<\/p>\n
My brain, throughout my 20-plus-year career as a science and tech journalist, has played host to a near \u00adconstant tug-of-war between ambition and reality. Learning to find that balance is a big part of what\u2019s helped me survive in this industry and, ultimately, led me here. This past spring, I had the great privilege of joining the incredible team of journalists behind MIT Technology Review <\/em>to take the reins of the print magazine.\u00a0<\/p>\n If you\u2019ve been reading along with us for the last handful of issues, you may have noticed a few changes starting to materialize. We\u2019ve brought back a regular roster of lists and infographics (both things that magazines do particularly well). But the biggest change is only just beginning to take shape, which is why Mat Honan, our editor in chief, asked me to hop in to introduce myself\u2014and the issue you\u2019re holding in your hands right now.\u00a0<\/p>\n We\u2019re giving ourselves permission to play around and experiment. To be a little \u2026 audacious.\u00a0<\/p>\n Because, practical though I may be, I do still have plenty of ideas. It\u2019s just that I sometimes need a reminder to stop blocking myself and do the thing<\/em>. That\u2019s the spirit driving this issue in particular.\u00a0<\/p>\n We wanted to end 2026 with a slate of stories that check in on impossible ideas. Why? Because it\u2019s frankly a lot of fun to dream about living on the moon or uploading our brains. Because losing sight of ambition is all too easy when it feels as if we\u2019re playing whack-a-mole with the world\u2019s problems. But also because the scientists and engineers who absolutely refuse to give up on even the most daring endeavors\u2014like making synthetic blood or decoding animals\u2019 speech\u2014remind us what this whole technology thing is supposed to do to begin with.\u00a0<\/p>\n It\u2019s supposed to take cutting-edge research and development and apply it to make life better, safer, healthier, even more joyful. And when we eff up and make things worse (see: forever chemicals, traffic deaths, and AI that encourages potentially dangerous user behavior), we\u2019re supposed to dig back in, assess the damage, and find ways to fix what we\u2019ve broken. Even when unraveling the mess might itself seem impossible.\u00a0<\/p>\n Right before I came to MIT Technology Review, <\/em>I edited a newsletter about individual actions that can help address the climate crisis, which some would call\u2014and have called\u2014a fool\u2019s errand, given the sheer scale of the problem. They might say it\u2019s as implausible as an AI kill switch, practical nuclear fusion, or a superconductor that works at room temperature. But if I learned nothing else from three years spent finding ways for li\u2019l old me (or li\u2019l old you!) to chip away at one of humanity\u2019s biggest existential threats, it\u2019s that focusing on what we can\u2019t do only makes the darkness darker.\u00a0<\/p>\n So yeah, this one\u2019s for the folks who have the audacity to try, and who refuse to let anyone\u2014themselves included\u2014tell them no.<\/p>\n I hope you enjoy the ride.