Meta is beefing up its age-verification mechanisms with an AI system that analyzes images and videos on Instagram and Facebook for “visual cues,” such as height and bone structure, to identify and delete accounts of users under the age of 13. The company announced the move amid a wave of cases in which hundreds of children have managed to evade social network access restrictions, even through simple tricks such as drawing on a mustache.

The new approach is part of a series of measures Meta adopted as part of an AI-based security strategy designed to correct the limitations of traditional methods, which rely heavily on self-reported age. With this change, the company seeks to reduce the ease with which minors access platforms that, in theory, are restricted to them.

In a press release, Meta explained that it is implementing several tools to identify contextual indicators that allow estimating a person’s age. This process includes the analysis of posts, comments, bios, and descriptions, with special attention to references related to school years or birthday celebrations—elements that can offer clues about the real age of the person who manages the account.

These tools are in addition to automated analysis techniques aimed at detecting physical traits from imagery shared to Meta’s social platforms. These include characteristics such as height and bone structure. Meta is careful to stipulate that this system is not face recognition, as it does not seek to identify specific individuals in images or videos. Instead, the company notes that, “by combining these visual insights with our analysis of text and interactions, we can significantly increase the number of underage accounts we identify and remove.”

If, based on these elements, Meta suspects that an account is managed by a child under 13, it will be suspended. The user will have to revalidate their age using the procedures established by the company to regain access; otherwise, the profile will be permanently deleted.

Meta also announced that it will expand the scope of its technology to detect users between the ages of 13 and 15 and automatically assign them teen accounts. This type of profile incorporates content restrictions and parental controls enabled by default, with the aim of providing a safer environment for this age group.

Meta began implementing age-verification tech in 2024 for Instagram users in the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Now, the mechanism will be extended to Instagram accounts in Brazil and 27 European Union countries. In addition, these practices will be applied for the first time to Facebook users in the US, with plans to expand to the EU and UK next month.

Looking All Grown-Up

The new measures have been interpreted as a response to a preliminary ruling recently issued by the European Commission, which concluded that the company led by Mark Zuckerberg is in breach of the Digital Services Act for allegedly failing to effectively prevent children under 13 from using its platforms. The EU body found that the company lacks sufficiently effective mechanisms to block such access and that its current systems for identifying and suspending accounts below the age threshold are insufficient.

These criticisms are supported by the results of a survey conducted by the nonprofit Internet Matters. After surveying nearly 1,300 children and their parents in the UK, the study revealed that approximately one-third of children have successfully evaded government-imposed restrictions on access to social networking sites. In some cases, the methods employed are particularly striking.

The report, titled “The Online Safety Act: Are Children Safe Online?” showed that 46 percent of 9- to 16-year-olds believe that circumventing age controls is very easy. In total, however, only 32 percent admitted to breaking the rules.

President Donald Trump’s negotiators face the arduous task of trying to convince the president that a deal he previously rejected is their best option in Iran.

Last month, Trump initially gave his blessing for a so-called “cash for uranium” deal, under which the US would release around $20 billion in frozen funds in exchange for Iran handing over its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, sources familiar with the matter tell WIRED.

Trump’s negotiators, vice president JD Vance, special envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son in law, received repeated approvals from the president while they were in Islamabad, giving them confidence a deal was close.

But the deal unraveled, in part because Trump was warned by his team that there was a risk he could be seen as giving Iran “pallets of cash”—an echo of his own oft-stated criticism of Barack Obama’s Iran deal—and he pulled the plug, the sources said.

Except now, that’s once again the cornerstone of the current proposal.

The current negotiations for a memorandum of understanding that could guide talks on a nuclear deal center on Iran handing over its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, and a moratorium on further uranium enrichment for somewhere around 12 to 15 years, Axios earlier reported.

In exchange, the US would offer a combination of billions in sanctions relief and the gradual release of frozen funds after gaining control of the enriched uranium, in order to destroy it or blend it down so it cannot be used for a nuclear weapon.

While a memorandum of understanding might get Iran to the table, that framework is not materially different from what was discussed previously in Islamabad and rejected by Trump, who has repeatedly told advisers in recent weeks he is against sending money to Iran, sources tell WIRED.

Some of Trump’s advisers say the decision of whether Trump ultimately blesses the framework is likely to come down to how badly he wants a deal. There are few options to incentivize Iran, they add, and financial aid has been the most compelling.

“They are going to have to do something like that, and it’s better than the Obama deal, so he should take it,” one Trump adviser said on the condition of anonymity, referring to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Trump has long criticized that deal for having provisions similar to ones currently under discussion, like a sunset clause on nuclear enrichment and the US lifting some sanctions.

For all the machinations in the West Wing, it has not gone unnoticed by Trump’s orbit that some of his top players have been conspicuous in their absence on Iran, according to two administration officials familiar with the matter.

Marco Rubio, the secretary of state and national security adviser, has been part of the group advising Trump on Iran and, physically speaking, spends most of his time in his West Wing office overlooking West Executive Avenue instead of at the State Department.

Rubio was happy to brief reporters on Tuesday, but he only did so at the request of the White House, a person familiar with the matter said, with his advisers wary of him getting involved in Iran negotiations that could as easily unravel as succeed.

In fact, given the downside risk, Rubioworld has been saying they were surprised that Vance asked to be a part of the Iran talks—a contention denied by people close to the vice president, who said he was ordered to by Trump.

Rubio instead has been more focused on Cuba, and on Venezuela, where assistant secretary of state Caleb Orr has been involved in overseeing new private equity investment to rebuild the country’s oil infrastructure.

Mexico City is one of the fastest sinking cities in the world. Now, a powerful satellite from the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) confirms the accelerated advance of this silent threat that puts nearly 20 million people at risk.

The satellite designed by NASA and the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO), known as NISAR (NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar), was able to capture with unprecedented precision the magnitude and evolution of this phenomenon in different areas of the Mexican capital. The analysis is based on preliminary measurements taken from space between October 2025 and January of this year, during the dry season in Mexico City.

Their findings were captured in a map that shows how the subsurface of the metropolis is shifting. In the map, NASA identified areas with subsidence greater than 2 centimeters per month (marked in dark blue). The agency specifies that the areas marked in yellow and red could correspond to background signals (or noise) that are expected to diminish as the satellite instrument collects more data.

The image also highlights the location of Benito Juarez International Airport, located near Lake Nabor Carrillo, which operates in the middle of an area with accelerated subsidence. “Images like this confirm that the NISAR measurements are in line with expectations,” said Craig Ferguson, deputy director of the project.

Mexico City sits atop the clay and lake bed of ancient Lake Texcoco. NASA explains that this process is a consequence of intense groundwater pumping and the increasing weight associated with urban development. Both factors have caused the compaction of the ancient lake soil for more than a century.

The phenomenon was first documented in 1925 by engineer Roberto Gayol. Between the 1900s and 2000s, some areas experienced a drop of nearly 35 centimeters per year, causing damage to infrastructure such as the Metro, one of the largest mass transit systems in the Americas.

A study conducted in 2024 by Dario Solano-Rojas, a remote-sensing specialist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, found that subsidence is not uniform. After analyzing changes in the city’s elevation between 2011 and 2020, the researcher and his team concluded that subsidence rates are highly variable: While some areas register up to 50 centimeters per year, in others the phenomenon is almost imperceptible.

This creates “differential subsidence,” where the ground sinks unevenly not only across square kilometers or city blocks, but even on a meter scale. When a street, railway, or building sinks differently at one end compared to the other, its stability is compromised.