Celebrating the opening of the new Graduate Junction residence

Over two choreographed move-in days in August, more than 600 residents unloaded their boxes and belongings into their new homes in Graduate Junction, located at 269 and 299 Vassar Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts. With smiling ambassadors standing by to assist, residents were welcomed into a new MIT-affiliated housing option that offers the convenience of on-campus licensing terms, pricing, and location, as well as the experienced building development and management of American Campus Communities (ACC).

With the building occupied and residents settled, the staff has turned their attention to creating connections between new community members and celebrating the years of a collaborative effort between faculty, students, and staff to plan and create a building that expands student choice, enhances neighborhood amenities, and meets sustainability goals. 

Gathering recently for a celebratory block party, residents and their families, staff, and project team members convened in the main lounge space of building W87 to mingle and enjoy the new community. Children twirled around while project managers, architects, staff from MIT and ACC, and residents reflected on the partnership-driven work to bring the new building to fruition. With 351 units, including studios, one-, two-, and four-bedroom apartments, the building added a total of 675 new graduate housing beds and marked the final step in exceeding the Institute’s commitment made in 2017 to add 950 new graduate beds.

The management staff has also planned several other events to help residents feel more connected to their neighbors, including a farmers market in the central plaza, fall crafting workshops, and coffee breaks. “Graduate Junction isn’t just a place to live — it’s a community,” says Kendra Lowery, American Campus Communities’ general manager of Graduate Junction. “Our staff is dedicated to helping residents feel at home, whether through move-in support, building connections with neighbors, or hosting events that celebrate the unique MIT community.” 

Partnership adds a new option for students

Following a careful study of student housing preferences, the Graduate Housing Working Group — composed of students, staff, and faculty — helped inform the design that includes unit styles and amenities that fit the needs of MIT graduate students in an increasingly expensive regional housing market.

“Innovative places struggle to build housing fast enough, which limits who can access them. Building housing keeps our campus’s innovation culture open to all students. Additionally, new housing for students reduces price pressure on the rest of the Cambridge community,” says Nick Allen, a member of the working group and a PhD student in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning. He noted the involvement of students from the outset: “A whole generation of graduate students has worked with MIT to match Grad Junction to the biggest gaps in the local housing market.” For example, the building adds affordable four-bed, two-bath apartments, expanded options for private rooms, and new family housing.

Neighborhood feel with sustainability in mind

The location of the residence further enhances the residential feel of West Campus and forms additional connections between the MIT community and neighboring Cambridgeport. Situated on West Campus next to Simmons Hall and across from Westgate Apartments, the new buildings frame a central, publicly accessible plaza and green space. The plaza is a gateway to Fort Washington Park and the newly reopened pedestrian railroad crossing enhances connections between the residences and the surrounding Cambridgeport neighborhood.

Striving for the LEED v4 Multifamily Midrise Platinum certification, the new residence reflects a commitment to energy efficiency through an innovative design approach. The building has efficient heating and cooling systems and a strategy that reclaims heat from the building’s exhaust to pre-condition incoming ventilation air. The building’s envelope and roofing were designed with a strong focus on thermal performance and its materials were chosen to reduce the project’s climate impact. This resulted in an 11 percent reduction of the whole building’s carbon footprint from the construction, transportation, and installation of materials. In addition, the development teams installed an 11,000 kilowatt-hour solar array and green roof plantings.

Bacteria in the human gut rarely update their CRISPR defense systems

Within the human digestive tract are trillions of bacteria from thousands of different species. These bacteria form communities that help digest food, fend off harmful microbes, and play many other roles in maintaining human health.

These bacteria can be vulnerable to infection from viruses called bacteriophages. One of bacterial cells’ most well-known defenses against these viruses is the CRISPR system, which evolved in bacteria to help them recognize and chop up viral DNA.

A study from MIT biological engineers has yielded new insight into how bacteria in the gut microbiome adapt their CRISPR defenses as they encounter new threats. The researchers found that while bacteria grown in the lab can incorporate new viral recognition sequences as quickly as once a day, bacteria living in human gut add new sequences at a much slower rate — on average, one every three years.

The findings suggest that the environment within the digestive tract offers many fewer opportunities for bacteria and bacteriophages to interact than in the lab, so bacteria don’t need to update their CRISPR defenses very often. It also raises the question of whether bacteria have more important defense systems than CRISPR.

“This finding is significant because we use microbiome-based therapies like fecal microbiota transplant to help treat some diseases, but efficacy is inconsistent because new microbes do not always survive in patients. Learning about microbial defenses against viruses helps us to understand what makes a strong, healthy microbial community,” says An-Ni Zhang, a former MIT postdoc who is now an assistant professor at Nanyang Technological University.

Zhang is the lead author of the study, which appears today in the journal Cell Genomics. Eric Alm, director of MIT’s Center for Microbiome Informatics and Therapeutics, a professor of biological engineering and of civil and environmental engineering at MIT, and a member of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, is the paper’s senior author.

Infrequent exposure

In bacteria, CRISPR serves as a memory immune response. When bacteria encounter viral DNA, they can incorporate part of the sequence into their own DNA. Then, if the virus is encountered again, that sequence produces a guide RNA that directs an enzyme called Cas9 to snip the viral DNA, preventing infection.

These virus-specific sequences are called spacers, and a single bacterial cell may carry more than 200 spacers. These sequences can be passed onto offspring, and they can also be shared with other bacterial cells through a process called horizontal gene transfer.

Previous studies have found that spacer acquisition occurs very rapidly in the lab, but the process appears to be slower in natural environments. In the new study, the MIT team wanted to explore how often this process happens in bacteria in the human gut.

“We were interested in how fast this CRISPR system changes its spacers, specifically in the gut microbiome, to better understand the bacteria-virus interactions inside our body,” Zhang says. “We wanted to identify the key parameters that impact the timescale of this immunity update.”

To do that, the researchers looked at how CRISPR sequences changed over time in two different datasets obtained by sequencing microbes from the human digestive tract. One of these datasets contained 6,275 genomic sequences representing 52 bacterial species, and the other contained 388 longitudinal “metagenomes,” that is, sequences from many microbes found in a sample, taken from four healthy people.

“By analyzing those two datasets, we found out that spacer acquisition is really slow in human gut microbiome: On average, it would take 2.7 to 2.9 years for a bacterial species to acquire a single spacer in our gut, which is super surprising because our gut is challenged with viruses almost every day from the microbiome itself and in our food,” Zhang says.

The researchers then built a computational model to help them figure out why the acquisition rate was so slow. This analysis showed that spacers are acquired more rapidly when bacteria live in high-density populations. However, the human digestive tract is diluted several times a day, whenever a meal is consumed. This flushes out some bacteria and viruses and keeps the overall density low, making it less likely that the microbes will encounter a virus that can infect them.

Another factor may be the spatial distribution of microbes, which the researchers believe prevents some bacteria from encountering viruses very frequently.

“Sometimes one population of bacteria may never or rarely encounter a phage because the bacteria are closer to the epithelium in the mucus layer and farther away from a potential exposure to viruses,” Zhang says.

Bacterial interactions

Among the populations of bacteria that they studied, the researchers identified one species — Bifidobacteria longum — that had gained spacers much more recently than others. The researchers found that in samples from unrelated people, living on different continents, B. longum had recently acquired up to six different spacers targeting two different Bifidobacteria bacteriophages.

This acquisition was driven by horizontal gene transfer — a process that allows bacteria to gain new genetic material from their neighbors. The findings suggest that there may be evolutionary pressure on B. longum from those two viruses.

“It has been highly overlooked how much horizontal gene transfer contributes to this dynamic. Within communities of bacteria, the bacteria-bacteria interactions can be a main contributor to the development of viral resistance,” Zhang says.

Analyzing microbes’ immune defenses may offer a way for scientists to develop targeted treatments that will be most effective in a particular patient, the researchers say. For example, they could design therapeutic microbes that are able to fend off the types of bacteriophages that are most prevalent in that person’s microbiome, which would increase the chances that the treatment would succeed.

“One thing we can do is to study the viral composition in the patients, and then we can identify which microbiome species or strains are more capable of resisting those local viruses in a person,” Zhang says.

The research was funded, in part, by the Broad Institute and the Thomas and Stacey Siebel Foundation.

Why open secrets are a big problem

Imagine that the head of a company office is misbehaving, and a disillusioned employee reports the problem to their manager. Instead of the complaint getting traction, however, the manager sidesteps the issue and implies that raising it further could land the unhappy employee in trouble — but doesn’t deny that the problem exists.

This hypothetical scenario involves an open secret: a piece of information that is widely known but never acknowledged as such. Open secrets often create practical quandaries for people, as well as backlash against those who try to address the things that the secrets protect.

In a newly published paper, MIT philosopher Sam Berstler contends that open secrets are pervasive and problematic enough to be worthy of systematic study — and provides a detailed analysis of the distinctive social dynamics accompanying them. In many cases, she proposes, ignoring some things is fine — but open secrets present a special problem.

After all, people might maintain friendships better by not disclosing their salaries to each other, and relatives might get along better if they avoid talking politics at the holidays. But these are just run-of-the-mill individual decisions.

By contrast, open secrets are especially damaging, Berstler believes, because of their “iterative” structure. We do not talk about open secrets; we do not talk about the fact that we do not talk about them; and so on, until the possibility of addressing the problems at hand disappears.

“Sometimes not acknowledging things can be very productive,” Berstler says. “It’s good we don’t talk about everything in the workplace. What’s different about open secrecy is not the content of what we’re not acknowledging, but the pernicious iterative structure of our practice of not acknowledging it.  And because of that structure, open secrecy tends to be hard to change.”

Or, as she writes in the paper, “Open secrecy norms are often moral disasters.”

Beyond that, Berstler says, the example of open secrets should enable us to examine the nature of conversation itself in more multidimensional terms; we need to think about the things left unsaid in conversation, too.

Berstler’s paper, “The Structure of Open Secrets,” appears in advance online form in Philosophical Review. Berstler, an assistant professor and the Laurance S. Rockefeller Career Development Chair in MIT’s Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, is the sole author.

Eroding our knowledge

The concept of open secrets is hardly new, but it has not been subject to extensive philosophical rigor. The German sociologist Georg Simmel wrote about them in the early 20th century, but mostly in the context of secret societies keeping quirky rituals to themselves. Other prominent thinkers have addressed open secrets in psychological terms. To Berstler, the social dynamics of open secrets merit a more thorough reckoning.

“It’s not a psychological problem that people are having,” she says. “It’s a particular practice that they’re all conforming to. But it’s hard to see this because it’s the kind of practice that members, just in virtue of conforming to the practice, can’t talk about.”

In Berstler’s view, the iterative nature of open secrets distinguishes them. The employee expecting a candid reply from their manager may feel bewildered about the lack of a transparent response, and that nonacknowledgement means there is not much recourse to be had, either. Eventually, keeping open secrets means the original issue itself can be lost from view.

“Open secrets norms are set up to try to erode our knowledge,” Berstler says.

In practical terms, people may avoid addressing open secrets head-on because they face a familiar quandary: Being a whistleblower can cost people their jobs and more. But Berstler suggests in the paper that keeping open secrets helps people define their in-group status, too.

“It’s also the basis for group identity,” she says.

Berstler avoids taking the position that greater transparency is automatically a beneficial thing. The paper identifies at least one kind of special case where keeping open secrets might be good. Suppose, for instance, a co-worker has an eccentric but harmless habit their colleagues find out about: It might be gracious to spare them simple embarrassment.

That aside, as Berstler writes, open secrets “can serve as shields for powerful people guilty of serious, even criminal wrongdoing. The norms can compound the harm that befalls their victims … [who] find they don’t just have to contend with the perpetrator’s financial resources, political might, and interpersonal capital. They must go up against an entire social arrangement.” As a result, the chances of fixing social or organizational dysfunction diminish.

Two layers of conversation

Berstler is not only trying to chart the dynamics and problems of open secrets. She is also trying to usefully complicate our ideas about the nature of conversations and communication.

Broadly, some philosophers have theorized about conversations and communication by focusing largely on the information being shared among people. To Berstler, this is not quite sufficient; the example of open secrets alerts us that communication is not just an act of making things more and more transparent.

“What I’m arguing in the paper is that this is too simplistic a way to think about it, because actual conversations in the real world have a theatrical or dramatic structure,” Berstler says. “There are things that cannot be made explicit without ruining the performance.”

At an office holiday party, for instance, the company CEO might maintain an illusion of being on equal footing with the rest of the employees if the conversation is restricted to movies and television shows. If the subject turns to year-end bonuses, that illusion vanishes. Or two friends at a party, trapped in an unwanted conversation with a third person, might maneuver themselves away with knowing comments, but without explicitly saying they are trying to end the chat.

Here Berstler draws upon the work of sociologist Erving Goffman — who closely studied the performative aspects of everyday behavior — to outline how a more multi-dimensional conception of social interaction applies to open secrets. Berstler suggests open secrets involve what she calls “activity layering,” which in this case suggests that people in a conversation involving open secrets have multiple common grounds for understanding, but some remain unspoken.

Further expanding on Goffman’s work, Berstler also details how people may be “mutually collaborating on a pretense,” as she writes, to keep an open secret going.

“Goffman has not really systematically been brought into the philosophy of language, so I am showing how his ideas illuminate and complicate philosophical views,” Berstler says.

Combined, a close analysis of open secrets and a re-evaluation of the performative components of conversation can help us become more cognizant about communication. What is being said matters; what is left unsaid matters alongside it.

“There are structural features of open secrets that are worrisome,” Berstler says. “And because of that we have to more aware [of how they work].”

Transform Your iPhone into a Filmmaking Powerhouse with the Atomos Ninja Phone

In his latest YouTube video, tech enthusiast Kofi Yeboah showcases the incredible capabilities of the Atomos Ninja Phone, a game-changing device that transforms your iPhone into a professional filmmaking tool. Packed with features like 4K recording, ProRes support, and live streaming capabilities, the Ninja Phone is designed to give creators unmatched flexibility to capture, edit, and share high-quality content anytime, anywhere.

Kofi’s video provides a detailed walkthrough of the setup process, including how to seamlessly integrate the Ninja Phone with your favorite cameras. He also highlights the device’s advanced monitoring features, such as focus peaking, waveform, and false color, which make it an indispensable tool for both on-location shooting and live streaming.

Why Creators Love the Atomos Ninja Phone

The Ninja Phone addresses common limitations in mobile video production by combining portability with professional-grade features. Here’s what sets it apart:

  • 4K 30fps Recording: Capture stunning video quality for cinematic storytelling.
  • Enhanced Cloud Integration: Sync and store your footage effortlessly in the cloud.
  • Live Streaming Made Easy: Stream directly to platforms like YouTube and Facebook with minimal setup.

Whether you’re a filmmaker, content creator, or live streamer, the Ninja Phone provides the performance and convenience you need in a compact device.

Watch Kofi’s Full Breakdown

Don’t miss Kofi Yeboah’s in-depth review to discover how the Atomos Ninja Phone can elevate your production workflow. From its easy setup process to its advanced features, this innovative device is quickly becoming a must-have for creators looking to level up their mobile filmmaking game.

[embedded content]

OpenAI funds $1 million study on AI and morality at Duke University

OpenAI is awarding a $1 million grant to a Duke University research team to look at how AI could predict human moral judgments. The initiative highlights the growing focus on the intersection of technology and ethics, and raises critical questions: Can AI handle the complexities of…

How blockchain, IoT, and AI shape digital transformation

When devices, networks, and AI work together seamlessly, it creates a smarter, more connected ecosystem. This isn’t a distant dream; it’s a reality rapidly emerging as blockchain, IoT, and AI come together. These technologies are no longer working in isolation – they form a trio that…

US eyes AGI breakthrough in escalating China tech rivalry

The emerging US-China Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) rivalry could face a major policy transformation, as the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) recommends a Manhattan Project-style initiative and restrictions on humanoid robots in its latest report to Congress. Released in November 2024, the Commission’s annual report…

Helping students bring about decarbonization, from benchtop to global energy marketplace

MIT students are adept at producing research and innovations at the cutting edge of their fields. But addressing a problem as large as climate change requires understanding the world’s energy landscape, as well as the ways energy technologies evolve over time.

Since 2010, the course IDS.521/IDS.065 (Energy Systems for Climate Change Mitigation) has equipped students with the skills they need to evaluate the various energy decarbonization pathways available to the world. The work is designed to help them maximize their impact on the world’s emissions by making better decisions along their respective career paths.

“The question guiding my teaching and research is how do we solve big societal challenges with technology, and how can we be more deliberate in developing and supporting technologies to get us there?” says Professor Jessika Trancik, who started the course to help fill a gap in knowledge about the ways technologies evolve and scale over time.

Since its inception in 2010, the course has attracted graduate students from across MIT’s five schools. The course has also recently opened to undergraduate students and been adapted to an online course for professionals.

Class sessions alternate between lectures and student discussions that lead up to semester-long projects in which groups of students explore specific strategies and technologies for reducing global emissions. This year’s projects span several topics, including how quickly transmission infrastructure is expanding, the relationship between carbon emissions and human development, and how to decarbonize the production of key chemicals.

The curriculum is designed to help students identify the most promising ways to mitigate climate change whether they plan to be scientists, engineers, policymakers, investors, urban planners, or just more informed citizens.

“We’re coming at this issue from both sides,” explains Trancik, who is part of MIT’s Institute for Data, Systems, and Society. “Engineers are used to designing a technology to work as well as possible here and now, but not always thinking over a longer time horizon about a technology evolving and succeeding in the global marketplace. On the flip side, for students at the macro level, often studies in policy and economics of technological change don’t fully account for the physical and engineering constraints of rates of improvement. But all of that information allows you to make better decisions.”

Bridging the gap

As a young researcher working on low-carbon polymers and electrode materials for solar cells, Trancik always wondered how the materials she worked on would scale in the real world. They might achieve promising performance benchmarks in the lab, but would they actually make a difference in mitigating climate change? Later, she began focusing increasingly on developing methods for predicting how technologies might evolve.

“I’ve always been interested in both the macro and the micro, or even nano, scales,” Trancik says. “I wanted to know how to bridge these new technologies we’re working on with the big picture of where we want to go.”

Trancik’ described her technology-grounded approach to decarbonization in a paper that formed the basis for IDS.065. In the paper, she presented a way to evaluate energy technologies against climate-change mitigation goals while focusing on the technology’s evolution.

“That was a departure from previous approaches, which said, given these technologies with fixed characteristics and assumptions about their rates of change, how do I choose the best combination?” Trancik explains. “Instead we asked: Given a goal, how do we develop the best technologies to meet that goal? That inverts the problem in a way that’s useful to engineers developing these technologies, but also to policymakers and investors that want to use the evolution of technologies as a tool for achieving their objectives.”

This past semester, the class took place every Tuesday and Thursday in a classroom on the first floor of the Stata Center. Students regularly led discussions where they reflected on the week’s readings and offered their own insights.

“Students always share their takeaways and get to ask open questions of the class,” says Megan Herrington, a PhD candidate in the Department of Chemical Engineering. “It helps you understand the readings on a deeper level because people with different backgrounds get to share their perspectives on the same questions and problems. Everybody comes to class with their own lens, and the class is set up to highlight those differences.”

The semester begins with an overview of climate science, the origins of emissions reductions goals, and technology’s role in achieving those goals. Students then learn how to evaluate technologies against decarbonization goals.

But technologies aren’t static, and neither is the world. Later lessons help students account for the change of technologies over time, identifying the mechanisms for that change and even forecasting rates of change.

Students also learn about the role of government policy. This year, Trancik shared her experience traveling to the COP29 United Nations Climate Change Conference.

“It’s not just about technology,” Trancik says. “It’s also about the behaviors that we engage in and the choices we make. But technology plays a major role in determining what set of choices we can make.”

From the classroom to the world

Students in the class say it has given them a new perspective on climate change mitigation.

“I have really enjoyed getting to see beyond the research people are doing at the benchtop,” says Herrington. “It’s interesting to see how certain materials or technologies that aren’t scalable yet may fit into a larger transformation in energy delivery and consumption. It’s also been interesting to pull back the curtain on energy systems analysis to understand where the metrics we cite in energy-related research originate from, and to anticipate trajectories of emerging technologies.”

Onur Talu, a first-year master’s student in the Technology and Policy Program, says the class has made him more hopeful.

“I came into this fairly pessimistic about the climate,” says Talu, who has worked for clean technology startups in the past. “This class has taught me different ways to look at the problem of climate change mitigation and developing renewable technologies. It’s also helped put into perspective how much we’ve accomplished so far.”

Several student projects from the class over the years have been developed into papers published in peer-reviewed journals. They have also been turned into tools, like carboncounter.com, which plots the emissions and costs of cars and has been featured in The New York Times.

Former class students have also launched startups; Joel Jean SM ’13, PhD ’17, for example, started Swift Solar. Others have drawn on the course material to develop impactful careers in government and academia, such as Patrick Brown PhD ’16 at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Leah Stokes SM ’15, PhD ’15 at the University of California at Santa Barbara.

Overall, students say the course helps them take a more informed approach to applying their skills toward addressing climate change.

“It’s not enough to just know how bad climate change could be,” says Yu Tong, a first-year master’s student in civil and environmental engineering. “It’s also important to understand how technology can work to mitigate climate change from both a technological and market perspective. It’s about employing technology to solve these issues rather than just working in a vacuum.”