disease-resistant traits. It exposes these oysters to dermo in a lab, and crossbreeds the survivors, producing hardier mollusks. Traditionally it takes about three years to breed a generation of oysters for better disease resistance; Bushek says his team has done it in one.

The tropics are a different story

Oysters may suit the DoD’s needs in temperate waters, but for bases in tropical climates, it’s coral that builds the best seawalls. Hawaii, for instance, enjoys the protection of “fringing” coral reefs that extend offshore for hundreds of yards in a gentle slope along the seabed. The colossal, complex, and porous character of this surface exhausts wave energy over long distances, says Ben Jones, an oceanographer for the Applied Research Laboratory at the University of Hawaii—and head of the university’s Reefense project. He said it’s not unusual to see ocean swells of 6 to 8 feet way offshore, while the water at the seashore laps gently.

A Marine base in Hawaii will test out a new approach to coastal protection inspired by local coral reefs: A forward barrier will take the first blows of the waves, and a scattering of pyramids will further weaken waves before they get to shore.

Inspired by this effect, Jones and a team of researchers are designing an array that they’ll deploy near a US Marine Corps base in Oahu whose shoreline is rapidly receding. While the final design isn’t set yet, the broad strokes are: It will feature two 50-meter-wide barriers laid in rows, backed by 20 pyramid-like obstacles. All of these are hollow, thin-walled structures with sloping profiles and lots of big holes. Waves that crash into them will lose energy by crawling up the sides, but two design aspects of the structure—the width of the holes and the thinness of the walls—will generate turbulence in the water, causing it to spin off more energy as heat.

The manmade structures in Hawaii will be studded with concrete domes meant to encourage coral colonization. Though at grave risk from global warming, coral reefs are thought to provide coastal-protection benefits worth billions of dollars.

In the team’s full vision, the units are bolstered by about a thousand small coral colonies. Jones’ group plans to cover the structures with concrete modules that are about 20 inches in diameter. These have grooves and crevices that offer perfect shelters for coral larvae. The team will initially implant them with lab-bred coral. But they’re also experimenting with enticements, like light and sound, that help attract coral larvae from the wild—the better to build a wall that nature, not the Pentagon, will tend.

A third Reefense team, led by scientists at the University of Miami, takes its inspiration from a different sort of coral. Its design has a three-tiered structure. The foundation is made of long, hexagonal logs punctured with large holes; atop it is a dense layer with smaller holes—“imagine a sponge made of concrete,” says Andrew Baker, director of the university’s Coral Reef Futures Lab and the Reefense team lead.

The team thinks these artificial components will soak up plenty of wave energy—but it’s a crest of elkhorn coral at the top that will finish the job. Native to Florida, the Bahamas, and the Caribbean, elkhorn like to build dense reefs in shallow-water areas with high-intensity waves. They don’t mind getting whacked by water because it helps them harvest food; this whacking keeps wave energy from getting to shore.

Disease has ravaged Florida’s elkhorn populations in recent decades, and now ocean heat waves are dealing further damage. But their critical condition has also motivated policymakers to pursue options to save this iconic state species—including Baker’s, which is to develop an elkhorn more rugged against disease, higher temperatures, and nastier waves. Under Reefense, Baker says, his lab has developed elkhorn with 1.5° to 2° Celsius more heat tolerance than their ancestors. They also claim to have boosted the heat thresholds of symbiotic algae—an existentially important occupant of any healthy reef—and cross-bred local elkhorn with those from Honduras, where reefs have mysteriously withstood scorching waters.

An unexpected permitting issue, though, will force the Miami team to exit Reefense in 2025, without building the test unit it hoped to deploy near a Florida naval base. The federal permitting authority wanted a pot of money set aside to uninstall the structure if needed; Darpa felt it couldn’t do that in a timely way, according to Baker. (Darpa told WIRED every Reefense project has unique permitting challenges, so the Miami team’s fate doesn’t necessarily speak to anything broader. Representatives for the other two Reefense projects said Baker’s issue hasn’t come up for them.)

Though his team’s work with Reefense is coming to a premature end, Baker says, he’s confident their innovations will get deployed elsewhere. He’s been working with Key Biscayne, an island village near Miami whose shorelines have been chewed up by storms. Roland Samimy, the village’s chief resilience and sustainability officer, says they spend millions of dollars every few years importing sand for their rapidly receding beaches. He’s eager to see if a hybrid structure, like the University of Miami design, could offer protection at far lower cost. “People are realizing their manmade structures aren’t as resilient as nature is,” he says.

Not just Darpa

By no means is Darpa the only one experimenting in these areas. Around the world, there are efforts tackling various pieces of the puzzle, like breeding coral for greater heat resistance, or combining coral and oysters with artificial reefs, or designing low-carbon concrete that makes building these structures less environmentally damaging. Bilkovic, of the Virginia Institute for Marine Science, says Reefense will be a success if it demonstrates better ways of doing things than the prevailing methods—and has the data to back this up. “I’m looking forward to seeing what their findings are,” she says. “They’re systematically assessing the effectiveness of the project. Those lessons learned can be translated to other areas, and if the techniques are effective and work well, they can easily be translated to other regions.”

As for Darpa, though the Reefense prototypes are just starting to go in the water, the work is just beginning. All of these first-generation units will be scrutinized—both by the research teams and independent government auditors—to see whether their real-world performance matches what was in the models. Reefense is scheduled to conclude with a final report to the DoD in 2027. It won’t have a “winner” per se; as the Pentagon has bases around the world, it’s likely these three projects will all produce learnings that are relevant elsewhere.

Although their client has the largest military budget in the world, the three Reefense teams have been asked to keep an eye on the economics. Darpa has asked that project costs “not greatly exceed” those of conventional solutions, and tasked government monitors with checking the teams’ math. Catherine Campbell, Reefense’s program manager at Darpa, says affordability doesn’t just make it more likely the Pentagon will employ the technology—but that civilians can, too.

“This isn’t something bespoke for the military… we need to be in line with those kinds of cost metrics [in the civilian sector],” Campbell said in an email. “And that gives it potential for commercialization.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Photo of WIRED

Wired.com is your essential daily guide to what’s next, delivering the most original and complete take you’ll find anywhere on innovation’s impact on technology, science, business and culture.

Can walls of oysters protect shores against hurricanes? Darpa wants to know. Read More »

why-a-diabetes-drug-fell-short-of-anticancer-hopes

Why a diabetes drug fell short of anticancer hopes


Studies suggested it could treat cancer, but the clinical trials were a bust.

Multi-pipettes

Pamela Goodwin has received hundreds of emails from patients asking if they should take a cheap, readily available drug, metformin, to treat their cancer.

It’s a fair question: Metformin, commonly used to treat diabetes, has been investigated for treating a range of cancer types in thousands of studies on laboratory cells, animals, and people. But Goodwin, an epidemiologist and medical oncologist treating breast cancer at the University of Toronto’s Mount Sinai Hospital, advises against it. No gold-standard trials have proved that metformin helps treat breast cancer—and her recent research suggests it doesn’t.

Metformin’s development was inspired by centuries of use of French lilac, or goat’s rue (Galega officinalis), for diabetes-like symptoms. In 1918, researchers discovered that a compound from the herb lowers blood sugar. Metformin, a chemical relative of that compound, has been a top type 2 diabetes treatment in the United States since it was approved in 1994. It’s cheap—less than a dollar per dose—and readily available, with few side effects. Today, more than 150 million people worldwide take the stuff.

Illustration of French lilac plant.

The French lilac, Galega officinalis, has been used medicinally since medieval times, including for symptoms associated with diabetes. Investigations of the plant’s chemical galegine led to the development of metformin, a related molecule synthesized in the lab. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Metformin has a variety of effects, such as improving immune function and the body’s responses to insulin, which in turn regulates blood sugar. It can also slow growth of cancer cells in the lab. Many of these benefits seem to stem from metformin’s action in the cell’s powerhouses, the mitochondria, where it slows the production of energy and limits the generation of damaging chemicals called free radicals.

Researchers have considered metformin for treating a plethora of conditions, from glaucoma to polycystic ovary syndrome to pimples. “It really has a reputation of being a potential wonder drug,” says Michael Pollak, an oncologist and researcher at McGill University in Montreal. “There’s still a lot of work to be done on metformin.” (Pollak consults for biotechnology companies interested in metformin analogs as medicines.)

But the latest research has convinced Pollak and some others that treatment of cancers should be taken off the list.

More studies, but no proof

One of the first hints linking metformin to anticancer effects came in a short note in the British Medical Journal in 2005. Researchers analyzed medical records of almost 12,000 people from the Tayside region of Scotland who were newly diagnosed with diabetes between 1993 and 2001. Of those, more than 900 went on to develop cancer. Interestingly, those who’d taken metformin at some point during the study period were 23 percent less likely to have received a later cancer diagnosis.

This finding fueled further research on people with diabetes taking metformin and the risk for breast cancer, liver cancer, ovarian and endometrial cancer, and other types. The authors of a 2013 analysis, covering more than 1 million patients in 41 observational studies like the original one, concluded that metformin “might be associated with a significant reduction in the risk of cancer.” But such associations are not proof.

Researchers went on to explore the link in studies with cells in dishes and in lab animals, finding that metformin slowed growth of blood, breast, endometrial, lung, liver, stomach, and thyroid cancer cells. It also seemed to make cancer cells extra sensitive to chemotherapy drugs. In one mouse study, scientists grafted human breast, prostate, or lung cancer cells into the animals and treated them with either standard chemotherapy drugs, metformin, or a combination of both. The combination worked best, preventing tumor growth and prolonging relapse.

These findings made sense to researchers. Metformin treats metabolic problems in diabetes, and cancer has also been linked to metabolic issues such as obesity. Even before the 2005 British Medical Journal study, Goodwin had noticed that breast cancer patients with high insulin did worse than those with normal insulin levels.

That logic, plus the promising data, led scientists to conduct a number of randomized controlled trials—the gold-standard experiment in medicine. Researchers would enroll people with cancer and split them into two groups. One group would get standard cancer therapy plus metformin; the other group would get standard therapy plus a placebo, a pill containing no medication.

And metformin flopped, big time. While a number of studies are ongoing, trials for two types of cancer recently reported no benefit overall from metformin. In June 2024, at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting in Chicago, researchers reported a Canadian trial with 407 men with low-risk prostate cancer. The enrollees had been diagnosed within six months before starting the trial and had decided to monitor their cancer without starting immediate treatment. Half took metformin and half took a placebo. After biopsies at 18 and 36 months to test whether their disease had progressed, there was no difference between the two groups.

A larger British and Swiss trial including nearly 1,900 patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed prostate cancer that had spread to other body parts was reported at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress in Barcelona, Spain, in September. This trial also found that metformin plus standard treatment, compared to standard treatment alone, did not improve overall prostate cancer survival in the study population.

A multinational study of breast cancer helmed by Goodwin also led to disappointment. The researchers enrolled more than 3,600 patients between 2010 and 2013; these patients had been diagnosed about a year before enrollment and had already undergone chemotherapy and surgery. In addition to standard cancer treatment, half received metformin and half received a placebo.

By 2016, it was clear that metformin wasn’t doing anything to enhance survival for about 1,100 participants with a particular cancer subtype. When the study wrapped in 2020, the researchers analyzed the rest of the patients, counting how many were alive and free of breast or any other form of cancer. Metformin made no difference in those results, or to survival overall, the team reported in 2022.

Fatal flaws in the research

In retrospect, researchers think they know why earlier studies oversold metformin’s potential. Many of the studies that examined medical records had a crucial flaw, says Samy Suissa, a pharmacoepidemiologist at McGill.

Here’s what happens: Researchers sift through old medical records to see if someone ever took metformin. Then they compare cancer rates among people who took the drug at any point to those who never took it. But you have to be alive to take metformin. Anyone who died, of cancer or other causes, before having a chance at a metformin prescription is left out of the calculations. This skews the results; it’s called the “immortal time bias.” It makes any drug, metformin or otherwise, look like it helps patients to survive because it can only be taken by people who are alive, says Suissa.

Plus, scientists are more likely to publish studies that show metformin is promising than ones where it makes no difference, skewing the scientific literature.

As for those studies of cells in dishes and of lab animals, many experiments used much higher doses of metformin than are used in people. Too much metformin risks a buildup of lactate, a byproduct of low oxygen metabolism that acidifies the blood and can be fatal.

Researchers still suspect metformin might treat specific subgroups of cancer. For example, the authors of the prostate cancer trial presented in Barcelona suggested that metformin might help patients whose cancer has spread to other tissues or multiple sites in their bones. And Goodwin saw a hint in her trial that it might help women whose cancers contain a certain version of a cell-growth gene called ERBB2. But it would require another trial, focused on women with that particular cancer, to prove it.

And there are now better treatments for those patients than there were more than a decade ago when Goodwin started her study, reducing the opportunity to test metformin. Goodwin doesn’t currently have the funding to follow up on this theory.

It may also be that the clinical trials recruited patients with cancers that were too far along. “I always thought we were asking too much of metformin,” says Victoria Bae-Jump, a gynecological oncologist at the University of North Carolina Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center in Chapel Hill. “Maybe it just needs to be earlier in the pathway of growth.” Bae-Jump is now testing metformin in women who have early-stage endometrial cancer or a precursor to it.

Others are investigating metformin for people who have precancerous lesions in their mouths. “The idea would be to keep them from progressing, or reverse the tissues to be more normal,” says Frank Ondrey, a head and neck cancer surgeon at the Masonic Cancer Center of the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. In a small, uncontrolled study of 23 people, metformin halved lesion size in four of them. Ondrey is involved in two ongoing studies, one a randomized, controlled trial, to further test metformin in people with precancerous lesions; these should yield results within a few years.

Subdued expectations

Metformin is also being tested for other conditions such as dementia and a genetic disorder called fragile X syndrome. And perhaps the ultimate potential use for metformin is to slow aging itself. “I think it’s much easier to treat aging and prevent cancer than to treat cancer,” says Nir Barzilai, a geroscientist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York and president of the nonprofit Academy for Health & Lifespan Research. Through its enhancement of insulin action and metabolism plus its minimization of free radical production, metformin influences all the key hallmarks of aging, such as problems with DNA, mitochondria and stem cells, says Barzilai.

He and colleagues are gathering funds for a randomized, controlled trial of metformin in 3,000 people age 65 through 79 who are showing signs of age-related disease already. The trial will test whether fewer people taking metformin die over six years. Barzilai, who is 68, says he is confident in metformin’s anti-aging ability and already takes the drug himself.

Others, mindful of what happened with cancer, are more circumspect. Pollak says that many of the studies in other areas of medicine are too small to prove metformin works, and Suissa notes that some of the studies finding benefits in populations taking metformin, including for longevity, have the same problems the oh-so-promising early cancer research did.

In short, Suissa says, “Don’t believe everything you hear.”

This story originally appeared in Knowable Magazine.

Photo of Knowable Magazine

Knowable Magazine explores the real-world significance of scholarly work through a journalistic lens.

Why a diabetes drug fell short of anticancer hopes Read More »

greening-of-antartica-shows-how-climate-change-affects-the-frozen-continent

Greening of Antartica shows how climate change affects the frozen continent


Plant growth is accelerating on the Antarctic Peninsula and nearby islands.

Moss and rocks cover the ground on Robert Island in Antarctica. Photographer: Isadora Romero/Bloomberg

Moss and rocks cover the ground on Robert Island in Antarctica. Photographer: Isadora Romero/Bloomberg Credit: Bloomberg via Getty

Moss and rocks cover the ground on Robert Island in Antarctica. Photographer: Isadora Romero/Bloomberg Credit: Bloomberg via Getty

When satellites first started peering down on the craggy, glaciated Antarctic Peninsula about 40 years ago, they saw only a few tiny patches of vegetation covering a total of about 8,000 square feet—less than a football field.

But since then, the Antarctic Peninsula has warmed rapidly, and a new study shows that mosses, along with some lichen, liverworts and associated algae, have colonized more than 4.6 square miles, an area nearly four times the size of New York’s Central Park.

The findings, published Friday in Nature Geoscience, based on a meticulous analysis of Landsat images from 1986 to 2021, show that the greening trend is distinct from natural variability and that it has accelerated by 30 percent since 2016, fast enough to cover nearly 75 football fields per year.

Greening at the opposite end of the planet, in the Arctic, has been widely studied and reported, said co-author Thomas Roland, a paleoecologist with the University of Exeter who collects and analyzes mud samples to study environmental and ecological change. “But the idea,” he said, “that any part of Antarctica could, in any way, be green is something that still really jars a lot of people.”

illustration of Antarctica and satellite photos

Credit: Inside Climate News

Credit: Inside Climate News

As the planet heats up, “even the coldest regions on Earth that we expect and understand to be white and black with snow, ice, and rock are starting to become greener as the planet responds to climate change,” he said.

The tenfold increase in vegetation cover since 1986 “is not huge in the global scheme of things,” Roland added, but the accelerating rate of change and the potential ecological effects are significant. “That’s the real story here,” he said. “The landscape is going to be altered partially because the existing vegetation is expanding, but it could also be altered in the future with new vegetation coming in.”

In the Arctic, vegetation is expanding on a scale that affects the albedo, or the overall reflectivity of the region, which determines the proportion of the sun’s heat energy that is absorbed by the Earth’s surface as opposed to being bounced away from the planet. But the spread of greenery has not yet changed the albedo of Antarctica on a meaningful scale because the vegetated areas are still too small to have a regional impact, said co-author Olly Bartlett, a University of Hertfordshire researcher who specializes in using satellite data to map environmental change.

“The real significance is about the ecological shift on the exposed land, the land that’s ice-free, creating an area suitable for more advanced plant life or invasive species to get a foothold,” he said.

Bartlett said Google Earth Engine enabled the scientists to process a massive amount of data from the Landsat images to meet a high standard of verification of plant growth. As a result, he added, the changes they reported may actually be conservative.

“It’s becoming easier for life to live there,” he said. “These rates of change we’re seeing made us think that perhaps we’ve captured the start of a more dramatic transformation.”

In the areas they studied, changes to the albedo could have a small local effect, Roland said, as more land free of reflective ice “can feed into a positive feedback loop that creates conditions that are more favorable for vegetation expansion as well.”

Antarctic forests at similar CO2 levels

Other research, including fossil studies, suggests that beech trees grew on Antarctica as recently as 2.5 million years ago, when carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere were similar to today, another indicator of how unchecked greenhouse gas emissions can rapidly warm Earth’s climate.

Currently, there are only two species of flowering plants native to the Antarctic Peninsula, Antarctic hair grass, and Antarctic pearlwort. “But with a few new grass seeds here and there, or a few spores, and all of a sudden, you’ve got a very different ecosystem,” he said.

And it’s not just plants, he added. “Increasingly, we’re seeing evidence that non-native insect life is taking hold in Antarctica. And that can dramatically change things as well.”

The study shows how climate warming will shake up Antarctic ecosystems, said conservation scientist Jasmine Lee, a research fellow with the British Antarctic Survey who was not involved in the new study.

“It is clear that bank-forming mosses are expanding their range with warmer and wetter conditions, which is likely facilitating similar expansions for some of the invertebrate communities that rely on them for habitat,” she said. “At the same time, some specialist species, such as the more dry-loving mosses and invertebrates, might decline.”

She said the new study is valuable because it provides data across a broad region showing that Antarctic ecosystems are already rapidly altering and will continue to do so as climate change progresses.

“We focus a lot on how climate change is melting ice sheets and changing sea ice,” she said. “It’s good to also highlight that the terrestrial ecosystems are being impacted.”

The study shows climate impacts growing in “regions previously thought nearly immune to the accelerated warming we’re seeing today,” said climate policy expert Pam Pearson, director of the International Cryosphere Climate Initiative.

“It’s as important a signal as the loss of Antarctic sea ice over the past several years,” she said.

The new study identified vegetative changes by comparing the Landsat images at a resolution of 300-square-feet per pixel, detailed enough to accurately map vegetative growth, but it didn’t identify specific climate change factors that might be driving the expansion of plant life.

But other recent studies have documented Antarctic changes that could spur plant growth, including how some regions are affected by warm winds and by increasing amounts of rain from atmospheric rivers, as well as by declining sea ice that leads adjacent land areas to warm, all signs of rapid change in Antarctica.

Roland said their new study was in part spurred by previous research showing how fast patches of Antarctic moss were growing vertically and how microbial activity in tiny patches of soil was also accelerating.

“We’d taken these sediment cores, and done all sorts of analysis, including radiocarbon dating … showing the growth in the plants we’d sampled increasing dramatically,” he said.

Those measurements confirmed that the plants are sensitive to climate change, and as a next step, researchers wanted to know “if the plants are growing sideways at the same dramatic rate,” he said. “It’s one thing for plants to be growing upwards very fast. If they’re growing outwards, then you know you’re starting to see massive changes and massive increases in vegetation cover across the peninsula.”

With the study documenting significant horizontal expansion of vegetation, the researchers are now studying how recently deglaciated areas were first colonized by plants. About 90 percent of the glaciers on the Antarctic Peninsula have been shrinking for the past 75 years, Roland said.

“That’s just creating more and more land for this potentially rapid vegetation response,” he said. “So like Olly says, one of the things we can’t rule out is that this really does increase quite dramatically over the next few decades. Our findings raise serious concerns about the environmental future of the Antarctic Peninsula and of the continent as a whole.”

This story originally appeared on Inside Climate News.

Photo of Inside Climate News

Greening of Antartica shows how climate change affects the frozen continent Read More »

neo-nazis-head-to-encrypted-simplex-chat-app,-bail-on-telegram

Neo-Nazis head to encrypted SimpleX Chat app, bail on Telegram

“SimpleX, at its core, is designed to be truly distributed with no central server. This allows for enormous scalability at low cost, and also makes it virtually impossible to snoop on the network graph,” Poberezkin wrote in a company blog post published in 2022.

SimpleX’s policies expressly prohibit “sending illegal communications” and outline how SimpleX will remove such content if it is discovered. Much of the content that these terrorist groups have shared on Telegram—and are already resharing on SimpleX—has been deemed illegal in the UK, Canada, and Europe.

Argentino wrote in his analysis that discussion about moving from Telegram to platforms with better security measures began in June, with discussion of SimpleX as an option taking place in July among a number of extremist groups. Though it wasn’t until September, and the Terrorgram arrests, that the decision was made to migrate to SimpleX, the groups are already establishing themselves on the new platform.

“The groups that have migrated are already populating the platform with legacy material such as Terrorgram manuals and are actively recruiting propagandists, hackers, and graphic designers, among other desired personnel,” the ISD researchers wrote.

However, there are some downsides to the additional security provided by SimpleX, such as the fact that it is not as easy for these groups to network and therefore grow, and disseminating propaganda faces similar restrictions.

“While there is newfound enthusiasm over the migration, it remains unclear if the platform will become a central organizing hub,” ISD researchers wrote.

And Poberezkin believes that the current limitations of his technology will mean these groups will eventually abandon SimpleX.

“SimpleX is a communication network rather than a service or a platform where users can host their own servers, like in OpenWeb, so we were not aware that extremists have been using it,” says Poberezkin. “We never designed groups to be usable for more than 50 users and we’ve been really surprised to see them growing to the current sizes despite limited usability and performance. We do not think it is technically possible to create a social network of a meaningful size in the SimpleX network.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Neo-Nazis head to encrypted SimpleX Chat app, bail on Telegram Read More »

why-trolls,-extremists,-and-others-spread-conspiracy-theories-they-don’t-believe

Why trolls, extremists, and others spread conspiracy theories they don’t believe


Some just want to promote conflict, cause chaos, or even just get attention.

Picture of a person using an old Mac with a paper bag over his head. The bag has the face of a troll drawn on it.

There has been a lot of research on the types of people who believe conspiracy theories, and their reasons for doing so. But there’s a wrinkle: My colleagues and I have found that there are a number of people sharing conspiracies online who don’t believe their own content.

They are opportunists. These people share conspiracy theories to promote conflict, cause chaos, recruit and radicalize potential followers, make money, harass, or even just to get attention.

There are several types of this sort of conspiracy-spreader trying to influence you.

Coaxing conspiracists—the extremists

In our chapter of a new book on extremism and conspiracies, my colleagues and I discuss evidence that certain extremist groups intentionally use conspiracy theories to entice adherents. They are looking for a so-called “gateway conspiracy” that will lure someone into talking to them, and then be vulnerable to radicalization. They try out multiple conspiracies to see what sticks.

Research shows that people with positive feelings for extremist groups are significantly more likely to knowingly share false content online. For instance, the disinformation-monitoring company Blackbird.AI tracked over 119 million COVID-19 conspiracy posts from May 2020, when activists were protesting pandemic restrictions and lockdowns in the United States. Of these, over 32 million tweets were identified as high on their manipulation index. Those posted by various extremist groups were particularly likely to carry markers of insincerity. For instance, one group, the Boogaloo Bois, generated over 610,000 tweets, of which 58 percent were intent on incitement and radicalization.

You can also just take the word of the extremists themselves. When the Boogaloo Bois militia group showed up at the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, for example, members stated they didn’t actually endorse the stolen election conspiracy but were there to “mess with the federal government.” Aron McKillips, a Boogaloo member arrested in 2022 as part of an FBI sting, is another example of an opportunistic conspiracist. In his own words: “I don’t believe in anything. I’m only here for the violence.”

Combative conspiracists—the disinformants

Governments love conspiracy theories. The classic example of this is the 1903 document known as the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” in which Russia constructed an enduring myth about Jewish plans for world domination. More recently, China used artificial intelligence to construct a fake conspiracy theory about the August 2023 Maui wildfire.

Often the behavior of the conspiracists gives them away. Years later, Russia eventually confessed to lying about AIDS in the 1980s. But even before admitting to the campaign, its agents had forged documents to support the conspiracy. Forgeries aren’t created by accident. They knew they were lying.

As for other conspiracies it hawks, Russia is famous for taking both sides in any contentious issue, spreading lies online to foment conflict and polarization. People who actually believe in a conspiracy tend to stick to a side. Meanwhile, Russians knowingly deploy what one analyst has called a “fire hose of falsehoods.”

Likewise, while Chinese officials were spreading conspiracies about American roots of the coronavirus in 2020, China’s National Health Commission was circulating internal reports tracing the source to a pangolin.

Chaos conspiracists—the trolls

In general, research has found that individuals with what scholars call a high “need for chaos” are more likely to indiscriminately share conspiracies, regardless of belief. These are the everyday trolls who share false content for a variety of reasons, none of which are benevolent. Dark personalities and dark motives are prevalent.

For instance, in the wake of the first assassination attempt on Donald Trump, a false accusation arose online about the identity of the shooter and his motivations. The person who first posted this claim knew he was making up a name and stealing a photo. The intent was apparently to harass the Italian sports blogger whose photo was stolen. This fake conspiracy was seen over 300,000 times on the social platform X and picked up by multiple other conspiracists eager to fill the information gap about the assassination attempt.

Commercial conspiracists—the profiteers

Often when I encounter a conspiracy theory I ask: “What does the sharer have to gain? Are they telling me this because they have an evidence-backed concern, or are they trying to sell me something?”

When researchers tracked down the 12 people primarily responsible for the vast majority of anti-vaccine conspiracies online, most of them had a financial investment in perpetuating these misleading narratives.

Some people who fall into this category might truly believe their conspiracy, but their first priority is finding a way to make money from it. For instance, conspiracist Alex Jones bragged that his fans would “buy anything.” Fox News and its on-air personality Tucker Carlson publicized lies about voter fraud in the 2020 election to keep viewers engaged, while behind-the-scenes communications revealed they did not endorse what they espoused.

Profit doesn’t just mean money. People can also profit from spreading conspiracies if it garners them influence or followers, or protects their reputation. Even social media companies are reluctant to combat conspiracies because they know they attract more clicks.

Common conspiracists—the attention-getters

You don’t have to be a profiteer to like some attention. Plenty of regular people share content where they doubt the veracity or know it is false.

These posts are common: Friends, family, and acquaintances share the latest conspiracy theory with “could this be true?” queries or “seems close enough to the truth” taglines. Their accompanying comments show that sharers are, at minimum, unsure about the truthfulness of the content, but they share nonetheless. Many share without even reading past a headline. Still others, approximately 7 percent to 20 percent of social media users, share despite knowing the content is false. Why?

Some claim to be sharing to inform people “just in case” it is true. But this sort of “sound the alarm” reason actually isn’t that common.

Often, folks are just looking for attention or other personal benefit. They don’t want to miss out on a hot-topic conversation. They want the likes and shares. They want to “stir the pot.” Or they just like the message and want to signal to others that they share a common belief system.

For frequent sharers, it just becomes a habit.

The dangers of spreading lies

Over time, the opportunists may end up convincing themselves. After all, they will eventually have to come to terms with why they are engaging in unethical and deceptive, if not destructive, behavior. They may have a rationale for why lying is good. Or they may convince themselves that they aren’t lying by claiming they thought the conspiracy was true all along.

It’s important to be cautious and not believe everything you read. These opportunists don’t even believe everything they write—and share. But they want you to. So be aware that the next time you share an unfounded conspiracy theory, online or offline, you could be helping an opportunist. They don’t buy it, so neither should you. Be aware before you share. Don’t be what these opportunists derogatorily refer to as “a useful idiot.”

H. Colleen Sinclair is Associate Research Professor of Social Psychology at Louisiana State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Photo of The Conversation

The Conversation is an independent source of news and views, sourced from the academic and research community. Our team of editors work with these experts to share their knowledge with the wider public. Our aim is to allow for better understanding of current affairs and complex issues, and hopefully improve the quality of public discourse on them.

Why trolls, extremists, and others spread conspiracy theories they don’t believe Read More »

toxic-chemicals-from-ohio-train-derailment-lingered-in-buildings-for-months

Toxic chemicals from Ohio train derailment lingered in buildings for months

This video screenshot released by the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) shows the site of a derailed freight train in East Palestine, Ohio.

Enlarge / This video screenshot released by the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) shows the site of a derailed freight train in East Palestine, Ohio.

On February 3, 2023, a train carrying chemicals jumped the tracks in East Palestine, Ohio, rupturing railcars filled with hazardous materials and fueling chemical fires at the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains.

The disaster drew global attention as the governors of Ohio and Pennsylvania urged evacuations for a mile around the site. Flames and smoke billowed from burning chemicals, and an acrid odor radiated from the derailment area as chemicals entered the air and spilled into a nearby creek.

Three days later, at the urging of the rail company Norfolk Southern, about 1 million pounds of vinyl chloride, a chemical that can be toxic to humans at high doses, was released from the damaged train cars and set aflame.

Federal investigators later concluded that the open burn and the black mushroom cloud it produced were unnecessary, but it was too late. Railcar chemicals spread into Ohio and Pennsylvania.

As environmental engineers, I and my colleagues are often asked to assist with public health decisions after disasters by government agencies and communities. After the evacuation order was lifted, community members asked for help.

In a new study, we describe the contamination we found, along with problems with the response and cleanup that, in some cases, increased the chances that people would be exposed to hazardous chemicals. It offers important lessons to better protect communities in the future.

How chemicals get into homes and water

When large amounts of chemicals are released into the environment, the air can become toxic. Chemicals can also wash into waterways and seep into the ground, contaminating groundwater and wells. Some chemicals can travel below ground into nearby buildings and make the indoor air unsafe.

A computer model shows how chemicals from the train may have spread, given wind patterns. The star on the Ohio-Pennsylvania line is the site of the derailment.

Enlarge / A computer model shows how chemicals from the train may have spread, given wind patterns. The star on the Ohio-Pennsylvania line is the site of the derailment.

Air pollution can find its way into buildings through cracks, windows, doors, and other portals. Once inside, the chemicals can penetrate home items like carpets, drapes, furniture, counters, and clothing. When the air is stirred up, those chemicals can be released again.

Evacuation order lifted, but buildings were contaminated

Three weeks after the derailment, we began investigating the safety of the area near 17 buildings in Ohio and Pennsylvania. The highest concentration of air pollution occurred in the 1-mile evacuation zone and a shelter-in-place band another mile beyond that. But the chemical plume also traveled outside these areas.

In and outside East Palestine, evidence indicated that chemicals from the railcars had entered buildings. Many residents complained about headaches, rashes, and other health symptoms after reentering the buildings.

At one building 0.2 miles away from the derailment site, the indoor air was still contaminated more than four months later.

Nine days after the derailment, sophisticated air testing by a business owner showed the building’s indoor air was contaminated with butyl acrylate and other chemicals carried by the railcars. Butyl acrylate was found above the two-week exposure level, a level at which measures should be taken to protect human health.

When rail company contractors visited the building 11 days after the wreck, their team left after just 10 minutes. They reported an “overwhelming/unpleasent odor” even though their government-approved handheld air pollution detectors detected no chemicals. This building was located directly above Sulphur Run creek, which had been heavily contaminated by the spill. Chemicals likely entered from the initial smoke plumes and also rose from the creek into the building.

Our tests weeks later revealed that railcar chemicals had even penetrated the business’s silicone wristband products on its shelves. We also detected several other chemicals that may have been associated with the spill.

Homes and businesses were mere feet from the contaminated waterways in East Palestine.

Enlarge / Homes and businesses were mere feet from the contaminated waterways in East Palestine.

Weeks after the derailment, government officials discovered that air in the East Palestine Municipal Building, about 0.7 miles away from the derailment site, was also contaminated. Airborne chemicals had entered that building through an open drain pipe from Sulphur Run.

More than a month after the evacuation order was lifted, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged that multiple buildings in East Palestine were being contaminated as contractors cleaned contaminated culverts under and alongside buildings. Chemicals were entering the buildings.

Toxic chemicals from Ohio train derailment lingered in buildings for months Read More »

illinois-city-plans-to-source-its-future-drinking-water-from-lake-michigan

Illinois city plans to source its future drinking water from Lake Michigan

The Great Lakes Compact —

As aquifers dry up, some Midwest communities are looking to the region’s natural resources.

Waves roll ashore along Lake Michigan in Whiting, Indiana.

Enlarge / Waves roll ashore along Lake Michigan in Whiting, Indiana.

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. It is republished with permission. Sign up for their newsletter here

The aquifer from which Joliet, Illinois, sources its drinking water is likely going to run too dry to support the city by 2030—a problem more and more communities are facing as the climate changes and groundwater declines. So Joliet eyed a huge water source 30 miles to the northeast: Lake Michigan.

It’s the second-largest of the Great Lakes, which together provide drinking water to about 10 percent of the US population, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office for Coastal Management.

Soon, Joliet residents will join them. After years of deliberation, their city government decided last year to replace the aquifer by piping it in from Lake Michigan, buying it from the city of Chicago.

Project construction will start in 2025 with the intent to have water flowing to residents by 2030, said Theresa O’Grady, an engineering consultant working with the city of Joliet. Joliet will foot the approximately $1 billion bill for the project, including the cost to build 65 miles of piping that will transport water from Chicago to Joliet and neighboring communities.

Not just anyone can gain access to Lake Michigan’s pristine, saltless water. That’s rooted in the Great Lakes Compact, an agreement that governs how much water each state or Canadian province can withdraw from the lakes each day. With some exceptions, only municipalities located within the 295,200-square-mile basin (which includes the surface area of the lakes themselves) can get approved for a diversion to use Great Lakes drinking water.

Joliet is one of those exceptions.

“I’ve seen occasional news stories about, ‘Is Kansas suddenly going to get Lake Michigan water because Joliet got Lake Michigan water?’ We are going above and beyond to demonstrate how much we respect the privilege we have to use Lake Michigan water. We are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to be good stewards of that,” said Allison Swisher, Joliet’s director of public utilities.

In April 2023, then-Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot signed an agreement with Joliet and five other nearby communities to supply them with treated Lake Michigan water. Now, legal experts and other Great Lakes communities are left wondering how Joliet, located well outside of the Great Lakes basin, fits in.

The exemption in the Great Lakes Compact

The Great Lakes Region, which encompasses portions of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, as well as the Canadian province of Ontario, is governed through the Great Lakes Compact, enacted in 2008.

“If you do not live in a straddling community, or you’re not a city in a straddling county, you don’t have a ticket to the dance. You can’t even ask for a Great Lakes water diversion,” said Peter Annin, director of the Mary Griggs Burke Center for Freshwater Innovation at Northland College and author of The Great Lakes Water Wars.

“With the exception of the state of Illinois,” he added.

The Chicago exemption, as it is often referred to, has roots in the 1800s, when animal waste from the city’s stockyards would flush into the Chicago River, ultimately pouring into Lake Michigan.

“That’s why Chicago embarks on this massive Panama Canal-like water diversion project, to take all that sewage and put it into this long canal, which then would connect with the Des Plaines River southwest of the city, and then the Illinois River, and then the Mississippi River,” Annin said, referring to the infamous reversal of the Chicago River. “Chicago’s solution was to flush its toilet to St. Louis.”

Every day, Chicago had the right to use billions of gallons of Lake Michigan water to divert this water and dilute the pollution downstream. The state of Wisconsin began challenging the diversion in the 1920s, arguing that Illinois’ superfluous water use was depleting water levels in the lake. In 1967, the Supreme Court sided with Illinois, and now, Chicago can do whatever it wants with its 2.1 billion gallons per day.

“So here we are today with this really kind of unbelievable Joliet water diversion proposal,” Annin said.

Illinois city plans to source its future drinking water from Lake Michigan Read More »

your-cells-are-dying-all-the-time.

Your cells are dying. All the time.

Apoptosis, necroptosis, and pyroptosis, oh my —

Some go gently into the night. Others die less prettily.

3D rendering of an NK Cell destroying a cancer cell.

Enlarge / 3D rendering of an NK Cell destroying a cancer cell.

Billions of cells die in your body every day. Some go out with a bang, others with a whimper.

They can die by accident if they’re injured or infected. Alternatively, should they outlive their natural lifespan or start to fail, they can carefully arrange for a desirable demise, with their remains neatly tidied away.

Originally, scientists thought those were the only two ways an animal cell could die, by accident or by that neat-and-tidy version. But over the past couple of decades, researchers have racked up many more novel cellular death scenarios, some specific to certain cell types or situations. Understanding this panoply of death modes could help scientists save good cells and kill bad ones, leading to treatments for infections, autoimmune diseases, and cancer.

“There’s lots and lots of different flavors here,” says Michael Overholtzer, a cell biologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. He estimates that there are now more than 20 different names to describe cell death varieties.

Here, Knowable Magazine profiles a handful of classic and new modes by which cells kick the bucket.

Unplanned cell death: Necrosis

Lots of bad things can happen to cells: They get injured or burned, poisoned or starved of oxygen, infected by microbes or otherwise diseased. When a cell dies by accident, it’s called necrosis.

There are several necrosis types, none of them pretty: In the case of gangrene, when cells are starved for blood, cells rot away. In other instances, dying cells liquefy, sometimes turning into yellow goop. Lung cells damaged by tuberculosis turn smushy and white — the technical name for this type, “caseous” necrosis, literally means “cheese-like.”

Any form of death other than necrosis is considered “programmed,” meaning it’s carried out intentionally by the cell because it’s damaged or has outlived its usefulness.

A good, clean death: Apoptosis

The two main categories of programmed cell death are “silent and violent,” says Thirumala-Devi Kanneganti, an immunologist at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee. Apoptosis, first named in 1972, is the original silent type: It’s a neat, clean form of cell death that doesn’t wake the immune system.

That’s handy when cells are damaged or have served out their purpose. Apoptosis allows tadpoles to discard tail cells when they become frogs, for example, or human embryos to dispose of the webbing between developing fingers.

The cell shrinks and detaches from its neighbors. Genetic material in the nucleus breaks into pieces that scrunch together, and the nucleus itself fragments. The membrane bubbles and blisters, and the cell disintegrates. Other cells gobble up the bits, keeping the tissue tidy.

In necrosis, a cell dies by accident, releasing its contents and drawing immune cells to the site of damage by creating inflammation. In apoptosis, the cell collapses in on itself and the bits are cleared away without causing damaging inflammation.

Enlarge / In necrosis, a cell dies by accident, releasing its contents and drawing immune cells to the site of damage by creating inflammation. In apoptosis, the cell collapses in on itself and the bits are cleared away without causing damaging inflammation.

Your cells are dying. All the time. Read More »

can-addressing-gut-issues-treat-long-covid-in-children?

Can addressing gut issues treat long COVID in children?

Child holding his stomach

Frazao Studio Latino/ Getty Images

Four years after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, doctors and researchers are still seeking ways to help patients with long COVID, the persistent and often debilitating symptoms that can continue long after a COVID-19 infection.

In adults, the most common long COVID symptoms include fatigue and brain fog, but for children the condition can look different. A study published last month suggests preteens are more likely to experience symptoms such as headaches, stomach pain, trouble sleeping, and attention difficulties. Even among children, effects seem to vary by age. “There seems to be some differences between age groups, with less signs of organ damage in younger children and more adultlike disease in adolescents,” says Petter Brodin, professor of pediatric immunology at Imperial College London.

While vast sums have been devoted to long COVID research—the US National Institutes of Health have spent more than a billion dollars on research projects and clinical trials—research into children with the condition has been predominantly limited to online surveys, calls with parents, and studies of electronic health records. This is in spite of a recent study suggesting that between 10 and 20 percent of children may have developed long COVID following an acute infection, and another report finding that while many have recovered, some still remain ill three years later.

Now, what’s believed to be the first clinical trial specifically aimed at children and young adults with long COVID is underway, recruiting subjects aged 7 to 21 on which to test a potential treatment. It builds on research that suggests long COVID in children may be linked to the gut.

In May 2021, Lael Yonker, a pediatric pulmonologist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, published a study of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), which she says is now regarded as a more severe and acute version of long COVID. It showed that these children had elevated levels of a protein called zonulin, a sign of a so-called leaky gut. Higher levels of zonulin are associated with greater permeability in the intestine, which could enable SARS-CoV-2 viral particles to leak out of the intestines and into the bloodstream instead of being excreted out of the body. From there, they could trigger inflammation.

As Yonker began to see more and more children with long COVID, she theorized that many of the gastrointestinal and neurological symptoms they were experiencing might be linked. But her original study also pointed to a possible solution. When she gave the children with MIS-C a drug called larazotide, an existing treatment for people with issues relating to a leaky gut, the levels of viral particles in their blood decreased and their symptoms improved.

Can addressing gut issues treat long COVID in children? Read More »

when-you-call-a-restaurant,-you-might-be-chatting-with-an-ai-host

When you call a restaurant, you might be chatting with an AI host

digital hosting —

Voice chatbots are increasingly picking up the phone for restaurants.

Drawing of a robot holding a telephone.

Getty Images | Juj Winn

A pleasant female voice greets me over the phone. “Hi, I’m an assistant named Jasmine for Bodega,” the voice says. “How can I help?”

“Do you have patio seating,” I ask. Jasmine sounds a little sad as she tells me that unfortunately, the San Francisco–based Vietnamese restaurant doesn’t have outdoor seating. But her sadness isn’t the result of her having a bad day. Rather, her tone is a feature, a setting.

Jasmine is a member of a new, growing clan: the AI voice restaurant host. If you recently called up a restaurant in New York City, Miami, Atlanta, or San Francisco, chances are you have spoken to one of Jasmine’s polite, calculated competitors.  

In the sea of AI voice assistants, hospitality phone agents haven’t been getting as much attention as consumer-based generative AI tools like Gemini Live and ChatGPT-4o. And yet, the niche is heating up, with multiple emerging startups vying for restaurant accounts across the US. Last May, voice-ordering AI garnered much attention at the National Restaurant Association’s annual food show. Bodega, the high-end Vietnamese restaurant I called, used Maitre-D AI, which launched primarily in the Bay Area in 2024. Newo, another new startup, is currently rolling its software out at numerous Silicon Valley restaurants. One-year-old RestoHost is now answering calls at 150 restaurants in the Atlanta metro area, and Slang, a voice AI company that started focusing on restaurants exclusively during the COVID-19 pandemic and announced a $20 million funding round in 2023, is gaining ground in the New York and Las Vegas markets.

All of them offer a similar service: an around-the-clock AI phone host that can answer generic questions about the restaurant’s dress code, cuisine, seating arrangements, and food allergy policies. They can also assist with making, altering, or canceling a reservation. In some cases, the agent can direct the caller to an actual human, but according to RestoHost co-founder Tomas Lopez-Saavedra, only 10 percent of the calls result in that. Each platform offers the restaurant subscription tiers that unlock additional features, and some of the systems can speak multiple languages.

But who even calls a restaurant in the era of Google and Resy? According to some of the founders of AI voice host startups, many customers do, and for various reasons. “Restaurants get a high volume of phone calls compared to other businesses, especially if they’re popular and take reservations,” says Alex Sambvani, CEO and co-founder of Slang, which currently works with everyone from the Wolfgang Puck restaurant group to Chick-fil-A to the fast-casual chain Slutty Vegan. Sambvani estimates that in-demand establishments receive between 800 and 1,000 calls per month. Typical callers tend to be last-minute bookers, tourists and visitors, older people, and those who do their errands while driving.

Matt Ho, the owner of Bodega SF, confirms this scenario. “The phones would ring constantly throughout service,” he says. “We would receive calls for basic questions that can be found on our website.” To solve this issue, after shopping around, Ho found that Maitre-D was the best fit. Bodega SF became one of the startup’s earliest clients in May, and Ho even helped the founders with trial and error testing prior to launch. “This platform makes the job easier for the host and does not disturb guests while they’re enjoying their meal,” he says.

When you call a restaurant, you might be chatting with an AI host Read More »

european-leadership-change-means-new-adversaries-for-big-tech

European leadership change means new adversaries for Big Tech

A new sheriff in town —

“Legislation has been adopted and now needs to be enforced.”

European leadership change means new adversaries for Big Tech

If the past five years of EU tech rules could take human form, they would embody Thierry Breton. The bombastic commissioner, with his swoop of white hair, became the public face of Brussels’ irritation with American tech giants, touring Silicon Valley last summer to personally remind the industry of looming regulatory deadlines.

Combative and outspoken, Breton warned that Apple had spent too long “squeezing” other companies out of the market. In a case against TikTok, he emphasized, “our children are not guinea pigs for social media.”  

His confrontational attitude to the CEOs themselves was visible in his posts on X. In the lead-up to Musk’s interview with Donald Trump, Breton posted a vague but threatening letter on his account reminding Musk there would be consequences if he used his platform to amplify “harmful content.” Last year, he published a photo with Mark Zuckerberg, declaring a new EU motto of “move fast to fix things”—a jibe at the notorious early Facebook slogan. And in a 2023 meeting with Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Breton reportedly got him to agree to an “AI pact” on the spot, before tweeting the agreement, making it difficult for Pichai to back out.

Yet in this week’s reshuffle of top EU jobs, Breton resigned—a decision he alleged was due to backroom dealing between EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and French president Emmanuel Macron.

“I’m sure [the tech giants are] happy Mr. Breton will go, because he understood you have to hit shareholders’ pockets when it comes to fines,” says Umberto Gambini, a former adviser at the EU Parliament and now a partner at consultancy Forward Global.

Breton is to be effectively replaced by the Finnish politician Henna Virkkunen, from the center-right EPP Group, who has previously worked on the Digital Services Act.

“Her style will surely be less brutal and maybe less visible on X than Breton,” says Gambini. “It could be an opportunity to restart and reboot the relations.”

Little is known about Virkkunen’s attitude to Big Tech’s role in Europe’s economy. But her role has been reshaped to fit von der Leyen’s priorities for her next five-year term. While Breton was the commissioner for the internal market, Virkkunen will work with the same team but operate under the upgraded title of executive vice president for tech sovereignty, security and democracy, meaning she reports directly to von der Leyen.

The 27 commissioners, who form von der Leyen’s new team and are each tasked with a different area of focus, still have to be approved by the European Parliament—a process that could take weeks.

“[Previously], it was very, very clear that the commission was ambitious when it came to thinking about and proposing new legislation to counter all these different threats that they had perceived, especially those posed by big technology platforms,” says Mathias Vermeulen, public policy director at Brussels-based consultancy AWO. “That is not a political priority anymore, in the sense that legislation has been adopted and now has to be enforced.”

Instead Virkkunen’s title implies the focus has shifted to technology’s role in European security and the bloc’s dependency on other countries for critical technologies like chips. “There’s this realization that you now need somebody who can really connect the dots between geopolitics, security policy, industrial policy, and then the enforcement of all the digital laws,” he adds. Earlier in September, a much anticipated report by economist and former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi warned that Europe would risk becoming “vulnerable to coercion” on the world stage if it did not jump-start growth. “We must have more secure supply chains for critical raw materials and technologies,” he said.

Breton is not the only prolific Big Tech adversary to be replaced this week—in a planned exit. Gone, too, is Margrethe Vestager, who had garnered a reputation as one of the world’s most powerful antitrust regulators after 10 years in the post. Last week, Vestager celebrated a victory in a case forcing Apple to pay $14.4 billion in back taxes to Ireland, a case once referred to by Apple CEO Tim Cook as “total political crap”.

Vestager—who vied with Breton for the reputation of lead digital enforcer (technically she was his superior)—will now be replaced by the Spanish socialist Teresa Ribera, whose role will encompass competition as well as Europe’s green transition. Her official title will be executive vice-president-designate for a clean, just and competitive transition, making it likely Big Tech will slip down the list of priorities. “[Ribera’s] most immediate political priority is really about setting up this clean industrial deal,” says Vermuelen.

Political priorities might be shifting, but the frenzy of new rules introduced over the past five years will still need to be enforced. There is an ongoing legal battle over Google’s $1.7 billion antitrust fine. Apple, Google, and Meta are under investigation for breaches of the Digital Markets Act. Under the Digital Services Act, TikTok, Meta, AliExpress, as well as Elon Musk’s X are also subject to probes. “It is too soon for Elon Musk to breathe a sigh of relief,” says J. Scott Marcus, senior fellow at think tank Bruegel. He claims that Musk’s alleged practices at X are likely to run afoul of the Digital Services Act (DSA) no matter who the commissioner is.

“The tone of the confrontation might become a bit more civil, but the issues are unlikely to go away.”

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

European leadership change means new adversaries for Big Tech Read More »

bizarre,-nine-day-seismic-signal-caused-by-epic-landslide-in-greenland

Bizarre, nine-day seismic signal caused by epic landslide in Greenland

Big splash —

Unidentified seismic object resulted in skyscraper-high tsunami.

Ice calving from a glacier

Earthquake scientists detected an unusual signal on monitoring stations used to detect seismic activity during September 2023. We saw it on sensors everywhere, from the Arctic to Antarctica.

We were baffled—the signal was unlike any previously recorded. Instead of the frequency-rich rumble typical of earthquakes, this was a monotonous hum, containing only a single vibration frequency. Even more puzzling was that the signal kept going for nine days.

Initially classified as a “USO”—an unidentified seismic object—the source of the signal was eventually traced back to a massive landslide in Greenland’s remote Dickson Fjord. A staggering volume of rock and ice, enough to fill 10,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools, plunged into the fjord, triggering a 200-meter-high mega-tsunami and a phenomenon known as a seiche: a wave in the icy fjord that continued to slosh back and forth, some 10,000 times over nine days.

To put the tsunami in context, that 200-meter wave was double the height of the tower that houses Big Ben in London and many times higher than anything recorded after massive undersea earthquakes in Indonesia in 2004 (the Boxing Day tsunami) or Japan in 2011 (the tsunami which hit Fukushima nuclear plant). It was perhaps the tallest wave anywhere on Earth since 1980.

Our discovery, now published in the journal Science, relied on collaboration with 66 other scientists from 40 institutions across 15 countries. Much like an air crash investigation, solving this mystery required putting many diverse pieces of evidence together, from a treasure trove of seismic data, to satellite imagery, in-fjord water level monitors, and detailed simulations of how the tsunami wave evolved.

This all highlighted a catastrophic, cascading chain of events, from decades to seconds before the collapse. The landslide traveled down a very steep glacier in a narrow gully before plunging into a narrow, confined fjord. Ultimately, though, it was decades of global heating that had thinned the glacier by several tens of meters, meaning that the mountain towering above it could no longer be held up.

Uncharted waters

But beyond the weirdness of this scientific marvel, this event underscores a deeper and more unsettling truth: climate change is reshaping our planet and our scientific methods in ways we are only beginning to understand.

It is a stark reminder that we are navigating uncharted waters. Just a year ago, the idea that a seiche could persist for nine days would have been dismissed as absurd. Similarly, a century ago, the notion that warming could destabilize slopes in the Arctic, leading to massive landslides and tsunamis happening almost yearly, would have been considered far-fetched. Yet, these once-unthinkable events are now becoming our new reality.

The “once unthinkable” ripples around the world.

As we move deeper into this new era, we can expect to witness more phenomena that defy our previous understanding, simply because our experience does not encompass the extreme conditions we are now encountering. We found a nine-day wave that previously no one could imagine could exist.

Traditionally, discussions about climate change have focused on us looking upwards and outwards to the atmosphere and to the oceans with shifting weather patterns, and rising sea levels. But Dickson Fjord forces us to look downward, to the very crust beneath our feet.

For perhaps the first time, climate change has triggered a seismic event with global implications. The landslide in Greenland sent vibrations through the Earth, shaking the planet and generating seismic waves that traveled all around the globe within an hour of the event. No piece of ground beneath our feet was immune to these vibrations, metaphorically opening up fissures in our understanding of these events.

This will happen again

Although landslide-tsunamis have been recorded before, the one in September 2023 was the first ever seen in east Greenland, an area that had appeared immune to these catastrophic climate change induced events.

This certainly won’t be the last such landslide-megatsunami. As permafrost on steep slopes continues to warm and glaciers continue to thin, we can expect these events to happen more often and on an even bigger scale across the world’s polar and mountainous regions. Recently identified unstable slopes in west Greenland and in Alaska are clear examples of looming disasters.

Landslide-affected slopes around Barry Arm fjord, Alaska. If the slopes suddenly collapse, scientists fear a large tsunami would hit the town of Whittier, 48km away.

Enlarge / Landslide-affected slopes around Barry Arm fjord, Alaska. If the slopes suddenly collapse, scientists fear a large tsunami would hit the town of Whittier, 48km away.

Gabe Wolken/USGS

As we confront these extreme and unexpected events, it is becoming clear that our existing scientific methods and toolkits may need to be fully equipped to deal with them. We had no standard workflow to analyze the 2023 Greenland event. We also must adopt a new mindset because our current understanding is shaped by a now near-extinct, previously stable climate.

As we continue to alter our planet’s climate, we must be prepared for unexpected phenomena that challenge our current understanding and demand new ways of thinking. The ground beneath us is shaking, both literally and figuratively. While the scientific community must adapt and pave the way for informed decisions, it’s up to decision-makers to act.

The authors discuss their findings in more depth.

Stephen Hicks is a Research Fellow in Computational Seismology, UCL and Kristian Svennevig is a Senior Researcher, Department of Mapping and Mineral Resources, Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bizarre, nine-day seismic signal caused by epic landslide in Greenland Read More »