Prof. Aleksander Mądry’s testimony before a House subcommittee was highlighted by Politico fellow Mohar Chatterjee in a recent newsletter exploring how large tech companies are dominating how generative AI technologies are developed and utilized. During his testimony, Mądry emphasized that “very few players will be able to compete, given the highly specialized skills and enormous capital investments the building of such systems requires.”
Prof. Simon Johnson speaks with Boston Globe reporter Kara Miller about the safety of the U.S. banking system. “Johnson argues that more oversight and regulation are critical to making sure the banking system operates smoothly, even though increased regulations might provoke resistance,” writes Miller.
MIT scientists have found that delayed charging and strategic placement of EV charging stations could help reduce additional energy demands caused by more widespread EV adoption, reports Grace Carroll for Fast Company. “Leveraging these two strategies together significantly eliminates any additional energy demands,” writes Carroll, “and can be tailored to specific local conditions to help cities meet their decarbonization goals.”
Prof. Simon Johnson writes for The Los Angeles Times about the impact of government support during a financial crisis. “The immediate banking crisis may have been tempered, but it isn’t over,” writes Johnson. “As concerns about moral hazard rise again in Europe, will European regulators succumb to the temptation to make an example of some bank or other? One thing is certain: What they do will have global consequences, including for the U.S., and we will need to be prepared for them.”
A new study by MIT researchers finds that strategic placement of EV charging stations and creating systems to help stagger charging times could help reduce or eliminate the need for new power plants to handle the impact of EV charging on the grid, reports Sharon Udasin and Saul Elbein for The Hill. The researchers found that “better availability of charging stations at workplaces could help take advantage of peak power being produced midday by solar energy facilities.”
Researchers at MIT developed a system that uses artificial intelligence to help predict future risk of developing breast cancer, reports Poppy Harlow for CNN. What this work does “is identifies risk. It can tell a woman that you’re at high risk for developing breast cancer before you develop breast cancer,” says Larry Norton, medical director of the Lauder Breast Center at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
Prof. Emeritus Peter Diamond speaks with Boston Globe reporter Scot Lehigh about the future of Social Security. “Given the large past differences in the approaches of the two parties, it is important that citizens press members of Congress to be specific about their views on fixing the program,” says Diamond. “And it’s just as important that voters let their members of Congress know their own views.”
A new report co-authored by MIT researchers finds that the “US lead in advanced computing has declined significantly over the past five years—especially when measured against China,” writes Will Knight for Wired. The report’s authors emphasize that the US “needs to make sure that the CHIPS Act spending reflects the importance of developing novel ideas in advanced computing, as opposed to just propping up existing technologies,” Knight notes.
In an article for The Hill, Vincent Quan, co-executive director of J-PAL North America, outlines how new governors should rely on evidence when investing in government programs. “Governors should invest in programs that are most likely to improve the lives of their constituents,” writes Quan. “However, determining which programs work and which do not is far easier said than done. Not all programs work as intended.”
Writing for The Hill, President L. Rafael Reif emphasizes the importance of “enabling universities to undertake the use-inspired research that will seed future innovations.” He adds: “To secure national leadership and prosperity over time, the U.S. needs to be the birthplace of the new ideas that will determine the future — including the future of semiconductor technology, design, and manufacturing.”
Prof. Jonathan Gruber speaks with GBH hosts Jim Braude and Margery Eagan about why Democrats are pushing to raise the debt ceiling. “This is really about paying off the money that Congress approved to spend for all of the things the government does,” says Gruber.
Profs. Daron Acemoglu and David Autor speak with New York Times correspondent Thomas B. Edsall about the forces driving working-class voters towards the Republican party. “Elites are making choices that are not good news for non-college workers,” said Acemoglu. “In fact, they are bad news for most workers.”
Prof. Christopher Knittel speaks with Wall Street Journal reporter Andrew Duehren about how European governments are beginning to experiment with new ways to control energy prices.“Especially with the European energy-market policy interventions, what policy makers do not want to do is exacerbate these problems with their policies, and my fear is that is what these proposals would do,” says Knittel.
At MIT’s AI Policy Forum Summit, which was focused on exploring the challenges facing the implementation of AI technologies across a variety of sectors, SEC Chair Gary Gensler and MIT Schwarzman College of Computing Dean Daniel Huttenlocher discussed the impact of AI on the world of finance. “If someone is relying on open-AI, that's a concentrated risk and a lot of fintech companies can build on top of it,” Gensler said. “Then you have a node that's every bit as systemically relevant as maybe a stock exchange."
Writing for The Hill, Prof. Jonathan Gruber, Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) and Matt Hourihan of the Federation of American Scientists write that there’s “an unfortunate history of Congress authorizing ambitious boosts for science only to fall short in appropriations. Congress deserves credit for getting the CHIPS and Science Act across the finish line, but legislators shouldn’t rest on their haunches. Instead, our leaders should sustain the moment they’ve started and ensure robust support for federal innovation — our future depends on it.”