ResidentialBusiness

Hello again from Fast Company and thanks for reading Plugged In. Before I go any further, a bit of quick self-serving promotion: This week, we published our fifth annual Next Big Things in Tech list. Featuring 137 projects and people in 31 categories, it’s our guide to technologies that are already reshaping business and life in general, with plenty of headroom to go further in the years to come. None of them are the usual suspects—and many have largely flown under the radar. Take a look, and you’ll come away with some discoveries. Two weeks ago in this space, I wrote about Sora, OpenAI’s new social network devoted wholly to generating and remixing 10-second synthetic videos. At the time of launch, the company said its guardrails prohibited the inclusion of living celebrities, but also declared that it didn’t plan to police copyright violations unless owners explicitly opted out of granting permission. Consequently, the clips people shared were rife with familiar faces such as Pikachu and SpongeBob. Not surprisingly, that policy gave Hollywood fits. Quickly changing course, OpenAI tweaked its algorithm to reject prompts that clearly reference copyrighted IP. A handful of high-profile Sora members have used its Cameo feature to create shareable AI versions of themselves, including iJustine, Logan Paul, Mark Cuban, and OpenAI’s own Sam Altman. They’re everywhere on the service. But with other current celebs off the table, the Sora-obsessed turned to one of the few remaining available sources of cultural touchstones: dead people. That too has proven controversial. Most notably, the daughters of George Carlin, Martin Luther King Jr., Robin Williams, and Malcolm X have all decried the use of Sora to create synthetic videos of their fathers. “Please, just stop sending me AI videos of Dad,” wrote Zelda Williams on Instagram. “If you’ve got any decency, just stop doing this to him and to me, to everyone even, full stop.” I am sympathetic to their angst. In 2021, a genealogy site called MyHeritage presaged the Sora era by launching a feature called Deep Nostalgia that let you turn old family photographs into brief videos. Out of curiosity, I uploaded a photo of a deceased relative. The moment I saw the results, I regretted having done so. Being constantly exposed to AI simulacrums of your parent created by random strangers must be agonizing. In response to concerns about bad-taste AI resurrections, OpenAI told The Washington Post’s Tatum Hunter and Drew Harwell that it would allow representatives of the “recently deceased” to block Sora depictions. But the company didn’t specify what it considered to be recent. Whatever its definition, it’s not going to make everyone happy. The aforementioned famous fathers died anywhere from 1965 (Malcolm X) to 2014 (Williams). They surely won’t fall under a recency exception. Yet the old bit of wisdom “tragedy plus time equals comedy”—which apparently originated with another dead person, comedian Steve Allen—doesn’t always hold true. It depends on the context. Even more than a decade later, Robin Williams’s death by suicide still feels like an incalculable tragedy. I have not run across any videos of him on Sora, and would prefer I never do. But I don’t feel the same way about Queen Elizabeth II, who made it to 96 and was spry until her 2022 passing. Actually, I thoroughly enjoyed a jag of Sora remixes that began with a clip of her praising the cheese puffs at Costco (“delightfully orange”) and went on to show her relishing other delicacies in various venues around the world. Some of these clips made me LOL, not figuratively but literally. In fact, the only reason I peruse Sora at all is because an overwhelming percentage of the items in my feed are fanciful and at least aspirationally funny. AI slop of the sort that strives—however clumsily—for realism is scarce on the service. The same is hardly true on other social networks such as Facebook and TikTok, which are infested with machine-generated kindhearted celebrities and cute animals. I’m not saying that Sora is consistently riotous. I’ve scrolled through a lot of videos of MLK—and Mister Rogers, Bob Ross, and others—in which the only point is that they’re mouthing some anodyne term they wouldn’t have used, or talking about Sora itself. That gets tiresome fast, and makes me at least slightly queasy. It might even be slop. It’s just not the sum total of Sora. I have not been above making my own Sora videos depicting the departed. Inspired by the fact that Orson Welles once recorded a radio commercial for frozen peas, I prompted for a video depicting him filming such an ad. It came out entertaining, in part because Sora’s version of Welles reminded me of the late John Candy’s wonderful impression of him. Other users remixed the clip into ones showing Welles endorsing everything from twine to camp chairs, starring less and less convincing approximations of the legendary actor-director. Maybe you had to be there. But I found it to be a rewarding if minor act of collaborative creativity, not a regrettable coarsening of the internet. All in all, encouraging people to channel their AI-video-generating energy into clips that are playful, genuinely social, and cordoned off from reality, as Sora does, seems like a positive development to me. Still, I try to show grace toward the feelings of others and would accept more restrictive policies on the use of deceased celebrities. Maybe the service could permit them only if nobody alive ever met the person in question. Cleopatra and Abraham Lincoln would pass that test; Marilyn Monroe and Albert Einstein would not. (That’s before you get to the fact that the estates of some celebrities have deals with licensing companies that probably aren’t thrilled with Sora’s unauthorized use, such as CMG Worldwide, which represents the Monroe and Einstein estates.) If nothing else, building new guardrails around specific categories of famed individuals no longer with us would be an interesting challenge for some engineer at OpenAI. I can’t see the company investing much effort in it. But in a strange way, it’s done the world a favor by forcing us to confront questions like this while the stakes remain relatively low. AI is only going to get better at deepfaking people, famous and otherwise. Better to figure out how we feel about that now, before the synthetic dead folks are truly indistinguishable from the real thing. You’ve been reading Plugged In, Fast Company’s weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to you—or if you’re reading it on FastCompany.com—you can check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself every Friday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at hmccracken@fastcompany.com with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters. I’m also on Bluesky, Mastodon, and Threads, and you can follow Plugged In on Flipboard. More top tech stories from Fast Company Inside Microsoft’s quest to make Windows 11’s AI irresistible Executives with a combined 130+ years of tenure on the company’s decades of work to get people to talk to their PCs—and why the time might finally be right. Read More → Billionaire investor Frank McCourt is not giving up on his dream of acquiring TikTok The financier says he wants a closer look at the The President deal for the wildly popular social-media platform. Read More → Goodbye, SEO. Hello, GEO How AI search is rewriting digital strategy. Read More → How kids are getting around classroom phone bans ‘Kids will always find a way, but honestly, the creativity involved is a skill worth developing,’ one teacher commented. Read More → This addictive game is like ‘SimCity’ but for transit nerds The goal of ‘Subway Builder’ is to move people from A to B. Some believe it might just start a transit revolution in the process. Read More → 5 time-saving Google Calendar tricks you should be using Make your calendar work for you, not the other way around. Read More → View the full article

Financial crises and their consequences may be harder to arrest today than in the pastView the full article

Decision on planning application has been pushed back to December in latest blow to relationsView the full article

We are in an era of strategic silence—no longer in the age of the activist CEO. Instead, business leaders are being told to lie low and stay in their lane to avoid unwanted attention, including from the White House. In the wake of Jimmy Kimmel’s removal from ABC, CEOs are reportedly turning down press and speaking opportunities. Today, leaders are faced with the question of when to speak up . . . and when to stay strategically silent in order to protect their constituents. Reverend Mariann Budde is an expert on speaking up. She was thrust into the national spotlight during President The President’s inauguration when she preached a sermon urging him to “have mercy upon the people in our country who are scared now.” In the weeks that followed, Budde was publicly criticized by President The President, and received both hate mail—as well as an overwhelming amount of gratitude for speaking up. Budde believes bravery can be learned. She is the author of How We Learn to Be Brave, a book about what courage looks like in our lives, and how we can cultivate it. She’ll be releasing an adaptation for younger readers, We Can Be Brave, in late October. Reverend Budde sat down with Fast Company to discuss how leaders should think about speaking up in an environment where doing so has very real consequences. In this paid Premium story, you’ll: Hear how Reverend Budde’s decision to speak out against President The President affected her—both negatively and positively Understand the time and place leaders should speak out Get advice for dealing with the aftermath of speaking up [The following conversation has been edited for clarity.] How can leaders distinguish between when it’s necessary to speak up, versus when it’s actually not worth the risk and, in fact, foolhardy? It’s a very important question. And if there were a formula then it would be easy, right? We would all know. And part of the uncertainty and the risk is that we don’t know. Is this an important time—either for our personal integrity, the well-being of others, or the interests of our community or business—to speak out? Is this a time when we have reputational strength and wherewithal to withstand anticipated blowback? You don’t have to rise to every occasion, if it’s not wise. I think in times like this, these are serious questions to ask, because whole constituencies are at risk. However, there are times when we self-censor or when we step back unnecessarily, out of the anticipation of consequences that may or may not be real. There are dangers when we all take the safe route. It leaves a big gap for really unhealthy dynamics in society to have free reign. I think we are at risk of seeing some of that now, to be honest. What’s the cost to society if we all take the safe route? Unfortunately, in the beginning, you don’t see it unless you are near a vulnerable population, which is why proximity to those who are most impacted by the large societal movements is so important. I live in Washington, D.C., and people ask me: What’s it like in Washington now? It really depends on where you’re standing. For some people, life is just fine, and for other people, it is a living terror. How do you decide when to use your voice? Carefully. I don’t speak up every day. I did not and I don’t speak up on everything. I weigh my very limited public impact potential carefully. I try to stay in my lane, which is where spiritual values that I represent are in alignment with the democratic aspirations of our country. When I speak up, I do so from that foundation, and also from a constituency base that I personally represent. What’s a time when you didn’t speak up and wish you had? I wake up almost every day thinking of human inflicted starvation in Gaza. I am asked repeatedly to speak out, and I have done so very rarely, in part because I have very deep ties within the Jewish community here in Washington and in this country. I recognize not only the complexity of the situation, but also the impact that things I might say or do. The Archbishop of the Anglican church in Jerusalem asks us sometimes not to say anything because it just makes things worse for them. But I tell you, it doesn’t feel good to be quiet sometimes. Not that I have any illusions in this particular political environment that I would make a difference, which is another calculation I make: If I have absolutely no chance of affecting change by what I say, I have to decide if it’s worth the cost. You have spoken up in a very public way that has thrust you into the national spotlight. What was the impact on you personally? Well, first of all, it was a very unusual opportunity that was given to me to preach at the post inaugural prayer service. In terms of the upside, that was a privilege. The downside, it was obviously hard. It cost me a lot to think that through. I clearly offended the President and his inner circle, and they took the opportunity to make that known and it set in motion an onslaught of reaction for about three weeks. Our entire church was flooded with some pretty mean-spirited and false accusations. So that was the hard part. The other side to it was also a huge outpouring of gratitude, the likes of which I’ve never experienced. Boxes and boxes of mail—so much we couldn’t open it. People wrote me letters that began with, “I’m not a religious person, but I wanted to tell you how much what you said meant to me. Thank you for reminding people that my child is a human.” What advice do you have for people who do want to use their voice in a very public way, such as the way you have? Maybe people such as other leaders? It’s very helpful to be grounded. For three or four days, you’re at the height of all this energy and attention, and then the world goes silent. And it’s time to take out the garbage and remember that you forgot 17 things on your to-do list. It’s helpful to remember while there’s a response to you, your life is rooted somewhere else. We’re not the first generation of Americans to experience significant pulling back from values that we thought had been well-established. It was no picnic in the early 1920s when resegregation was introduced into this country. What did the people do then, and what can we do now? It’s also good to have a sense of humor, and a couple of children around to keep you grounded. We are at a time of deep disconnection and polarization. What does good leadership look like right now, especially if you’re leading people who are deeply divided? We don’t realize how influenced we have become by the contempt that’s poisoning our society. We can’t have conversations with people who differ from us in ways that don’t dehumanize and belittle one another. If we can’t figure out how to talk to each other across our differences, we will never, ever solve the problems that we’re facing as a society. You do have to speak up in the face of hatred and intolerance, but how you do it matters. You have to meet that kind of intolerance with firm conviction and persuasion—and yet not robbing that person of their inherent dignity as well. What does it mean to be brave? From our earliest days as human beings, we have to and are summoned to do things that we have never done before. Stepping into something that is unfamiliar carries some degree of risk, and yet this is the miracle of our existence. Even though we’re afraid, we know exactly what we’re supposed to do. Sometimes we’re really excited because we feel like we’re in our element and we can do this. Other times, we’re terrified. We don’t know if we can do it. And we learn sometimes that we can’t, in fact, do that thing, and we fail. Then the most important learning is what is the brave moment after failure or disappointment or making a mistake? I find that the brave or the courageous call in those times is to step up, learn, wipe off whatever humiliation or wounding that happens, and persevere. View the full article

When brands hire illustrators, animators, or other artists, they typically know what they’re paying for: a defined set of creative assets, delivered on deadline, with clear usage rights. But in the age of generative AI, that’s no longer the whole picture. Commissioned artwork is increasingly being used not just in finished campaigns, but as training data to power AI models—models that, in turn, generate new, derivative outputs. Often, this use isn’t spelled out in contracts. It’s not malicious. It’s just . . . new. That’s left brands, agencies, and artists in a tricky spot—trying to apply old licensing logic to a new generation of tools. The result is a growing disconnect between how creative work is made, how it’s used, and how it’s paid for. What’s needed isn’t a philosophical debate about machine creativity. It’s a practical framework—one flexible enough for fast-moving teams, but structured enough to protect the humans still at the heart of the process. The Creative Loop Has Changed Traditionally, artists get paid for what they deliver—a character design, a series of storyboards, a set of icons or illustrations. The license defines where, how long, and in what formats those assets can be used. But as AI workflows become more embedded in creative production, the loop looks different. A brand commissions original artwork. That artwork is used not only in campaigns, but to fine-tune a generative model trained to produce content “in the style of” the original work. From there, marketing teams or third-party vendors can generate dozens of variations on demand—without going back to the original artist. There’s nothing inherently unethical about this. In many cases, it’s efficient and creatively useful. But if the artist who trained the model isn’t compensated for that secondary use, a value gap opens up. And that gap becomes a reputational risk for the brand—especially as creative professionals, advocacy groups, and consumers become more AI-literate. A Shift from Ownership to Participation This isn’t a question of whether AI should be used. That debate is over. The question now is how to ensure the humans who shape the aesthetic intelligence of these systems are fairly recognized and fairly paid. One path forward is to rethink the licensing structure. Instead of defaulting to flat fees for fixed deliverables, brands can structure creative engagements to reflect how derivative value is created over time. That starts by offering two distinct paths: one built around full ownership, and the other designed for ongoing participation. In the ownership model, brands pay a higher up-front fee that covers the rights to train a model, generate derivative outputs, and use those outputs across campaigns without future royalties. It’s clean, comprehensive, and often a fit for fast-scaling companies or complex campaigns with long content tails. In the participation model, brands pay a standard commission fee and then compensate the artist over time, based on how their work is used to generate new content. This might look like a royalty per output, a revenue share, or a pooled licensing structure tied to usage volume—akin to how publishers or music rights organizations operate. Neither option is perfect. But both reflect the realities of modern creative work—where original contributions can fuel a long arc of generative production. More importantly, they offer artists a choice in how their labor and influence are valued. What a Smarter Licensing Framework Looks Like For brands and agencies ready to adopt more transparent compensation models, the good news is this doesn’t require a reinvention of the creative contract. A few key mechanisms, easily added to existing agreements, can bring clarity to how AI-derived work is used and monetized. The first is a Commission-to-Model clause. It makes explicit that commissioned work will be used to train a model, and defines the scope of that use. These clauses can specify what kind of model is being trained, whether third-party partners will have access, and how long the model can be used. Crucially, they establish triggers for expanded use—say, across new business units or global campaigns—that would require a conversation or renewal. Think of it as the AI-era equivalent of a sync license for a song: it clarifies how the “source material” can be extended and scaled. Next is a Derivative Use Ladder—a pricing framework that reflects how far an AI-generated asset strays from the original commission. Minor edits or resizes might be included in the base fee. AI-generated variants used within the same campaign could carry a modest uplift. Broader reuse across platforms, regions, or product lines would trigger higher fees or require relicensing. The goal isn’t to over-monetize creativity. It’s to avoid ambiguity and allow both sides to plan with confidence. For brands building longer-term systems, where a model trained on original artwork might generate thousands of outputs, a royalty-bearing model license may be the most aligned. This could take the form of a flat fee per generated asset, a quarterly revenue share, or a pooled royalty structure when multiple artists contribute to a shared model. The mechanics can vary. What matters is the principle: as the system creates more outputs, more value should flow back to the creative source. Each of these frameworks can integrate into existing production workflows. But together, they offer something more powerful: a shift in mindset from “we own what we paid for” to “we share in what we build together.” What Artists Want (and Brands Can Offer) Artists aren’t looking to halt innovation. Most understand the value of generative tools. Many already use them in their own workflows. What they want is transparency, consent, and a fair share of the value created when their work is used to teach machines. That doesn’t mean every output requires a payment. But it does mean brands should be prepared to offer clear terms—not just to protect themselves legally, but to build trust with the creative talent they rely on. A Reputation-Forward Approach to AI As generative AI becomes normalized in creative production, scrutiny is rising: lawsuits over unlicensed training data, open letters from illustrators, AI-generated brand work that backfires online. In this environment, it’s no longer enough to stay quiet and hope no one asks. Responsible AI use is becoming part of a brand’s public posture. A clear, fair compensation model for human contributors isn’t just ethically sound—it’s reputationally smart. Put simply: compensating the people who make your model smarter is good business. Pay the Source The creative economy is shifting—from artifact to algorithm, from fixed deliverables to living systems, from single commissions to ongoing creative loops. In that new reality, we need new rules. Paying the source isn’t about holding onto the past. It’s about designing a future where artists, technologists, and brands can build together, with clarity and trust. That future is already arriving. The only question is whether we meet it with contracts that reflect the tools we use—or keep pretending the old ones are enough. View the full article

Logan Ivey has tried everything to cut down on his screen time. He bought a modern “dumbphone” that’s designed to be used as little as possible, tried a device called a Brick that removes distracting apps and notifications from a smartphone, and even resorted to a classic flip phone when all else failed. Still, nothing was working. So he turned his iPhone into a 6-pound weight. The 6 Pound Phone Case is a bulky, stainless steel contraption designed to make your smartphone extremely annoying to use. Inspired by the aesthetics of an ’80s brick phone, the case transforms a typical, ultra-portable iPhone into a cumbersome eyesore—and that’s the whole point. Ivey, who has been using the case for the past two months, says it has helped cut his screen time in half. Currently, the 6 Pound Phone Case is just a prototype, but Ivey is raising money through a Kickstarter page to sell a small batch of the cases for a whopping $210 each (the hefty price tag, he says, is due to the high manufacturing costs and current tariffs on steel). Ivey’s invention is the latest in a recent series of out-there projects designed to help smartphone users “hack” their brains into cutting the doomscroll short. In the late 2010s, dumbphones enjoyed a spike in popularity—but since then, many users have met with the unfortunate reality that they need smartphone functions like maps, Google, email, and other services to navigate the day-to-day. Creative minds have thought up all kinds of solutions to this conundrum, including an app that forces you to literally touch grass before you scroll, a phone case that doubles as a tiny screen, and an app that uses an animated bean character to guilt-trip you out of going on social media. The 6 Pound Phone Case is the newest addition to this wacky smartphone detox lineup—and it might just be the most effective. Designing a 6-Pound Phone Case Ivey uses social media for a living. He’s both an independent creator and a full-time social media producer for Matter Neuroscience, a company he describes as dedicated to “bridging the gap between everyday behavior and molecular science.” Part of Matter Neuroscience’s mission has included building an app that lets users track their emotions every week to understand what kind of behaviors drive happiness. Through this project, Ivey says, he realized just how much his phone was sapping his energy and blocking his “feel-good neurotransmitters.” After trying dumbphones, a flip phone, and app blockers, Ivey realized that, especially given his job in social media, it was just too inconvenient to try replacing his smartphone. Instead, he needed a way to make his iPhone feel more like a tool than an addictive pastime. “I asked myself, ‘How can I keep all the functionality of my phone, but still use it less?’” Ivey says. “Then I thought, like, What if my phone was just really heavy and inconvenient to use?” Matter Neuroscience partnered with Ivey to help make the idea reality. He turned to the clunky form factor of an ’80s brick phone as inspiration, designing a case with one flat surface and two jutting rectangles on its top and bottom. Cutouts for charging, volume buttons, power, and a tapered camera hole keep every part of the phone functional—but its stainless steel construction, which can be removed only by unscrewing four screws with an Allen wrench, makes it physically difficult to hold for too long. “At 6 pounds, your hands and arms physically get tired while using it,” the case’s Kickstarter page reads. “That fatigue reminds you to put the phone down.” Further, it adds, the case’s size is inconveniently big, purposefully preventing the user from tucking it in their pocket. “You have to carry it in a bag like a laptop, or leave it in another room. That means fewer phantom notifications, fewer sidewalk swipes, and fewer brain rot sessions while pooping (and maybe less hemorrhoids).” In Ivey’s experience, the 6 Pound Phone Case has cut his screen time from four and a half hours per week to just two. While Ivey does hope to sell some of the cases through his Kickstarter with Matter Neuroscience, he doesn’t have plans to patent the design, and sees it as a concept that could have genuine potential for other phone case companies. “Those little moments in life where you just instinctively reach for your phone, I don’t do anymore,” Ivey says, “because I either don’t have it on me or it’s too heavy.” View the full article

If you’ve noticed that the internet feels different lately—more cluttered, harder to navigate—you’re not imagining it. The system is breaking down in real time, and by 2026, researchers predict that 90% of web content will be AI-generated. Quality journalism is disappearing behind paywalls while feeds fill with noise designed purely to capture attention. An innovation that was supposed to democratize information is now drowning us in it. I know this intimately because I helped build it. As founder of AppNexus, which sold to AT&T for $1.6 billion, and former CTO of Right Media, I created the technology that became the backbone of digital advertising, a multibillion-dollar industry and the economic engine funding everything from major newsrooms to niche blogs. Now that engine is stalling. You are now the product Here’s what happened: instead of paying for what you have actually read or watched, the advertising system turned you into the product. Every click, search, and scroll got auctioned to the highest bidder. You became the currency. And once the dollars followed your data rather than content quality, the value of real information slipped into the background. The effects are everywhere. News organizations are consolidating rapidly or shuttering entirely. AI-generated slop is creeping into YouTube and other online communities, and flooding search results with spam. Trust in the media and the online ecosystem is on the brink of collapse. Shoes chase you around the internet, misinformation spreads faster than facts, and billions vanish to fraud. It feels like the end. But I’ve seen this before. A recurring pattern The internet has a pattern: it breaks, people panic, and then it is rebuilt into something much better. Web 1.0 gave us static pages and basic connectivity. Web 2.0 brought user-generated content and social interaction—but not before people warned it would destroy traditional media entirely. Each transition looked catastrophic while it was happening. Remember when mobile first arrived? Mobile websites were impossible to read. Ads covered half your screen. Everything required pinch-to-zoom and patience. Companies spent years trying to shove desktop experiences onto phones before they figured out that mobile needed its own infrastructure. It felt broken and annoying, until it didn’t. With phones constantly in hand and the first screen for most people, we barely remember the awkward transition. Another phase We’re in that awkward phase again. Our attention is fragmented across more platforms, devices, and channels than ever. We seek information and entertainment everywhere, and we have higher expectations: we want access without annoyance, quality without cost, personalization without intrusion. The current infrastructure wasn’t built for this reality. Now, AI has cascaded into everything. It’s generating slop that’s flooding search results and feeds, yes, but it’s also the tool we’re using to rebuild. We are reorganizing our lives around it: how we work, how we find information, how we consume content. What some are calling the “agentic AI economy”—where AI is integrated as an intelligent intermediary that reasons, plans, and acts to solve problems—is starting to take shape. The internet’s infrastructure will be fine once it catches up to that shift and the industry rethinks its fundamental economics. Course correction Licensing deals, revenue sharing, and “pay-per-crawl” compensation models are taking shape to course correct and ensure publishers start to be paid for their value and those will continue to evolve as the industry sees what sticks. Meanwhile, AI companies themselves, OpenAI being the most recent, are investing in advertising infrastructure, recognizing that if chat and AI engines are here to stay as primary channels, they need sustainable business models beyond subscriptions. New targeting approaches leveraging agentic AI are also on the horizon, offering the promise of eliminating waste and fraud that would otherwise go toward funding made-for-advertising websites or AI slop. Companies like mine, Scope3, offer “agentic advertising,” using AI agents to match ads to specific content themes and values rather than relying on personal data or demographics. Try this: copy a page you’ve browsed and paste it into ChatGPT, then ask it to produce an ad and compare the result to what’s actually on the page. More likely than not, ChatGPT gave a better ad without even needing your browser history or data. This makes content the product again, not you. Quality publishers get rewarded while content farms and fraudulent sites are starved of revenue. These are proof points that the economic infrastructure is being rebuilt. A turning point The internet’s promise doesn’t have to die with its decline. We’re at a turning point where we know AI will shape the web—that’s inevitable. Now we decide what kind of system we build with it. If the attention economy monetized distraction, the agentic AI economy has the chance to monetize trust. We can use AI to filter noise instead of creating it. We can reward publications that invest in fact-checking and original reporting. We can connect ads based on values and genuine interest rather than demographic profiles. Or we can let the internet collapse—either descending into unusable chaos where AI slop buries everything of value or splitting into a world where quality content exists only behind paywalls most people can’t afford. The builders who understand this moment, those championing dynamics that reward quality and trust, are ready to shape what’s next. The internet we want is possible. We just have to choose to build it. View the full article

It’s a sound—and smell—car commuters have become intimately familiar with: the noxious fumes of asphalt repaving. U.S. road maintenance and highway expansion require a massive quantity of asphalt every year, roughly 400 million tons a year on average, according to Asphalt magazine, a publication of the international trade association Asphalt Institute. But a new process developed by St. Louis-based firm Verde Resources seeks to streamline the process, making it more sustainable and odorless. Verde’s new BioAsphalt process, which has been in development since 2022, utilizes what’s called biochar, or natural wood remnants from forestry waste that get added into the traditional asphalt material mixture of limestone and granite aggregates. This allows the road mixture to sequester a small amount of carbon. Verde CEO Jack Wong estimates that for every 100 tons of BioAsphalt that gets laid, 10 tons of carbon dioxide gets sequestered. “We’re essentially creating a no-brainer model for the industry to transition to, making the product as competitive as traditional asphalt with environmental advantages and benefits,” Wong says. Asphalt’s environmental footprint is significant. In addition to using petroleum-based materials and requiring extensive energy for heating and installation, it also releases dangerous particulate matter as cars and trucks drive atop it. The National Asphalt Pavement Association estimated that laying down the material results in 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually in the U.S.; for comparison, that’s about one-seventh the amount of emissions created by the nation’s commercial airline industry. Earlier this summer, BioAsphalt passed the initial stages of a test at the National Center for Asphalt Technology at Auburn University in Alabama. A section of BioAsphalt roadway was tested for a year, with staff running modified 80-ton trucks across the test bed to verify its durability. The material, one of a handful trying to make asphalt less environmentally damaging, has been given an okay for lower-impact applications like local roads and parking lots. “We’ve had plenty of materials and ideas come through the test track over the years, but few show the carbon reduction potential that Verde’s Biochar Asphalt does, and it’s definitely the first technology on the track with a carbon sequestration component,” said Nathan Moore, assistant director for test track research at NCAT, in a statement. While the early validation confirms its suitability for light-duty pavements, continuous evaluations are underway to determine its long-term viability for medium- to high-traffic roadways and even runways, as part of NCAT’s multiyear test cycle. The secret to Verde’s process is a proprietary emulsifying agent that blends with a liquid asphalt binder to create a specialized emulsion, bonding the biochar and aggregate. This offers an alternative to the petroleum-based bitumen that traditionally binds roads Wong wouldn’t reveal the exact additives in the firm’s process, other than to say they’re nonhazardous. A self-proclaimed Dune fan, he calls them “spice.” But they bond the roadway mixture without needing the heat required during the traditional asphalt laying process, which can hit 300 degrees Fahrenheit. This opens up new opportunities for the road construction industry. On-site crews don’t need to cart gas canisters or additional gear to heat up the asphalt, so they can travel more lightly. In addition, since heat isn’t needed in the application process, they can work longer into the cold months of the year, expanding when they can repair and resurface roads and parking lots. This also means that the factories that make the asphalt mix don’t need to use heat as well. Wong added that while the BioAsphalt is about 15% to 20% more expensive to make, by weight, due to the different materials, it’s engineered to require a thinner layer when applied. So it actually ends up being slightly cheaper when energy savings and reduced material volume are factored in. Wong hopes to scale up quickly. BioAsphalt doesn’t need to be heated with traditional furnaces, but it can be made in the same factory settings as traditional asphalt—meaning that existing infrastructure can make the mix without needing to spend money on powering industrial furnaces. Verde is working with Ergon Asphalt & Emulsions, one of the largest liquid asphalt producers in North America, on arranging distribution and licensing the proprietary process to other producers. Wong hopes to ramp up production substantially in the next year and eventually capture 10% of the market. Roadways, of course, aren’t just sources of pollution themselves. But they can be considered fossil fuel infrastructure because they support the use of cars and trucks burning gasoline and diesel fuel. In response, Wong says that he feels Verde’s product offers a practical way to immediately reduce emissions that go into roadway repair and expansion. “We’re providing an immediate solution to the day-to-day needs for our very robust and mature road network,” Wong says. View the full article

With more than a decade of experience working as a design and tech analyst, Andrew Hogan is all in on the efficiency and ease that tech brings to our lives. But lately at home with his daughters (ages 4 and 18 months), Hogan is grappling with something unwieldy and undefined: how parents, kids, and technology interact, from smartphones to screen time to AI. “We are so eager to remove friction—avoid it and smooth over the rough spots, especially as parents,” Hogan says. In fall 2024, Hogan began writing a newsletter called Parent.Tech, designed to help him, and other parents, better understand how to navigate the increasingly complex world of tech and consumer products. Some of the topics covered include parenting apps, parental controls, AI’s place (or not) in homework, and how to build a framework for kids’ tech use. “I want to be a better dad, and Parent.Tech was a path to doing that,” Hogan says. “It’s given me some scaffolding and context to make decisions.” Hogan is parenting children who are on the back end of the “anxious generation,” named for a book written by social psychologist and New York University professor Jonathan Haidt. Touted by Oprah Winfrey and Katie Couric, the book links the steep decline in adolescent mental health to the increased reliance on screens and technology, calling this period in our culture “the great re-wiring of childhood.” Haidt advocates for more time steeped in unfettered play and fewer hours tethered to tech. While Haidt’s messaging isn’t entirely new (documentaries Screenagers in 2016 and The Social Dilemma in 2020, and the Wait Until 8th campaign have all introduced similar conversations), it’s spurred a renewed interest among parents to seek out new ways to manage tech. Entrepreneurs are listening. In the past decade, dozens of products have hit the market with the intention of giving kids and their families (everyone, really) the tools to reclaim attention, relationships, and presence. Businesses like Yondr are making it easier for kids to go phone-free in school; startups like Tin Can ($75) are bringing back the landline; and mobile-phone makers including Light Phone ($699), Pinwheel ($119), and Gabb Wireless (phones starting at $149) are offering phones free of social media and web access. Plus, there are untold numbers of toys that promise to help children enjoy the screen-free fun they deserve. These companies have identified a real need—it’s clear by now that willpower alone is not enough to keep humans off their screens. And together they are channeling our techno-anxiety into a new and growing market of products that parents are increasingly willing to shell out for. Determining the size of this market is still tricky because the products don’t fit into a neat box, despite their shared mission, says Audrey Chee-Read, principal analyst in Forrester’s CMO practice. “What you have isn’t really an established category with specific guardrails [e.g., there’s tech like Gabb that’s considered kids consumer tech versus Yondr that’s not a tech],” she says. “So there is probably a forecast out there on consumer or family tech products [of which Gabb, Tin Can, and Light Phone would be under] but that will also encapsulate other things like gaming.” Still, it’s clear that these businesses are growing: From 2020 to 2023, Gabb grew 895%, nabbing a spot on the 2024 Inc. 5000 list, while Pinwheel landed in the top 5% of that same list. Jacqueline Nesi, psychologist and assistant professor at Brown University who writes a newsletter called TechnoSapiens and runs a consultancy called Tech Without Stress, says the shift is undeniable: “People realize we can’t get rid of technology so [they’re asking] How do we learn to live with it in a way that promotes our well-being rather than detracts from it?” Building protected spaces that mimic the “before” While most children haven’t experienced life without screens, for most parents (especially Gen Xers), there’s a distinct before and after. An increasing number of adults, says Chee-Read, want to tether back to a time when phones weren’t in every pocket and we didn’t feel the pull to check social feeds at school or work. Distraction wasn’t as pervasive in our culture and there was a level of freedom to be in the moment. For Graham Dugoni, grappling with the desire to spend more time in the “before” made him a founder. His company, Yondr, makes and sells lockable neoprene pouches that allow people to leave their personal tech behind at school, work, concerts, and for other experiences to remove distraction and foster connection. Dugoni refers to the Yondr mission as creating a sort of “National Park system” of protected spaces. “It’s a big exercise in social psychology,” he says. “What happens in a phone-free space is at some level giving people a sense of freedom that they can’t find in other walks of modern life. We view ourselves as part of a counterculture movement.” Inspired by philosophers such as Martin Heidegger, who explored what it means to be in the world, and Marshall McLuhan, who studied the effects media has on society, Dugoni started the business in 2014, hand-making the pouches and selling them out of his Toyota RV. Since then, he’s scaled Yondr to reach more than 300% year-over-year growth. Dugoni hopes his product will become a form of infrastructure for a world with less screen time. The company now works with schools in 35 countries and 50 U.S. states, including one-third of all New York City secondary public schools. Los Angeles Public Schools (80% of middle schools and high schools in the district) work with the company, too, and Yondr’s neoprene pouches are also used at Madison Square Garden and at comedy clubs throughout the U.S. In fact, one of the first big relationships Dugoni secured was with comedian Dave Chappelle, who asks his audience members to store their phones in Yondr pouches during his shows to protect his act from online leaks and to maintain a distraction-free audience experience. Says Dugoni: “It’s so wildly traditional, it might be revolutionary.” A big piece of being in any emerging market, he says, is buy-in and consumer education. At schools, that takes the form of writing letters to parents, holding community forums, meeting with school administration, and step-by-step, day-by-day guidance for students and adults on what a phone-free school day looks like. “We always start with a why,” says David Franklin, Yondr’s manager of partner programming. “We need to change the school culture—that changes attitudes and it pushes this idea forward.” At concerts and comedy clubs, Yondr employees cruise the line into the venue, talking to attendees about the pouches, how they work, and why they’re a key part of that night’s audience experience. Sometimes, Dugoni says, people resist the idea, wanting to keep their phones available. Other times, folks are happy to try the pouch for a phone-free night. “The majority of our work is around experience design,” he says. “What things have to be true for this thing to work? It’s about how you approach people and make it conducive to their understanding: ‘This is a special experience and what you are stepping into is worth everyone being there for it.’” Seizing gaps in the attention economy Around the same time Dugoni founded Yondr, Kaiwei Tang met his now business partner Joe Hollier at a Google incubator program in 2014. The two founded Light Phone, one of the first “dumbphones” on the market, a year later. The spark for Light Phone was a desire to sidestep the attention economy and a frustration with the available options. Now on its third iteration, Light Phone III (priced at $699) offers people a chance to leave the house with a way to communicate, check the weather, listen to music, or find directions, all while free of the nagging distractions that often come along with smartphones. And while Tang knew there was a market for his product, he also quickly learned there’d be tension around its adoption. Change can be awkward, and as much as Light Phone built something for people who want some space from always-on tech, there would also be some friction around what using Light Phone means on a granular level. “We got so much feedback from our users; when people used it, the first 15 or 20 minutes were really nerve-racking,” Tang says. “Everyone had this anxiety. Standing to pay for your groceries and you don’t know what to do. After 15 or 20 minutes, you get over the FOMO, you remember what’s happening, you pay attention to the details of the buildings or trees you never really noticed.” Managing that dissonance, Tang says, has been a big part of the company’s growth. “Asking anyone to change a longtime behavior is going to be hard,” he admits. “We see it with food. We know we’re eating too much grease. We can’t help ourselves. We’re trying to show the benefits of the organic and healthy food brands, but we’re not asking everyone to become vegan. It’s the same thing with Light Phone. We’re trying to show the benefits of breaking away from the smartphone.” Gabb Wireless is another business aiming to knock off a sliver of this market, selling Samsung phones dressed in the company’s proprietary software, built specifically for kids and teens. Gabb phones and watches have no internet and no social media. Parental controls are built in, with safety and developmentally appropriate communication tools tailored for kids. Parents also have access to a Gabb app on their phones, allowing them to tap into location sharing, video calls, and text flagging capabilities on their kids’ devices. CEO Nate Randle says that while businesses in the category started when the conversation around kids and smartphones wasn’t really much of a thing, the market opportunity has been clear from the start. “We talk about TAM [total addressable market],” he says. “There are more than 60 million kids in the U.S. alone between the ages of 5 and 16. There is a wide-open market for an alternative solution to smartphones.” And for Gabb, showing up as a solution for families and kids has required an awareness around what it means to be a kids’ tech brand. “Traditionally, when someone thinks of a kids’ brand, they go to rainbows and stars,” says Brad Dowdle, VP of creative at Gabb Wireless. “This is Generation Alpha. They’ve grown up around technology. They’re savvy. It has to be aspirational, and they can’t feel we’re designing down to them.” When business opportunity and cultural change collide As these solutions emerge and build a following, it’s also important to zoom out on attitudes toward technology, privacy, and life online. For instance, says Chee-Read, while 63% of adults say they’re concerned about online behavior being tracked, less than half of youth report feeling similarly. At the same time, grassroots organizations are pushing for legislation in California, New York, Pennsylvania, and other states to ban phones from school. A company like Tin Can, which has a mission to make the landline cool again, is showing up on national news and having a viral moment on Instagram. Jerry Chen, the founder of Firewalla, which sells cybersecurity software to homes and businesses to shield everything from baby cameras and laptops to speakers and phones, says in its first five years the business doubled in revenue annually, followed by a “slowdown” of 100% growth every two years. On top of all of this, of course, is a vanishing amount of institutional knowledge and understanding. As technology progresses, the number of people available to provide relevant support and advice on how to manage it—especially as parents—is disappearing. The factors present five years ago in terms of managing the way technology influences daily life are nearly irrelevant today. And five years from now, we’ll be immersed in entirely new circumstances. Founders who can manage that kind of market speed and the dissonance around technology and its place in our lives stand to create solutions with real staying power. Entrepreneurs and CEOs like Dugoni, Randle, Tang, and Chen are selling products, yes, but they’re also shaping a new version of what it means to grow up and live in our world. This is not a market built to reject tech but rather to redefine how we relate to it. And for now, Hogan’s hope is that continuing to work on Parent.Tech in his off-hours will help him find the middle path in managing tech tools for himself and his kids. “People need to design these tools, and then we need to pay for these tools,” Hogan says. “We have to figure it out. No one is coming to change it for us.” View the full article

There’s no shortage of inspiration for what to do with a part of the house that’s not quite looking its best. Interior design magazines and furniture blogs are stuffed with idealized bedrooms, and online vision boards make it easy to cast a dragnet over the myriad images of classy lounges or perfectly ordered home offices. But there’s always the unavoidable catch that while these images may be helpful references for how to rethink a room, they don’t actually represent your room. A new AI tool offers a more personalized alternative. Created by the online interior design service Havenly, it’s an app-based AI design assistant that takes user-submitted images of rooms and instantly offers modifiable design alternatives. Using AI image generation and a chatbot-based conversation about the type of design a user wants, the tool quickly pops out multiple options, with prompts to add or change things. An interactive interface allows users to swap out or even buy actual products and furnishings shown in the design concepts. “It’s built on real design,” says Havenly CEO Lee Mayer. She cofounded the company in 2014, and for the past several years Havenly has been collecting its online design work in a broad database that covers more than 2 million individual design decisions and data points. Combining that with the inventories of several furnishings brands Havenly has acquired over the years, the company had the raw training materials for a large language model, the backbone of AI chatbots like ChatGPT. “You’ve got products, you can shop those products, you can say ‘I want to swap this product for that product’ and sort of see that in the space,” Mayer says. “It’s a really great tool to play and tinker and maybe even design your home. It’s not as fully featured and fully figured as a design experience would be, but it’s quite a big step above some of the LLM models that are out there, just in terms of your ability to execute on the design.” Designing an AI design assistant The tool was developed almost unintentionally. Havenly, which pairs users virtually with interior designers who offer consultations online, was having trouble keeping up with the demand for human designers. “One of the things we started to do last year was really invest in automation-based tooling for our designers themselves, largely so they could service more people as well and as effectively as they could,” Mayer says. It was essentially a time saver that lets AI handle the top-line design questions of a project before pulling in a human design expert. As the company was developing the tool for this internal purpose, they started to play with it. “We realized it was kind of fun,” Mayer says. “Why not expose it to the consumer?” Now available as a beta version on Havenly’s iOS app, the AI design assistant is a free way for users to start to visualize what a redesigned room could become. Testing out the tool ahead of its official launch, I asked it to offer some ideas for a few places in my own house. Not unlike my experiences with other AI chatbots that have emerged in recent years, the process was sometimes a bit clunky and confused. My first request was for ideas on filling a small space beneath a window in a children’s playroom with either storage, a bench, or a small table. Apparently caught up by the part of my prompt noting that this was located in a spare bedroom, the tool generated three fully outfitted bedroom designs. When I tried to clarify, the chatbot seemed to understand what I was looking for but then gave me three more bedroom designs. Switching to a less-specific approach, I uploaded an image of my house’s entryway and asked for suggestions on improving coat and shoe storage. The designs the tool offered were straightforward and useful, and the overall look largely matched the existing entry, albeit with much nicer furnishings. While I’m not likely to spend $600 on the small shoe shelf one design included, it did prompt some thinking about how I could more efficiently manage what can often become a jumble. For some users, this could easily become a gateway to buying that shoe shelf (from Havenly) or opting for a paid design service (from Havenly). It could also be a more informed way for people to rethink their space without the information overload of the internet. “Where we are in the AI wave is just understanding what people want with it and how they interact with it. I think our initial hypothesis is there is a group of people that frankly don’t need full design help,” Mayer says. “Is it perfect? No. Does it replace the designer? I don’t think so.” But it can help solve problems. Mayer says one of the beta users had more than 200 back-and-forth exchanges with the chatbot to refine ideas for upgrading a basement space. Even Mayer herself has put the tool to use, asking it to help outfit a guest bedroom on short notice. “I had guests coming within three weeks. I needed to place orders that day. I was like, all right, let’s just see what it comes up with,” she says. After a few minutes chatting with the bot, Mayer got a design that fit the room and furnishings that fit the budget. “I placed the orders,” she says. “I got the rug, the bed, and the bedding.” View the full article

A makeup illusionist, a photography project, and an innovative DJ are among the winners of Instagram’s inaugural Rings awards. The award, whose recipients were announced on Thursday, celebrates 25 creators who, in the company’s words, “bring people together over creativity” and “aren’t afraid to take creative chances and do it their way.” Among the winners is Mimi Choi, known for turning her face into mind-bending works of art. Celebrating her win, she penned in an Instagram post: “Because of its visual nature, Instagram has really helped spread my work and jump-start my career, providing me with numerous different types of collaboration opportunities that I couldn’t have even dreamed of when I began this journey.⁣⁣⁣” Then there’s Life on Film. Run by Grant Weintrob, Christian Baiocco, and Griffin Katz, the Instagram-first creative project hands out disposable cameras to strangers, as well as to some recognizable faces, turning their candid shots into cinematic Reels. DJ AG Online, another winner, has accrued tens of millions of views online by transforming the streets of London into spontaneous DJ sets. Self-identifying as an “open format DJ,” he joins the list of creatives awarded with both a physical gold ring designed by Grace Wales Bonner and a golden halo that sits around their profiles. The full list of 2025 winners are Aki and Koichi, Ari Miller, Brian Lindo, Chris Brickley, Cole Bennett, Ashley Gordon, Dolly Singh, Elyse Myers, Futuradosmil, Gabriel Moses, Golloria, Laufey, lifeonfilm, Linda Lomelino, Mimi Choi, Nigel Sylvester, Mika Ninagawa, Olivia Dean, Adrian Per, Sebastian Jern, Katie Krejci, Mohammed and Humaid Hadban, Thalita and Gabriela Zukeram, Tyshawn Jones, and Zarna Garg. While many of the winners have established followings, that wasn’t a factor in the judging process. Instead, each winner was honored by their peers. A panel of creatives—spanning fashion and makeup to sports and entertainment—each nominated their own favorite creators and voted on which 25 of Instagram’s 3 billion users would be among the first to receive the honor. The panel of judges included fashion and jewelry designer Grace Wales Bonner, who designed the gold ring each winner will receive; movie director Spike Lee; fashion designer Marc Jacobs; artist Kaws; makeup artist Pat McGrath; influencer Marques Brownlee, aka MKBHD; actress Yara Shahidi; pastry chef Cédric Grolet; Olympic rugby player Ilona Maher; music producer and songwriter Tainy; photographer Murad Osmann; Instagram exec and fashion journalist Eva Chen; and head of Intagram Adam Mosseri. “This award is for the creators who don’t just participate in culture—but shift it, break through whatever barrier holds them back to realize their ambitions. Because every act of creativity, big or small, can lead to something great,” Instagram said in its press release. “We’re witnessing a new era of digital entertainment,” Maria Rodriguez, vice president of marketing and communications at Open Influence, a creator marketing company, told Fast Company. “Just as the Oscars, Emmys, and Grammys celebrate excellence in film, television, and music, it’s only fitting that we recognize the talent, innovation, and artistry thriving on the platforms where audiences now spend most of their time.” Keep an eye out for the exclusive gold ring around each winner’s profile. View the full article

When companies undergo a major change, such as a CEO transition, reorganization, merger, or acquisition, most leaders default to one well-worn instinct: control the message. Lock down talking points. Tighten the language. Make it polished and official. In working with executive teams across industries, from tech to retail, we’ve seen time and again that simply trying to control the message isn’t enough. In fact, it often has the opposite effect, creating more confusion and mistrust than clarity. Because in every high-stakes moment, your audience—employees, customers, investors—is asking the same unspoken question: “What’s in it for me?” And if you’re not answering it, someone else will. Why WIIFM isn’t a selfish question For years, the phrase “What’s in it for me?” (or WIIFM) has gotten a bad rap. Leaders dismiss it as self-centered or marketing fluff. Not a serious strategy. But the opposite is true: WIIFM is one of the most powerful lenses available to a leader navigating complex change. It’s not about pandering. It’s about making strategy personal and anticipating needs. When people understand how a change will impact them, they’re far more likely to align with it, advocate for it, and stick around to help execute it. WIIFM isn’t about promising perks or pay raises. It’s about translating organizational ambition into something timely and tangible for the people you need on board. We’ve seen this across the board: in mergers and acquisitions where alignment felt impossible, in CEO transitions where trust was on the line, and in executive team restructurings where internal politics threatened progress. Leaders who start with WIIFM consistently build momentum, while those who skip it often lose the narrative . . . and the talent. What happens when leaders skip the WIIFM moment Not long ago, we worked with a company making an acquisition. The executive team was excited about the deal and confident about the shared mission, but in those critical first weeks after the announcement, they froze. Without all the answers in place, they waited to finalize every detail before they communicated anything to the acquired organization. During that time, the acquired organization was left to speculate. Rumors flew. Teams filled in the blanks. Fear took over. By the time the executive team had the certainty the acquired company was looking for and formal messaging landed, it was too late. Some talent had moved on, and for the rest, they were left with months of unwinding the rumors and working from a deficit to rebuild trust. We see this pattern again and again: silence creates space for confusion. In the absence of clarity, people default to self-protection and assume the worst. The longer the silence lingers, the further they go down the rabbit hole. But when leaders show up early, even if all the answers aren’t yet clear, and acknowledge the WIIFM questions head-on, they build trust. As one client told us, “When you show your face, you get the benefit of the doubt.” By anticipating their needs, you can limit their anxieties and show that you considered how they may be impacted. How to answer “What’s in it for me?” (without saying those exact words) Let’s be clear: this isn’t about scripting new taglines. It’s about pausing to ask a better question before you write the message. Before announcing any change, take five minutes to ask: What might my audience be worried about right now? What might they hope this change will solve for them? What could this feel like from their seat? As one senior leader we worked with put it: “People don’t expect their leaders to have all the answers—they expect presence. Leaders must be transparent, empathetic, and engaged in navigating change alongside their teams.” One message, many audiences: How to stay consistent One of the biggest hesitations we hear from executives is: How do I tailor the message without creating inconsistencies? The answer is to identify a core message and then deliver it in audience-relevant language. Your strategy may not change, but the way you communicate it will. For example, your core message might be: “We’re evolving our structure to accelerate innovation.” For employees, that might sound like: “We’re investing in clearer roles and fewer bottlenecks so teams can move faster and focus more on the work that matters.” For customers: “This means quicker product releases, better service, and less lag time.” For investors: “We expect this change to improve speed-to-market and reduce operating inefficiencies.” Each message serves the same strategy. But each audience hears what matters most to them. Four prompts to make it personal We’ve developed four simple prompts that help leaders shift their communication from top-down announcements to audience-centered leadership: “What are they worried about losing?” Security? Status? Control? Address it head-on. “What might they gain?” New opportunities, visibility, development, autonomy—spell it out. But don’t make any promises. “What does this mean for them in the next 30, 60, 90 days?” Use time as a grounding tool and a project management asset. This may present an opportunity to reengage with the audience after each benchmark. “What will we be transparent about even if we don’t have all the answers yet?” Uncertainty is okay. Silence is not. These prompts do more than clarify the messaging. They help you show up as a leader who gets it and who doesn’t just recite vision statements but connects them to the lived realities. Leading in the uncertainty gap As leaders, we often feel the pressure to have everything figured out before we speak up. But that instinct is counterproductive. Waiting for perfect information, especially in M&A scenarios, means you’ve already lost the room. As ProjectNext senior advisor Connie Rawson often reminds our clients, “Even saying, ‘We don’t have all the answers yet, but here’s what you can expect in the next 30 days,’ creates more stability than radio silence.” Because the real risk isn’t in saying the wrong thing, it’s in saying nothing at all. In an era where trust is harder to earn and easier to lose, hierarchical authority doesn’t command unbridled loyalty the way it used to. People want clarity, connection, and honesty. They deserve it. The good news? WIIFM isn’t just a tool for crisis moments. It’s a muscle you can build into your everyday leadership. When you consistently make strategy personal across teams, stakeholders, and situations, you don’t just manage change. You lead through it. View the full article

A typical three-bedroom house in Austin, Texas, can sometimes rack up monthly utility bills of $200 or $300 in the summer. But in new homes under construction in a nearby suburb, residents will owe little beyond the basic utility connection fee. The homes, built by Habitat for Humanity, tap into a shared geothermal system in a fully geothermal neighborhood. Heat pumps in each house connect to pipes that loop hundreds of feet underground, making use of the earth’s steady temperature for heating and cooling. The houses are also built to use as little energy as possible, with features like deep eaves that shade the interior and reduce the need for air-conditioning. Solar shingles on the roofs produce enough power to match each home’s expected electricity use. “Our goal is to make sure that they have a very, very low energy bill at the end of the day,” says Billy Whipple, chief impact officer at Habitat for Humanity’s Austin office. The nonprofit, known for working with volunteers to help lower the cost of construction, sees affordable housing holistically. It’s not enough just to have a low monthly mortgage payment; homes also need to be designed to have low maintenance and utility costs, especially as energy bills keep rising. A 100% geothermal neighborhood The houses are part of Whisper Valley, a larger development that was designed to rely on geothermal energy. This type of geothermal technology, also known as a ground-source heat pump, isn’t new. Habitat for Humanity has used the tech itself in other developments. But it’s still fairly uncommon because of the cost. Depending on the house, some systems can cost as much as $45,000. Building a connected network for the neighborhood, rather than adding the technology home by home, helps make it more affordable. EcoSmart Solution, a company that builds geothermal infrastructure, drills boreholes on each lot that connect to a larger energy system. “It allows us to implement the geothermal heating and cooling system at a fraction of the cost of doing it on a home-by-home basis,” says Chris Gray, EcoSmart’s CEO. “We bring it as a service. We do all of the drilling, all of the piping, all of the network connecting to each lot before the builders ever take over the lot.” Taurus Investment Holdings, the original developer behind the property, had a vision of making sustainability mainstream. “They were looking at what we can do to really create sustainability, but in an accessible, affordable way that can be approachable for the mass market,” Gray says. The first homes began construction in 2017, and hundreds are now in place. Ultimately, the neighborhood is projected to have around 7,500 homes built by a variety of developers, along with businesses and around 700 acres of green space. Houses currently listed for sale range up to $465,000. Habitat for Humanity’s three-bedroom and four-bedroom homes, available for families earning 60% to 80% of the area median income, are much more affordable, at $230,000 to $245,000. (That’s also well below the average cost within the city of Austin, where the median sales price was around $575,000 last month.) The nonprofit budgeted around $33,000 per house to add the solar and geothermal systems, according to Whipple. Ultra-efficient homes To minimize energy use, Habitat’s homes are well-insulated with an extra-tight building envelope. “When [homeowners] heat and cool, they won’t have to do it as frequently,” Whipple says. The houses also use passive design techniques, like deep overhangs on the windows that provide shade on sweltering Texas days. Inside, the appliances are Energy Star certified. The homes also use LED lighting, smart thermostats, and heat pump water heaters. While it’s impossible to predict how much energy a particular family might use—if they like to crank up the AC especially high, for example—the size of the solar system installed on the roof was calculated to cover all typical usage. That obviously makes a difference for residents on tight budgets. Skyler Korgel, one future resident who will be a first-time homeowner, says that she currently pays between $35 and $70 a month on energy bills in her apartment. “Having that jump to $200 to $300 per month, or unpredictably more during the summers, in a traditional home would be financially unsustainable for me,” Korgel says. “Between the geothermal heating system, rooftop solar panels, smart energy management systems, high-efficiency appliances, and a tight building envelope, I am hopeful that I can reach energy usage of effectively zero, eliminate my energy bill for some months, and even be able to provide power when the electric grid is strained,” she says. A model for future development Habitat for Humanity is building 48 homes in the neighborhood, including 25 that will be constructed in October by volunteers in a five-day sprint. (Skilled construction workers are handling more complex tasks like connecting heat pumps to the geothermal system.) But it’s also considering using the solar-and-networked geothermal approach for future homes. That may include more houses at Whisper Valley. EcoSmart is working with other developers to plan new projects across the country, from single-family homes to multifamily buildings. Others are also turning to geothermal. In Brooklyn, for example, a 463-unit apartment building that recently opened uses hundreds of geothermal wells for heating and cooling. An even larger all-geothermal apartment complex is opening in another part of Brooklyn. In some cases, existing neighborhoods are also moving to geothermal. Near Boston, one neighborhood has been testing a shift from gas heat to geothermal heating and cooling over the last two years. In Ann Arbor, Michigan, the city is building a geothermal district system in a neighborhood where 75% of residents are low-income—both as part of the city’s work to reach climate goals and to help residents significantly cut energy bills. View the full article

The most common email messages I receive these days are obviously AI-generated pitches for guests to appear on my podcast. They all begin the same way, with a praising reference to one of my recent episodes—usually the second-to-last posted show. “Your recent interview with so-and-so was penetrating, and got to the heart of the problem of x or y.” Then comes the crucial pivot: “John Dough’s work takes that problem even further . . .” And then the pitch for John Dough to be on the podcast. The problem is not just that the publicist used AI to shotgun the known universe of podcasters with pitches artificially customized to their shows. It’s that the comparisons and connections are really bad. “Your guest spoke so passionately about being a death doula, I think you would be so interested in an artist who makes Halloween napkins festooned with skeletons, which are usually of dead people.” So what do I do? I blacklist the sender. The human publicist ends up losing credibility because the one thing I might trust her to do—to accurately assess the appropriateness of my show for her guest—had been surrendered to a machine whose job was to make that connection by any means necessary. She was using AI in the fashion of an Industrial Age factory owner to increase her productivity, but simultaneously ignoring the human process that defines her expertise. I see the same thing happen with AI-generated reports and presentations. Someone gets some speculative idea and then asks Chat to justify it with a few case studies. On the surface, the case studies may sound like they’re supporting the premise—but if you look any deeper, they don’t really relate at all. They’re analogous, but not truly relevant. Worse yet, they’re sitting in what looks like a fully realized Powerpoint presentation. Concepts that could have been interpreted as half-baked, speculative, or open to discussion now appear finalized. They seem inappropriately unrealized for how elaborately they have been rendered, and make the presenter seem foolish. (That is, if the recipient is even reading the work rather than having their AI summarize it.) Deskilling ourselves By using the AI to do the big stuff—by outsourcing our primary competencies to the machines instead of giving them the boring busywork—we deskill ourselves and deprive everyone of the opportunity for AI-enhanced outputs. Too many of us are using AI as the primary architect for a project, rather than the general contractor who supports the architect’s human vision. (And even many of the general contractor’s functions are attributable to the human relationships they have developed over the years.) People are treating their chats as if they were fully realized (but as yet nonexistent) AGIs, and letting them do big stuff rather than treating them like tools that can do lots of little stuff. When facing a new seemingly gargantuan project, they turn to the AI first rather than digging in and doing some research—perhaps even using the AI as a research tool instead of relegating the whole project to it all at once. The output looks good to the user, less because it is good than because the Chat has been programmed to make the user feel good about their query. “That’s an insightful project idea, Douglas! I’ve managed to flesh out an entire proposal at three different price points.” The positive feedback loop reinforces the user behavior, until the threshold for asking the Chat to do the project is lower and lower. In the name of getting more product out there, the user loses touch with their own process—their core competency. No shortcuts The only ones who win in such a scenario are the AI companies, who effectively commoditize the users and their companies. Without any core competencies, the only competitive advantage a user has left is the robustness of their service contract with the AI company. The fast, slapdash results are not worth the cost in human expertise. As the researcher behind MIT’s study “This is Your Brain on ChatGPT” explained at a recent ANDUS event, when people turn to an AI for a solution before working on a problem themselves, the number of connections formed in their brains decreases. But when they turn to the AI after working on the problem for a while, they end up with more neural connections than if they worked entirely alone. That’s because the value of the AI is not its ability to create product for us, but to engage with us in our process. Working and iterating with an AI—doing what we could call generative thinking—is actually a break from Industrial Age thinking. We focus less on outputs than on cycles. Less on the volume of short-term results (assembly line), and more on the quality and complexity of thought and innovation. AI’s don’t have to replace our competencies or even our employees. That’s less an opportunity for success and scale than it is a recipe for deskilling, commodification, and eventual disappearance. Adopting AI as a partner in process and enhancer of competencies requires developing a new kind of culture around technology and innovation—one that centers the human ingenuity at the core of a company, and supports the ways that new, intelligent technologies can foster that living resource. View the full article

Prior to becoming the CEO of Lyft, David Risher didn’t post much on social media. That began to change just before his first day on the job, when Risher decided to sign up on the ride sharing platform as a driver. “I had no plan,” he says. “I just wanted to get in the car and see what it feels like to drive for Lyft and hear the rider’s story, but also experience it from a driver’s perspective.” At the end of that first outing, Risher revealed to the passenger who he was, and requested a selfie. He posted it on his personal LinkedIn account. “I drove for a couple more hours — and I didn’t tell anyone at Lyft I was doing this.” Since then, Risher has made a regular habit of getting behind the wheel and sharing the stories (and selfies) he gathers from the road on his personal LinkedIn and X accounts, which have since added about 25,000 followers. “Part of a CEO’s job is to be an external spokesperson for the company. The thing that I get the most consistent positive feedback on is my social media posts, particularly around driving, or pulling back the curtain on what it’s really like to run a company,” Risher says. “People trust individuals more than they trust institutions… so I think it is important for Lyft. I kind of just want people to know CEOs are just people.” As the personal brand of CEOs becomes increasingly tied to the brand of the companies they lead — their voice, their interests, their faces — more and more top bosses are taking pages out of the books of influencers. But is the expectation to whip out a phone and lead a TikTok Live changing the way these leaders function, and is it too much for a role that’s already all-consuming? In this paid Premium story, you’ll: Learn what’s driving this new expectation for chief executives Hear more from Lyft CEO David Risher The risk of turning your CEO into an influencer The age of the “Chief Promotional Officer” Risher isn’t the only chief executive blurring the lines between business leader and social media influencer. According to author, personal branding expert and the founder and president of Sterling Marketing Group, Karen Leland, CEOs are under increased pressure to have an active online presence. “People don’t just look at the company, they look at the brand of the CEO and the executives. They want to know how that person is putting themselves out there,” she says. “The CEO becomes almost like the chief promotional officer.” Not only are potential customers interested in the CEO’s online presence, according to Leland — who has helped hundreds of Fortune 500 and Inc. 1,000 CEOs develop their online personas — but so are prospective employees and investors. In a 2020 survey of global executives, 59% said their CEOs should have an online presence. In another, 74% of employees said customers associate their company with its executives. Other studies suggest that a positive CEO reputation can significantly improve an organization’s ability to attract and retain investors, and can even positively impact their market value. To some degree, this isn’t a novel idea. CEOs have been the faces of organizations for decades. But recently, stakeholders are expecting more, encouraging business leaders to fashion an “authentic” persona to connect with audiences the same way influencers do on YouTube, TikTok or Instagram. “CEO branding as a discipline is fairly new,” says Leland. “Only in the last couple of years has it really gained traction.” Leland even says it’s now common for CEOs to work with publicists to develop a personal narrative that is relevant to but distinct from the brand they represent. That could, for example, take the form of thought leadership, advocating for causes they care about, behind-the-scenes perspectives, and even personal interests and hobbies. Sir Richard Branson, for example, has long maintained a public persona closely connected to, but still distinct from, that of his companies, making frequent media appearances and posting on social media. Though Branson used to be the outlier his strategy has recently become the norm. Like Risher, many tech CEOs in particular have jumped on the branding bandwagon. As he transitioned from the COO of Shopify to CEO of Opendoor, Kaz Nejatian began posting on social media, sharing internal memos, and building his brand online. CEOs like Bumble’s Whitney Wolfe Herd, Microsoft’s Satya Nadella, JPMorgan Chase’s Jamie Dimon, Cisco’s Chuck Robbins, Best Buy’s Corie Barry, and many more have follower counts in the hundreds of thousands, or millions. CEOs as attention merchants? It may be inaccurate to group CEOs in the same camp as YouTubers or Twitch streamers, though. “Influencers aren’t necessarily thought leaders,” Leland says. But “CEOs who do this right are establishing themselves as thought leaders in a particular domain.” Recent media or conference appearances, product announcements, site visits, conversations with customers and employees, and other day-to-day responsibilities have all become fodder for a CEO’s online content. “I think today, it is a core responsibility,” says Leland. If a CEO makes a lengthy, thought leadership-style post on LinkedIn that goes viral, it’s a huge branding opportunity for their company. But while there may be benefits to a strong social media presence for some CEOs, others may have more to lose than gain from the added visibility. Just as influencers get “canceled” for posting bad takes or faux pas online, so could more CEOs (and thus companies) who are following this influencer-ization model. “There is this concomitant risk that goes along with it,” says Jerry Colonna, an executive coach, author, and CEO of Reboot.IO. “If they make a personal misstep, which every human being does, it’s not just the person who’s canceled — it’s the brand.” Colonna explains most people couldn’t name the CEOs of most Fortune 100 companies, often because well-established organizations have the luxury of letting their products speak for themselves. At the same time, he says others — Apple, Microsoft or Patagonia — were more successful because of the public personas of their leaders than they could have been otherwise. “As long as you’re doing it in an authentic way, then you’re probably doing good for your company,” says Risher of Lyft. “I think this is true for social media influence as well as for CEOs: if it feels forced, I don’t think you’re fooling anyone.” While he has seen the pressure on CEOs to be more present on social media growing in recent years, Colonna — who has gained a reputation as “The CEO Whisperer” for coaching countless prominent business leaders — says the impact of their online presence has its limits. “It can be really, really helpful, but it doesn’t solve the long term, ‘build-the-business’ problem,” he says. Because no matter how many likes and subscribes your CEO drives: “You still have to deliver high quality products.” View the full article

Vix ‘fear gauge’ leaps to highest since April as US futures fall with European indicesView the full article

It’s not always fun to look your finances in the eye, but it can unlock a rewarding path forward. These five books make tackling personal finance approachable, clear, and—dare we say it—an enjoyable journey. Rule Breaker Investing: How to Pick the Best Stocks of the Future and Build Lasting Wealth By David Gardner The real secret to building lasting wealth on the stock market is breaking the old investing rules. In Rule Breaker Investing, Motley Fool cofounder David Gardner teaches how to craft a purpose-driven portfolio, manage investments, and even master time management for a smarter, happier, richer investment journey. Listen to our Book Bite summary, read by author David Gardner, in the Next Big Idea App or view on Amazon. The Almanack of Naval Ravikant: A Guide to Wealth and Happiness By Eric Jorgenson Naval Ravikant is a legendary investor, entrepreneur, and founder in Silicon Valley. Beyond his business acumen, he is known for the distilled wisdom that he shares on living a rich and meaningful life. The Almanack of Naval Ravikant compiles his most powerful ideas about achieving wealth and happiness. Listen to our Book Bite summary, read by author Eric Jorgenson, in the Next Big Idea App or view on Amazon. All the Presidents’ Money: How the Men Who Governed America Governed Their Money By Megan Gorman The money dramas that plague us today are tales as old as time. We share all the same personal financial issues of the present with Americans of the past—including presidents. History is filled with relatable stories of money management (and mismanagement). How do your wealth-building skills compare to those of our nation’s presidents? Listen to our Book Bite summary, read by author Megan Gorman, in the Next Big Idea App or view on Amazon. Robin Hood Math: Take Control of the Algorithms That Run Your Life By Noah Giansiracusa Robin Hood Math is a guide to navigating the algorithmic world we inhabit today. By understanding the numbers games influencing our experiences and opportunities, we can better resist their undue influence in shaping our lives. Math is a tool for empowerment. Listen to our Book Bite summary, read by author Noah Giansiracusa, in the Next Big Idea App or view on Amazon. The Wealth Ladder: Proven Strategies for Every Step of Your Financial Life By Nick Maggiulli The optimal wealth strategy varies based on your financial starting point. Depending on where you sit on the Wealth Ladder, the best approach to getting more money shifts. It’s not necessarily about hard work but rather picking the correct place to focus your time and energy based on your current situation. Listen to our Book Bite summary, read by author Nick Maggiulli, in the Next Big Idea App or view on Amazon. This article originally appeared in Next Big Idea Club magazine and is reprinted with permission. View the full article

Tell me: Do things like this ever happen to you? You have clarity of purpose. You know what you need. You walk into another room to get it. Then, distraction hits, and you forget entirely what prompted you. Or else, you search the house for your car keys or your glasses, or your wallet. A good 10 minutes later, you realize they’ve been with you the whole time. You sit down to write an article about an intriguing study having to do with memory—if only you could remember what it was. Yes, these are highly personal anecdotes. But like all the best stories, I hope they’re simply the unique expression of universal truths. Perhaps second only to the fear of death itself, the one thing I’ve heard business leaders admit that they fear most is the idea of losing their memory. And that’s why I’ve latched on with gusto to a recent study out of Harvard University, among other institutions, that suggests a simple, straightforward way to improve cognitive health. A Mediterranean-style diet Writing in the journal Nature Medicine, researchers from Mass General Brigham, the Broad Institute of MIT, and yes, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, say that making a simple dietary change can “influence key metabolic pathways that protect memory and cognitive function.” The strategy: Make a conscious change to switch to a Mediterranean-style diet. More on the nose, according to a summary: “People following a more Mediterranean-style diet had a lower risk of developing dementia and showed slower cognitive decline.” They’re not the first to tout the benefits of this diet; heck, I’ve written about other studies here before. But this team analyzed data from two studies, including a total of 5,705 men and women from two longitudinal studies: the Nurses’ Health Study, followed by the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. And, by studying three factors: “long-term dietary patterns,” “participant’s inherited risk for Alzheimer’s disease,” and the incidence of “new cases of dementia,” they were able to make some striking conclusions. ‘Help reduce the risk’ According to the study’s first author, Yuxi Liu, PhD, a research fellow in the Department of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, a founding member of the Mass General Brigham healthcare system, and a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard Chan School and Broad: “These findings suggest that dietary strategies, specifically the Mediterranean diet, could help reduce the risk of cognitive decline and stave off dementia by broadly influencing key metabolic pathways.” Before I forget (ironic, right?) we should ensure that we’ve established what a Mediterranean-style diet actually entails. It includes a few factors: First, the primary fat source is olive oil, as opposed to higher saturated fats that are sometimes seen in Western diets. Second, whole grains. Lots of them. Plus, vegetables and fruits—probably four servings per day. Third, lean proteins. Think fish, chicken, turkey, and eggs. Fourth: Very limited red meat intake. Finally, lots of fiber from a variety of plant sources. My favorite kind of study Honestly, this makes it fall into the category of “frankly quite pleasurable things I might do anyway, even without the study.” Which therefore makes it my favorite kind of study. Short version? Do something I’d normally do almost without prompting, and get an unexpected benefit? I’m on board with that. Barely even need a reminder. —Bill Murphy Jr. This article originally appeared on Fast Company‘s sister publication, Inc. Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy. View the full article

When I first ventured into self-employment a few years ago, I received a lot of advice from fellow freelance writers: Know your worth. Don’t take low-paying work. The advice was valid, as too much low-paying work is a recipe for burnout. But to the newly self-employed, I would say: Know your worth. And also, there are very valid reasons to take low-paying work, if it can help launch your business. You can open the right doors without selling yourself short. The project is good for your portfolio Potential clients will expect “proof” that your work is good—especially if it’s the type of work that can be displayed in a portfolio (design, video, writing, or other creative work). Portfolios don’t grow overnight. One good client at a lower rate will lead to a better client who pays more. Even now, several years into freelance writing, I’ll still take projects below my normal rate if I think the work will be a standout in my portfolio. The payoff comes when clients approach me and say, “I saw your work for XYZ company—I love that publication!” Sometimes projects can earn you far more in the long run than your short-term payout. The project will connect you with important people Some of my best clients are referrals, even when the original project was low-paying, boring, or short-term. I’ve even had clients rehire me when they move on to their next gig. You’ll quickly learn which people in your industry are “movers and shakers.” By working with them, you could get a glowing recommendation or countless referrals. You can also say yes to speaking on panels, podcast appearances, and writing guest posts for publications if you feel like the work will get you in front of the right audience or make good industry connections. These are often a much lower lift than a full-blown paid project and can have a similar impact. You can learn new skills If you need it, here’s your permission to say “yes” to a project that’s slightly outside of your skill set. Slightly being the operative word. You need to be confident that you can meet the client’s expectations. But it’s also an opportunity to try something new and get paid for the work. Don’t ever, ever overpromise and under-deliver. However, sometimes the only way to gain new skills as a solo business owner is to take on the work, wow the client, and get the project into your portfolio so you can take on future projects that require the same skill set. It’s OK to say “no” For many self-employed people, money is a primary factor in accepting projects. But just like there are valid reasons beyond money to take on new work, there are also valid reasons for declining work—even if the money is good. Bad clients can cost you. They can absorb too much of your time and mental energy. You may also reach a point in your business where you don’t need the money, even if you have the bandwidth. One of the best things about running your own business is that you get to make those decisions. When you work for an employer, you’re forced onto projects or stuck with colleagues you’d rather avoid. Self-employment is different. Taking on clients is a business decision—and you should get comfortable basing your decisions on factors other than money. View the full article

UK 10-year government borrowing costs see biggest weekly fall since AprilView the full article

UK prime minister says police should ensure all fans can enjoy the match View the full article

“Let’s circle back when we have the bandwidth to touch base on whether we need to hop on a call to tackle the low-hanging fruit.” (If this corporate buzzword bingo sent a shiver down your spine—apologies.) In the world of professional communication, business jargon is often a necessary evil. Email clichés: love ‘em or hate ‘em, we all use ‘em. Many of us are trapped in a terminal cycle of “reaching out” and “circling back” to make sure “we’re aligned.” Recent analysis from email verification company ZeroBounce looked at more than one million real work emails to find out which overused email phrases are the most common offenders. To no one’s surprise, “reaching out” is the reigning champ with 6,117 appearances, shortly followed by follow-ups of all kinds (“to follow up,” “following up,” “will follow up”) with 5,755 mentions. Nearly 3,000 emails also started with a version of “hope”: “Hope you’re doing well,” “Hope this finds you well,” or “Hope all is well.” Other honorable mentions include “Happy Friday” (as well as the slightly less popular “Happy Monday”). “Touch base,” “hop on a call,” “bandwidth,” and “low-hanging fruit” were commonly identified by researchers.. “Language habits are some of the hardest to change,” Liviu Tanase, founder and CEO of ZeroBounce, told Fast Company. Despite nearly one in four employees now using AI to help write emails, the language hasn’t moved with the times. “Even with smart AI tools embedded in our inboxes, people still fall back on familiar phrases because they feel safe and sometimes, we don’t know what else to say.” She added: “Maybe it’s time we all ‘circle back’ to sounding human again.” Here, Gen Z is leading the charge. Young workers have no qualms including memes, emojis, slang, and abbreviations in their emails—just as they would text in a group chat with friends. Around 71% of people surveyed by the U.K. bank Barclays in 2023 said they believed Gen Z was changing the formality of language in the workplace. What worked in formal business correspondence just a decade or two ago, can be received as cold or even rude among today’s digital natives. For those looking to refresh their email etiquette, ZeroBounce offered a few easy swaps to test out in your next correspondence. Rather than penning “hope this finds you well,” you could ask, “how’s your week going?” Or open with, “Good morning – quick one.” The ubiquitous “just checking in” or “following up” can be replaced with something more direct: “What are your thoughts on the proposal?” (Many of us default to using “softer” language to our detriment, anyway.) For those looking to shake things further and take a leaf out of Gen Z’s playbook, one TikTok creator offered some suggestions to inject more mystery or foreboding in the workplace. “I hope this email finds you,” he suggests. “This kind of implies that everyone thinks you’re missing and they don’t know where you are. This is something really good to send to your remote coworkers.” Disclaimer: use at your own risk. But if you want to use a safer work email cliché, you can always just ask them to ping you. View the full article

How bad is the problem?View the full article

Carmaker reduced allocation to halt declining residual values of its luxury vehiclesView the full article

UK housing secretary and mayor in talks to make provisions on windows and bicycles less onerous as construction slumpsView the full article