Some tech promises refuse to die, even after decades of “just around the corner.” On 21 October 2026, MIT Technology Review published its Impossible issue, a set of progress reports on six of them.
Key takeaways
- The six ideas are nuclear-powered spaceships, an exercise pill, animal-communication decoding, solid-state batteries, PFAS cleanup and ending traffic deaths.
- Each report asks experts what is holding the idea back and how far it has come.
- One of the six, road safety, relies on methods that already exist.
- A companion essay on Theranos is a reminder to question any story that is too appealing.
What are the six tech promises MIT Technology Review tested?
The magazine’s “Are we there yet?” special report groups six items. Its reporters are Robin George Andrews, Cassandra Willyard, Sara Kiley Watson and Alexander C. Kaufman. The newsletter version, written by Thomas Macaulay on 23 October 2026, says each one will get its own coverage in the days that follow.
I have read the report’s landing page and the newsletter, not every full article, so the table below sticks to the stated premise of each piece.
| Promise | What it would change |
|---|---|
| Nuclear-powered spaceships | Shorter trips to Mars and less cosmic radiation for astronauts |
| Exercise in a pill | Medicines that copy some of what movement does for the body |
| Interspecies communication | A look at how other species perceive the world |
| Solid-state batteries | Faster charging, longer life and cooler operation |
| Cleaning up PFAS | Removing “forever chemicals” that harm health and the environment |
| Eliminating traffic deaths | Proven road-safety methods that could save over 1 million lives a year |
Why do some tech promises take decades?
Most of these ideas fail in the gap between a lab result and a product. A battery that works in a small cell must still be made by the million, cheaply. A chemical that breaks down PFAS in a flask must still work on a whole contaminated river.
Solid-state batteries show the pattern well. Swapping the liquid electrolyte (the material that carries charge inside a battery) for a solid one promises faster charging and cooler running. The idea is simple to state. Doing it at scale is the hard part.
The same test applies to other big claims. We looked at one in our piece on the Tesla robotaxi bet, where the promise is clear and the proof is still being gathered.
Which of the six is the odd one out?
Traffic deaths. The report frames it as “simple, proven road-safety methods” that could save more than 1 million lives worldwide each year. Nothing here needs a breakthrough. It needs money, rules and political will.
My opinion: that makes it the most frustrating entry. The other five wait on science. This one waits on us.
Can AI really decode a pet’s yowls and yips?
Not yet, and the claims need care. Some early work reports high accuracy at recognising cat sounds, but that work is preliminary and a probability score only shows a pattern match, not what the cat means. Researchers also say reliable translation is not imminent.
Think of it as sorting a recording into “sounds like this one” piles. Naming the pile is easy. Knowing what the animal was thinking is a different job.
What does Theranos have to do with tech promises?
The same newsletter carries a warning from the other direction. In The Checkup, Jessica Hamzelou writes about the documentary You Can See Everything, about Elizabeth Holmes.
Theranos claimed it could run over 100 tests on a few drops of blood and was valued at $9 billion in 2014. A 2015 Wall Street Journal investigation questioned the tests. Holmes was sentenced in 2022 to just over 11 years in prison.
Several reporters who had interviewed her later admitted they were misled. Fortune’s Roger Parloff said in 2015, “I blew it.” Hamzelou’s point is that a good story can beat scrutiny, and that missing peer-reviewed data was an early warning sign.
She also notes that peer review is imperfect, with about 10,000 papers retracted in 2023. Preprints and press releases skip it altogether.
How should you judge the next big tech promise?
- Ask for independent data, not a demo or a press release.
- Ask what has to be true at scale: cost, supply, safety.
- Check whether the people vouching for it have something to sell.
- Be wary of a story that is perfect.
What happens next
MIT Technology Review says it will cover each of the six in the coming days, so fuller reporting on each one should follow the 23 October 2026 newsletter. Watch for specifics: named projects, test results and timelines.
The newsletter’s other items point the same way. It lists a reported 42% cut in risk of death in a Moderna and Merck personalized mRNA melanoma vaccine, and a prime editor reaching its first human patient. Both are early and worth reading in the original reports.
FAQ
What is the Impossible issue?
It is an MIT Technology Review package published on 21 October 2026 that checks progress on six long-promised technologies and ideas.
Which technologies does it cover?
Nuclear-powered spaceships, an exercise pill, interspecies communication, solid-state batteries, PFAS cleanup and eliminating traffic deaths.
Can I translate my pet’s sounds with an app?
Not reliably. Current research is early, and a confidence score shows a sound pattern, not what your pet means.
Next step: pick one of the six, read the full report, and decide for yourself how close it is.
Leave a comment