The defenders of Ukraine showed how they hunt down Iranian Shahed drones launched by the Russian invaders. These…
Fotor Review: The Ultimate AI Photo Editor for Creatives?
Photo editing software can be complicated and expensive. Rather than focusing on the creative vision, we are burdened by attempting to master complicated tools. I’ve had my fair share of photo-editing frustrations until I came across Fotor! It’s no Photoshop replacement, but it comes with a…
AnimateLCM: Accelerating the Animation of Personalized Diffusion Models
Over the past few years, diffusion models have achieved massive success and recognition for image and video generation tasks. Video diffusion models, in particular, have been gaining significant attention due to their ability to produce videos with high coherence as well as fidelity. These models generate…
Joscha Koepke, Head of Product at Connectly – Interview Series
Joscha Koepke, is the Head of Product at Connectly, a code-free platform that lets you create campaigns and interactive bots to easily automate two-way conversations – to both leads and loyal customers – at scale. Connectly has a vision is to create the AI-powered infrastructure of…
Creative collisions: Crossing the art-science divide
MIT has a rich history of productive collaboration between the arts and the sciences, anchored by the conviction that these two conventionally opposed ways of thinking can form a deeply generative symbiosis that serves to advance and humanize new technologies.
This ethos was made tangible when the Bauhaus artist and educator György Kepes established the MIT Center for Advanced Visual Studies (CAVS) within the Department of Architecture in 1967. CAVS has since evolved into the Art, Culture, and Technology (ACT) program, which fosters close links to multiple other programs, centers, and labs at MIT. Class 4.373/4.374 (Creating Art, Thinking Science), open to undergraduates and master’s students of all disciplines as well as certain students from the Harvard Graduate School of Design (GSD), is one of the program’s most innovative offerings, proposing a model for how the relationship between art and science might play out at a time of exponential technological growth.
Now in its third year, the class is supported by an Interdisciplinary Class Development Grant from the MIT Center for Art, Science and Technology (CAST) and draws upon the unparalleled resources of MIT.nano; an artist’s high-tech toolbox for investigating the hidden structures and beauty of our material universe.
High ambitions and critical thinking
The class was initiated by Tobias Putrih, lecturer in ACT, and is taught with the assistance of Ardalan SadeghiKivi MArch ’23, and Aubrie James SM ’24. Central to the success of the class has been the collaboration with co-instructor Vladimir Bulović, the founding director of MIT.nano and Fariborz Maseeh Chair in Emerging Technology, who has positioned the facility as an open-access resource for the campus at large — including MIT’s community of artists. “Creating Art, Thinking Science” unfolds the 100,000 square feet of cleanroom and lab space within the Lisa T. Su Building, inviting participating students to take advantage of cutting-edge equipment for nanoscale visualization and fabrication; in the hands of artists, devices for discovering nanostructures and manipulating atoms become tools for rendering the invisible visible and deconstructing the dynamics of perception itself.
The expansive goals of the class are tempered by an in-built criticality. “ACT has a unique position as an art program nested within a huge scientific institute — and the challenges of that partnership should not be underestimated,” reflects Putrih. “Science and art are wholly different knowledge systems with distinct historical perspectives. So, how do we communicate? How do we locate that middle ground, that third space?”
An evolving answer, tested and developed throughout the partnership between ACT and MIT.nano, involves a combination of attentive mentorship and sharing of artistic ideas, combined with access to advanced technological resources and hands-on practical training.
“MIT.nano currently accommodates more than 1,200 individuals to do their work, across 250 different research groups,” says Bulović. “The fact that we count artists among those is a matter of pride for us. We’ve found that the work of our scientists and technologists is enhanced by having access to the language of art as a form of expression — equally, the way that artists express themselves can be stretched beyond what could previously be imagined, simply by having access to the tools and instruments at MIT.nano.”
A playground for experimentation
True to the spirit of the scientific method and artistic iteration, the class is envisioned as a work in progress — a series of propositions and prototypes for how dialogue between scientists and artists might work in practice. The outcomes of those experiments can now be seen installed in the first and second floor galleries at MIT.nano. As part of the facility’s five-year anniversary celebration, the class premiered an exhibition showcasing works created during previous years of “Creating Art, Thinking Science.”
Visitors to the exhibition, “zero.zerozerozerozerozerozerozerozeroone” (named for the numerical notation for one nanometer), will encounter artworks ranging from a minimalist silicon wafer produced with two-photon polymerization (2PP) technology (“Obscured Invisibility,” 2021, Hyun Woo Park), to traces of an attempt to make vegetable soup in the cleanroom using equipment such as a cryostat, a fluorescing microscope, and a Micro-CT scanner (“May I Please Make You Some Soup?,” 2022, Simone Lasser).
These works set a precedent for the artworks produced during the fall 2023 iteration of the class. For Ryan Yang, in his senior year studying electrical engineering and computer science at MIT, the chance to engage in open discussion and experimental making has been a rare opportunity to “try something that might not work.” His project explores the possibilities of translating traditional block printing techniques to micron-scale 3D-printing in the MIT.nano labs.
Yang has taken advantage of the arts curriculum at MIT at an early stage in his academic career as an engineer; meanwhile, Ameen Kaleem started out as a filmmaker in New Delhi and is now pursuing a master’s degree in design engineering at Harvard GSD, cross-registered at MIT.
Kaleem’s project models the process of abiogenesis (the evolution of living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances) by bringing living moss into the MIT.nano cleanroom facilities to be examined at an atomic scale. “I was interested in the idea that, as a human being in the cleanroom, you are both the most sanitized version of yourself and the dirtiest thing in that space,” she reflects. “Drawing attention to the presence of organic life in the cleanroom is comparable to bringing art into spaces where it might not otherwise exist — a way of humanizing scientific and technological endeavors.”
Consciousness, immersion, and innovation
The students draw upon the legacies of landmark art-science initiatives — including international exhibitions such as “Cybernetic Serendipity” (London ICA, 1968), the “New Tendencies” series (Zagreb, 1961-73), and “Laboratorium” (Antwerp, 1999) — and take inspiration from the instructors’ own creative investigations of the inner workings of different knowledge systems. “In contemporary life, and at MIT in particular, we’re immersed in technology,” says Putrih. “It’s the nature of art to reveal that to us, so that we might see the implications of what we are producing and its potential impact.”
By fostering a mindset of imagination and criticality, combined with building the technical skills to address practical problems, “Creating Art, Thinking Science” seeks to create the conditions for a more expansive version of technological optimism; a culture of innovation in which social and environmental responsibility are seen as productive parameters for enriched creativity. The ripple effects of the class might be years in the making, but as Bulović observes while navigating the exhibition at MIT.nano, “The joy of the collaboration can be felt in the artworks.”
7 cyber assets expanding your attack surface and how to find them
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
You’ve invested in cyber prevention and defense tools; next-gen firewalls, endpoint detection and response, SIEM, and more. However, despite this, breaches continue to occur. Perhaps your organization has contended with more breaches than it would care to admit.
And at this point, maybe you’re ready to just about toss in the towel. But before you’re bought out by burnout, consider the following:
One reason for consistent breaches pertains to obscure cyber assets. Yes, your enterprise might have a trove of cyber assets that are unknown to your team, flying under the radar and secretly expanding your attack surface.
These marauding and elusive assets create unseen vulnerabilities that cyber attackers are eager to exploit. From rogue cloud instances to server misconfigurations, any untracked cyber resource or failure represents a potential entry point into your networks.
In this article, discover seven frequently overlooked cyber assets that could accidentally increase your cyber risk exposure. We also provide guidance on how to identify these hidden threats within your environment. Keep reading to learn more.
1. Orphaned cloud resources. As cloud adoption accelerates, it becomes easier for cloud resources like storage buckets, databases, and compute instances to go untracked and unprotected. Orphaned from active monitoring, these ghost assets provide attackers with a backdoor into your cloud environment.
2. Rogue internet-exposed assets. From authenticated web apps to database servers, any internet-exposed asset represents risk if not properly secured. Rogue assets that slip through the cracks give hackers a direct path into your internal networks.
3. Forgotten personal/BYOD devices. With hybrid workforces now the norm, personal and BYOD devices have multiplied. Many go unaccounted for and lack security controls. They serve as unmonitored entry points to corporate data.
4. Sprawling internet of things (IoT). The attempted business optimization efforts, as through IoT, have flooded networks with countless smart devices. However, IoT security is frequently an afterthought, leaving deployments of smart cameras, sensors, HVAC controllers and more as low-hanging fruit for hackers.
5. Misconfigured network infrastructure. Oversights like open ports, unsecured protocols, and improper access controls on routers, switches and other network equipment can enable lateral movement within your infrastructure.
6. Outdated software/hardware. From OS vulnerabilities to end-of-life appliances, outdated and unpatched systems inevitably creep into complex environments, creating exploitable weaknesses.
7. Acquired company/asset blind spots. Mergers and acquisitions often introduce inherited risks in the form of untracked assets, technical debt, and risky integrations from the acquired entity.
Attack surface monitoring
How can you identify and mitigate the risks that derive from these unknown, but extant, cyber resources? The answer is continuous attack surface monitoring.
Advanced attack surface management solutions provide real-time discovery of all cyber assets across on-prem, cloud, home, and IoT environments. With a high level of visibility, as presented through a unified platform, you can accurately assess security posture and prioritize previously unknown risks.
Leaving any asset untracked is akin to leaving your doorway wide open to attackers. Illuminate your entire attack surface, and eliminate your hidden cyber risks. Learn more about top-tier attack surface monitoring and management tools, here.
Lastly, subscribe to the CyberTalk.org newsletter for timely insights, cutting-edge analyses and more, delivered straight to your inbox each week.
Satellite Laser Links From SpaceX To Be Available Commercially – Technology Org
SpaceX has announced its near-future intention to commercialize proprietary satellite laser links. This plan was revealed by company…
Navigating the Future of Tech: The Strategic Advantages of Software Development Outsourcing – Technology Org
These days, businesses of all sizes are continuously facing the pressure of the necessity to innovate and evolve…
Visting scholars from Ukraine kick off Global MIT At-Risk Fellows Program
Even before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine two years ago, members of the MIT faculty knew that violence and political pressures in the region endangered the work and well-being of Ukrainian scholars and contemplated how MIT could assist. The start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022 was the decisive catalyst — triggering the launch of the MIT-Ukraine Program later that year and eventually spurring creation of the new Global MIT At-Risk Fellows (GMAF) program with an initial focus on Ukraine.
Designed to provide sanctuary to scholars around the globe whose lives and academic freedom have been upended by war and tragedy in their countries, GMAF aspires to bring up to five international scholars annually to the MIT campus for semester-long study and research that will ultimately benefit their countries and simultaneously enrich the MIT community. Welcoming the program’s first three visiting scholars from Ukraine, GMAF officially kicked off on Feb. 29 at a reception hosted by the Office of the Vice Provost for International Activities and the MIT Center for International Studies.
The reception showcased the varied struggles of displaced individuals with the photographic exhibition, “Standing for freedom, portraits of scientists in exile,” comprising portraits of refugee scholars from countries torn by war and political upheaval. This inaugural U.S. installation will be on public display at MIT’s Koch Building from April 3 through April 30. It then travels to the French Embassy in Washington. It is the work of PAUSE, a French organization that has enabled scientists in exile to continue their work in France since 2017.
“It’s the first time the exhibit has been in the United States, and we are very proud and honored that it is here,” says PAUSE Executive Director Laura Loheac, who participated in the Feb. 29 event along with PAUSE co-founder Professor Pascale Laborier, photographer Pierre-Jérôme Adjedj, members of the local Ukrainian community, and MIT faculty, students, and senior staff.
Ford International Professor of History Elizabeth Wood said Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine “is not only tragic in its own right,” but “has also created a host of dire scientific and technological problems that we think MIT faculty, staff, and students are well positioned to help solve in collaboration with Ukrainians themselves.”
“Our focus in the MIT-Ukraine Program — itself launched just 16 months ago — has been to serve as a Ukraine hub at MIT,” said Wood, faculty chair for both GMAF and MIT-Ukraine. “The core idea of the GMAF Program in its current incarnation is to bring Ukrainian scholars to MIT for a semester so they can have a bit of a refuge from the war — though I know it is never far from their minds, and so they can soak up some of MIT’s famous culture of ‘mens et manus’ — mind, hands, and heart.”
GMAF scholars Liudmyla Huliaieva and Kateryna Lopatiuk have been at MIT for about a month, while the cohort’s third member, Dmytro Chumachenko, arrived one day before the reception due to visa processing delays. Huliaieva is an economist focused on the economic adaptation and survival of Ukrainian displaced women, while Lopatiuk is an architect and urban planner involved in rebuilding cities and towns across Ukraine, and Chumachenko is a multidisciplinary scientist working at the intersection of artificial intelligence and public health. All met rigorous criteria considered by faculty committee members who evaluated 80 applications for GMAF’s first group of scholars.
“We wanted individuals who were deeply committed to helping Ukraine, who could benefit from a place at MIT, who were providing absolutely top-notch scholarship, who could actually leave the country — since many men and some women cannot do that because of circumstances of the war — and who had projects they were ready and eager to pursue while here,” Wood says.
Huliaieva, Lopatiuk, and Chumachenko are the first of what will likely be 10 Ukrainian researchers and faculty spending a semester at MIT during the two-year GMAF pilot program. With additional funding, the program is envisioned to eventually expand to help scholars in other countries where their work is jeopardized by war or displacement. Provost Cynthia Barnhart says the three Ukrainian scholars now on campus “represent just the start.”
Event speakers noted GMAF’s collaborative nature. Among those recognized for conceiving and organizing it were MIT Vice Provost for International Activities Richard Lester, Senior Director Beth Dupuy, and Institute Professor Suzanne Berger — event emcee and founding director of the MIT International Science and Technology Initiatives (MISTI). Credited for implementing the new program was Svitlana Krasynska, program director for both MIT-Ukraine and GMAF.
Lester said about the program, “The threats to science and scholarship from war and political repression are profound and, unfortunately, they are growing around the world. Even though the GMAF program is small relative to the vast need, it is a practical way for MIT to contribute and also to demonstrate our solidarity with vulnerable members of the global academic community of which we are part.”
Krasynska said in an interview that, although the exact number is currently unknown, it is estimated that over 60,000 Ukrainian scholars and support staff have been displaced and many universities destroyed or badly damaged in the past two years.
“Lives have been severely disrupted,” said Krasynska, who was born and raised in Ukraine and has lived in the United States since 1997. “We really need to support Ukrainian scientists and support Ukrainian science because it is in dire straits right now.”
Chumachenko said his home campus, the National Aerospace University Kharkiv Aviation Institute, has suffered 160 Russian bombs, “but we are still working and teaching.”
“Besides what we bring back to Ukraine, I believe the three of us can bring something here,” he said. “People know about the Russian war in Ukraine through TV, but it’s not always the full picture.”
Lopatiuk echoed those sentiments. Noting that when she applied to the GMAF program she had several research goals in mind, but realized after spending the past month at MIT that “my main purpose is also to get students to get to know what Ukraine is as a country beyond the consequences of war” — including the nation’s history, culture and ideas.
Noting that her first impression of MIT “is that it’s a very big, friendly family,” Huliaieva plans to present a virtual seminar at Harvard University on March 18 designed to broaden awareness and understanding of the challenges faced by Ukrainians — both those still there and people forced to leave. Titled “Dreaming of home: Displaced Ukrainian women between transience and permanency,” it reflects her research into helping Ukrainian women gain financial independence and freedom.
Barnhart welcomed Huliaieva, Lopatiuk, and Chumachenko to MIT “not only as our very first cohort of scholars, but also as colleagues and collaborators.”
“I hope you’ll find our entire campus is a thriving ecosystem of ideas and innovation,” she said. “I hope you will learn that we are deeply committed to protecting education and scholarship whenever they come under threat.”
3 Questions: Progress on updating MIT’s undergraduate curriculum
In late February, Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate and Graduate Education Ian A. Waitz and Faculty Chair Mary Fuller announced the formation and launch of the Task Force on the MIT Undergraduate Academic Program (TFUAP). The effort fulfills a critical recommendation of the Task Force 2021 and Beyond RIC1 (Undergraduate Program) and draws upon several, prior foundational working groups — some focused on the current General Institute Requirements (GIRs) and others on updating recent studies for the purposes of this review.
In this interview, task force co-chairs Adam Martin, professor of biology, and Joel Voldman, the William R. Brody Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science describe the TFUAP’s goals, approach, and next steps.
Q: The charge of the task force is quite ambitious, including “reviewing the current undergraduate academic program and considering improvements with a focus on both the curriculum and pedagogy.” Can you explain your approach?
Martin: For context, it’s important to know that the undergraduate program is multifaceted and consists of many components, including majors, electives, experiential learning, and of course the GIRs — arguably one of the best-known acronyms at MIT! Moreover, the GIRs include science core classes; humanities, arts, and social sciences classes; certain electives in science and engineering; and a lab requirement, each of which serves a slightly different purpose and dovetails with majors and minors in unique ways.
Some aspects of the academic program are determined by the faculty, either MIT-wide or within a particular department. Others can be customized by students, in consultation with faculty and staff advisors, from the broad array of curricular and co-curricular offerings at MIT. The task force will look holistically at all of these aspects, considering both what MIT requires of all students, and the options we make available as students chart their own paths.
As part of this holistic approach, the TFUAP will zero in on both content and pedagogy. Obviously, the content we cover is important; our goal must remain to provide undergraduates with the world-class education they expect. But how we teach is of fundamental importance, as well. The pedagogy we adopt should be inclusive, supported by research, and designed to help students not only understand what they are learning, but why they are learning it — how it relates to their majors, potential careers, and their lives.
Voldman: I think your question’s description of our charge as “ambitious” is noteworthy. We feel that the task force is ambitious, too, but perhaps in a different sense from the question. That is, we believe our job is to not only think about nuts-and-bolts issues of the academic program requirements but also to consider the big picture. What are the most expansive possibilities? How can we push the envelope? That’s the MIT way, after all.
Q: The task force is building upon quite a bit of past work and benefits from some major accomplishments recommended by Task Force 2021 (TF2021). For example, how does the creation of the Undergraduate Advising Center, and in general, the desire to provide more personal and professional support to all students, fit in with the potential updates to the undergraduate curriculum?
Martin: You’re absolutely right — our work benefits greatly from years of conversations focused on the undergraduate academic program, particularly in the last decade or so. These include the 2014 Task Force on the Future of Education; the 2018 Designing the First-Year Experience Class; Task Force 2021 and Beyond (TF2021); the Foundational Working Groups (part of the RIC 1 implementation) that have studied the existing MIT undergraduate program; and the Committee on the Undergraduate Program. The valuable work of these past committees and their findings will certainly inform our thought process.
In the past, groups that evaluated the undergraduate curriculum were also charged with tackling related topics, such as undergraduate advising or revamping classrooms. Taking on any one of these three issues is ambitious by any measure! What’s changed in the past decade is that advances have been made in these other critical areas, so the TFUAP can focus solely on curriculum and pedagogy. For example, thanks to recent accomplishments by TF2021 and others, we have implemented a new advising system for all undergraduates in the form of the Undergraduate Advising Center.
We envision the TFUAP being a highly collaborative process, bringing in voices across the entire Institute and beyond. We welcome input from members of the community via email at tfuap@mit.edu. We will also be reaching out to student groups, alumni, individual faculty, faculty groups, and administrative staff across the Institute to hear their perspectives.
Q: Part of what TFUAP will have to confront, no doubt, are some of the most pressing issues of our time, like the rise of computing and AI, climate change (what President Kornbluth calls an existential threat to our way of life), and the changing nature of learning (online, hybrid, etc.). How are you thinking about all of these factors?
Voldman: That is a good question! It’s early days, and our work is just beginning, but we know that these and other issues loom over all of us. For example, we are keenly aware of the influx of students into computing-related majors and classes, and we need to think deeply about the implications. Furthermore, we want a curriculum that prepares students for current and upcoming global challenges as well as changes in the technology and tools available to address those challenges. However, we can expect that our students will need to be agile and curious, lifelong learners, collaborative and compassionate teammates, and creative and thoughtful problem-solvers.
As we work with the community to design the next version of an MIT undergraduate education, it will be important to build a structure that can incorporate the biggest challenges and opportunities of the day, while staying flexible and responsive to an ever-evolving world.