ResidentialBusiness

Bilt Rewards, best known for offering renters rewards points for paying on time, plans to do the same for mortgages through a partnership with United Wholesale Mortgage LLC, its first tie-up with a home lender. View the full article

Ten major philanthropic organizations are banding together to ensure that regular Americans, not just a small group of tech billionaires, have a say in how AI will shape society and who will benefit. The organizations announced Tuesday the formation of Humanity AI, a $500-million five-year initiative aimed at ensuring artificial intelligence serves people and communities rather than replacing or diminishing them. The coalition includes the Doris Duke Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Mellon Foundation, the Mozilla Foundation, the Omidyar Network and other philanthropies. The core group, which is expected to expand to include other philanthropies, will make the grants both on their own (with input from the group) and together from a common pool of capital. Many now believe that generative AI systems are about to revolutionize the way companies do business, from accounting to engineering to operations. Humanity AI is betting on a future where AI plays a supporting role, wherein it “strengthens communities, and enhances human creativity.” The groups want to rebalance the public policy conversation around AI to include the interests of normal people, not just the big tech players and financiers who are betting big on the transformative potential of the technology. “So much investment is going into AI right now with the goal of making money, which is our capital system and that’s all fine,” MacArthur Foundation president John Palfrey said in an interview with Fast Company. “What we are seeking to do is to invest public interest dollars to ensure that the development of the technology serves humans and places humanity at the center of this development.” The coalition knows it won’t be able to match the AI industry’s cash — its $500 million is a quarter Mira Murati’s seed round for Thinking Machines Lab. Palfrey says that even if his organization would put its entire $9 billion in assets into this one issue, it wouldn’t come close to the money being invested by the tech companies and their investors. But, he says, the ten organizations in Humanity AI working together could have a real impact. “We each have a slightly different angle on it, but we’re going to share knowledge and hopefully have the whole be greater than the sum of the parts,” he says. The goal, after all, is not to compete with the tech industry so much as it is to expand the conversation. “It’s all building a broader community of folks who are engaged in this topic,” Omidyar Network president Michele Jawando tells Fast Company. “[T]here’s just one or two people who are saying this is how [AI] should be used, and we’re saying, ‘Hey, wait a minute. I’m going to pull up a few more chairs at the table and get a few different voices and perspectives’.” Workers are increasingly worried that the real “value” that AI companies and their investors hope to deliver to big business is the ability to eliminate positions and cut payroll. AI companies and their backers counter by saying that some positions will be eliminated but that many kinds of jobs will be created. Creatives and artists wonder whether AI will enhance their performance or replace them, and many question how their authentic intellectual property can be protected in a world of AI-generated content. But the private sector would actually benefit by making sure that the benefits of AI are broadly distributed across geographies and classes, Jawando points out. “Because if people don’t see that, we’ve seen what happens when people feel completely on the outside and used and abused,” she says. “Every major industrial revolution has had [that] moment, and so the private sector should be incentivized to do this, but they’re not right now.” Some of the investments Humanity AI plans to make focus on giving underrepresented people ways to influence AI’s trajectory. The group plans to award funds to the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), which works to protect people’s right to data privacy as tech companies (and governments) work to bend norms toward having no expectation of privacy at all. The group also plans to fund the work of the Berkeley Labor Center, which develops technology to measure the real effects of AI on the workforce. In addition, it trains union organizers and labor advocates and other organizations that support them, so that workers can act as decision makers on how AI gets applied and not just passive participants (or victims) of the way AI is deployed in the workplace. Some of the group’s funding targets are more politically focused, working to raise the voices of people who will be affected by AI but lack thelobbying firepower of big tech. The public advocacy group AI Now, for example, seeks to inject into the policy debate the idea that the corporations developing AI should have to be accountable to the public. The group provides technical expertise to lawmakers (who often rely on AI industry sources), and researches and develops an intellectual framework that legitimizes public intervention in AI development. Some of the members of Humanity AI are focused on the creative industries. Omidyar’s Jawando says one of the projects Humanity AI wants to fund is focused on preserving the intellectual property of human creatives, and giving people like actors technology tools to stay in control of their image and work when generative AI tools can easily duplicate and remix them and post the results on social media. At a deeper level, Jawando says, society is beginning to grapple with the question of what role AI should play in society. Should it support and amplify people, or should it stand in for (or replace) people in many tasks? AI might be better used to address problems like healthcare accessibility or housing availability rather than making sure we all have better access to Canva, Jawando told me. “I think this is when you have the conversation about human flourishing–I think it comes down to that level of detail and thoughtfulness.” Humanity AI wants to find, and fund, people who share that worldview and speak that language. “We want to raise up a whole group of scientists and academics and researchers and advocates and young people who are going to raise these issues,” she says, “so that you can then empower the policymakers [to] incentivize the private sector folks to do the right thing . . .” Humanity AI partners will begin making grants as soon as fall 2025. Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors will serve as a fiscal sponsor and manage a pooled fund, with grants from that fund beginning in 2026. View the full article

A startup called Orion is ready to take on America’s sleep loss epidemic with a new, AI-enabled mattress cover that can adjust its temperature throughout the night to maximize comfort and rest. Cofounder and CEO Harry Gestetner previously cofounded the startup Fanfix, which helped Gen Z content creators build paid subscription programs. After the company sold to SuperOrdinary for a reported $65 million, Gestetner says he became interested in sleep and its well-documented links to health and longevity. “Every longevity expert tells you that sleep is the cornerstone of longevity,” he says. Gestetner found that most sleep and fitness trackers could detect bad sleep patterns, but they couldn’t directly do anything to help users get a better night’s rest. “All they do is just give you a bunch of data that tells you slept badly,” he says. And while sleep temperature has been shown to have a significant impact on sleep quality, existing sleep temperature control devices from companies like Eight Sleep were too expensive for many people Gestetner spoke to. Working with his father Daniel Gestetner, himself a serial entrepreneur and Orion’s chairman, Gestetner set out to craft a more affordable alternative—the “Tesla of sleep,” rather than the Ferrari, as he puts it. The company has since raised $10.3 million in venture funding and developed the technology with sleep expert and clinical psychologist Michael Breus, who serves as Orion’s chief sleep officer. Orion’s technology, unveiled for preorder on October 14, costs users with a queen-sized bed $2,300 up front plus $17 per month for a subscription. The subscription pays for access to Orion’s AI, which can automatically make dozens of temperature adjustments throughout the night to maximize comfort at various phases of sleep, taking into account sensor readings and users’ stated preferences. Buyers can indicate whether they want a firmer or softer cover, with other options in the works, and the equipment typically takes 10 to 15 minutes to install, Gestetner says. Sensors within the mattress cover can detect factors like body temperature, breathing rate, and heart rate, which allow the AI to optimize its temperature to match natural circadian rhythms, allowing for longer, deeper sleep. “We can tell, for example, if your body temperature is heating up, your heart rate’s starting to increase, and you’re getting into a lighter and lighter phase of sleep where you might wake up,” says Gestetner. “We can adjust your body temperature back down to keep you in deeper sleep longer and increase your sleep quality.” The package includes the mattress cover, along with a companion device that can be unobtrusively positioned near the bed or behind a nightstand, where it heats or cools water circulated through the mattress cover. Unlike waterbeds of yore, notorious for disastrous leaks and often banned from rental apartments, Orion’s mattress cover includes sturdy tubing and a second waterproof layer to prevent spillage, he says. It also only uses about 1.5 liters of water, which can be topped off about twice per year. Sensors in the mattress cover help monitor sleep quality and adjust temperature throughout the night. The technology works for couples as well, Gestetner says, avoiding quarrels over settings by maintaining two temperature zones, since many people don’t sleep best at the same temperature as their partner. “My girlfriend gets very cold at night, and so she likes to set her side very warm,” he says. “I get very hot at night, so I like to set my side very cold, and then I like to wake up very warm.” Before Orion’s customers begin using the device, which is expected to ship to preorder customers in December, they typically will do a home sleep test with a disposable wearable sensor, letting Orion observe their sleep patterns. The wearable, which looks similar to a large Band-Aid, lets the company chart their sleep habits and temperatures needs throughout the night. “We can show you pretty much everything that’s wrong with your sleep on a graph, and then preprogram the Orion device to you based on your data,” Gestetner says. The wearable isn’t essential, though, and Gestetner says the company already has a deal to place the mattress covers in hotels, where the built-in sensors will be able to help adjust temperatures and let guests get a better night’s sleep. Other companies have worked to develop AI and sensor technology to optimize other aspects of sleep: Heka offers mattresses that physically adjust to support different body types and changing sleeping positions throughout the night, while Nitetronic produces pillows that detect snoring and inflate to adjust the user’s head position and keep airways clear. A Tempur-Pedic bed base with adjustable contours can even alter its position during the night in response to snoring. But while many smart sleep devices can be fairly pricy, Orion aims to develop more affordable versions of its product, which could be available in the future for as little as $500, thanks in part to Daniel Gestetner’s manufacturing experience. Harry Gestetner envisions the product could appeal to any of the millions of people already tracking health and sleep stats with smartwatches and other wearables. The company is also about to participate in a formal clinical study, and Gestetner imagines that users will also amass concrete data to confirm the technology improves their sleep. “As people use the product, they should see improvements in their sleep data, which should be pretty undeniable,” he says. View the full article

Did you know you can customize Google to filter out garbage? Take these steps for better search results, including adding my work at Lifehacker as a preferred source. It's official: As of Tuesday, Oct. 14, Microsoft no longer supports Windows 10. That said, if you powered on your Windows 10 PC this morning, only to read headlines suggesting the end of Windows 10, you might be a bit confused. Your computer still works, after all. So what's really going on here? What Windows 10 end of life really meansAs it might now be evident, Microsoft ending support for Windows 10 doesn't mean the company has shut down the OS for good. Any devices still running Windows 10 will continue to run—and, in fact, much in the same way as they previously have. You probably won't notice any difference between Windows 10 on Oct. 14 vs. Oct. 13. The issue isn't that Windows 10 won't work going forward; rather, it's that Microsoft will no longer issue security updates to Windows 10 users by default. That means the next time someone discovers a security vulnerability with this OS—no matter how big or small it may be—Microsoft will not send a patch to most Windows 10 users. The risk of using Windows 10 going forward starts small, and escalates quickly. It's only day one of Windows 10's end of life, which means there's little risk in using the OS today. However, over time, more and more security vulnerabilities will surface. Soon enough, there will be a real danger in using a Windows 10 PC that is connected to the internet. All it takes is clicking one malicious link in a spam email, or downloading malware disguised as legitimate software, for hackers to strike. Windows 10 extended security updatesHere's the thing, though: Between users who can't or don't want to update to Windows 11, as well as organizations that rely on Windows 10 to run specific programs and services, there are still a lot of Windows 10 machines out there. If you're running Windows 10, you aren't alone—some estimates put the OS' market share at 40.5% of all Windows machines. Sure, there are more PCs out there running Windows 11, but there could be roughly half a billion users that just lost official support from Microsoft. Microsoft knows this, which is why this "end of life" isn't really the end for Windows 10. The company offers Windows 10 users the option of enrolling in Extended Security Updates, or ESU. Under the ESU program, you'll still receive critical security patches, even when using Windows 10. It does feel like Microsoft is soft launching Windows 10's demise, but at least all Windows 10 users have an option to continue using the OS securely. However, you can't just expect Microsoft to automatically enroll your PC in the ESU program. You have one of three options here, two of which are free: Pay a one-time $30 fee. Opt into Windows Backup to sync your PC to the cloud. Redeem 1,000 Microsoft Rewards points. You'll find these options your PC after updating to the latest possible version. From here, head to Settings > Windows Update, and look out for the "Windows 10 support ends in October 2025" and "Enroll in Extended Security Updates to help keep your device secure" options. Be warned, however, that Microsoft does not see this as a long-term solution. This is still part of the Windows 10 end of life plan, after all. The ESU program only lasts from Oct. 15 of this year through Oct. 13, 2026. After that date, Microsoft will stop issuing Windows 10 security updates for good. In addition, you will only receive security patches: no features, design changes, or tech support. Updating to Windows 11Whether it's today or Oct. 13 of next year, it won't be safe to run Windows 10 on an internet-connected PC without these security patches. As such, your only option for using Windows in the future is by upgrading to an OS Microsoft actively supports. At this time, that means Windows 11. That doesn't necessarily mean buying a new PC though, as Windows 11 might be compatible with your current machine. Here's are the minimum hardware requirements, as noted by Microsoft: Processor: 1 GHz or faster with at least two cores on a 64-bit chip Memory: 4GB or more Storage: 64GB or more Graphics card: Compatible with DirectX 12 or later, with a WDDM 2.0 driver TPM: Trusted Platform Module version 2.0 Display: 720p or higher, nine inches or larger, with 8 bits per color channel Your Windows 10 PC must also be running Windows 10 version 2004 or later, and you'll need to at least be running the Sept. 14, 2021 security update. While many of these requirements seem pretty basic, the one that trips up many otherwise capable machines is TPM 2.0. This is a security standard that can help prevent modern cyberattacks on Windows, so it's great to have. However, if you have a PC older than 2016, it might not have TPM 2.0. Your computer might very well be capable of running Windows 11, but Microsoft won't endorse it if you don't have this security hardware in place. Even still, you can go around Microsoft to install Windows 11 on an unsupported PC. Just note Microsoft does not approve of this, and may even stop supporting your PC if you choose this route—defeating the purpose of upgrading from Windows 10 in the process. View the full article

The largely direct-to-consumer lender will also offer reverse mortgage loans in the latest dealing between publicly traded industry players. View the full article

Cabinet dealers, interior designers and remodeling contractors in the U.S. hope new tariffs on imported kitchen cabinets, bathroom vanities and upholstered wooden furniture that kicked in Tuesday will create more business for them and eventually boost domestic production of those products. But several small business owners in the home improvement industry say they expect some short-term pains from the import taxes: Clients with projects already on the books might balk at having to pay more for the budget-priced cabinets they selected. Potential customers may postpone kitchen and bathroom renovations until costs — and the economy — seem more stable. “I think the volatility around pricing is damaging to the remodeling industry,” said Allison Harlow, an interior designer in Michigan whose company, Curio Design Studio, creates and builds custom bathrooms and kitchens. “Most people will hear the headline of ‘Kitchen cabinets will go up 50%’ and might just opt out of even reaching out to our company.” Despite high mortgage rates having depressed sales of existing homes in recent years, a forecast of remodeling activity by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies predicts that homeowner spending on improvements and maintenance will remain steady into the middle of 2026. The President calls cheap imports a national security threat A proclamation that President Donald The President signed on Sept. 29 cited national security and foreign trade practices as grounds for imposing the tariffs on certain finished wood products and product components. Of them, imported vanities and kitchen cabinets incurred the steepest tax rates: 25% until the end of the year and 50% starting on New Year’s Day. Upholstered chairs, seats and sofas also are subject to a 25% worldwide tariff effective Tuesday, with the rate scheduled to increase to 30% on Jan. 1. In addition, the presidential proclamation put a 10% import tax on softwood timber and lumber, which comes from evergreen trees like pine and cedars. Softwoods often are used to make furniture and in wood frame construction. Canada is the source of about 85% of the softwood lumber the U.S. imports, or nearly one-quarter of the national supply, according to the National Association of Homebuilders. Some U.S. trading partners are receiving more favorable treatment when it comes to the furniture and cabinetry tariffs. The tax on U.K. exports was capped at 10%, while the rate for wood products from the European Union and Japan was capped at 15%. The American Kitchen Cabinet Alliance and other trade and advocacy groups lobbied for tariffs to help offset what they described as a flood of cheap cabinets from countries such as Vietnam, Malaysia, China and elsewhere in the decades since more U.S. furniture manufacturing moved offshore. U.S.-made products tend to cost more but often are of better quality. A higher bottom line for renovators on a budget John Lovallo, an analyst at UBS bank, estimates the tariffs on imported cabinets and vanities could add roughly $280 to the average cost of building a single-family home, not enough to sink a project that often carries an overall price tag more than 1,000 times larger than that. Some business owners say they plan to cover any tariff-related costs for now instead of raising customer prices. John Dean, founder of Dean Cabinetry in Connecticut, sells cabinets that run the gamut from lower-priced imports to custom models made in his shop. Imported products account for about a third of his sales, but Dean said he does not expect much fallout from the tariffs. Two of his vendors that he buys imported cabinets from, in China and Vietnam, said they would raise prices by 10% to recoup some of the duty costs. Dean said he would not charge customers more for now. Since a kitchen remodel is a big ticket item to begin with, and with the costs of building lumber and labor going up, raising cabinet prices might hurt demand, he said. “My personal perspective is most small- and medium-sized businesses are trying to absorb those costs,” he said. The wood product tariffs are likely to have a bigger effect on selection than on prices as importers scale back their orders to focus on bestsellers and products with the highest profit margins, according to Jason Miller, a supply chain management professor at Michigan State University. “It will make importers more selective in the varieties they bring in,” Miller said: “So I think the bigger impact is going to be on the product variety side: Consumers should expect less variety.” What cabinet companies are expecting Although the White House said the tariffs were intended to boost domestic production and protect U.S. businesses from predatory trade practices, some cabinet makers say that will be difficult because their supply chains are multinational. Linq Kitchen, a Los Angeles-area company that designs, builds and installs modern-style kitchen cabinets, uses plywood and melamine panels from Asia and Europe in its projects, co-founder Josh Qian said. A suitable domestic alternative does not exist, he said. “The kitchen cabinet industry is highly globalized, and even U.S.-based manufacturers depend on imported materials, hardware, and finishes,” Qian said. “These tariffs may sound protective, but in reality, they often raise costs across the entire supply chain.” At the same time, cabinet companies that don’t sell foreign products or rely on imported components look forward to capturing more business. One is ACO Denver Custom Cabinetry in Denver, Colorado, which enlists Amish, Mennonite, and New German Baptist shops in the Midwest to handcraft custom cabinets. Andrea Mulkey, the company’s president and co-founder, said her main concern is whether interest in American-made cabinets will grow too quickly. “It’s hard to predict how much new business might come our way as competitors are affected,” Mulkey said. “We simply couldn’t serve everyone if demand suddenly surged. The real challenge is similar to what we saw post-COVID, when everyone got busy at once, and access to raw materials became strained.” The Curio Design Studio has its custom cabinets made in Minnesota and Wisconsin, but Harlow worries about the tariffs costing her customers. “I think it will decrease consumer confidence and create a narrative that the work is going to get inherently more expensive,” Harlow said. “I think we will have to work harder to attract potential clients with messaging of how this blanket statement, ‘Kitchen cabinets will go up 50%,’ does not impact our particular business model.” —Mae Anderson, AP Business Writer View the full article

It is dangerous to have confidence about what lies aheadView the full article

Fans are continuing to change the tune of how they consume music. It was recently reported that MTV was going to stop broadcasting five channels, including MTV Music, MTV 80s, MTV 90s, Club MTV, and MTV Live in the United Kingdom, and that the channels would go dark the end of this year. (Its flagship channel, MTV HD, will continue to air reality series.) Local news outlets in Australia, Poland, France, and Brazil have also reported that MTV could shut down music channels in those respective countries as well—leaving some to wonder if the United States is next to shutter those channels. It’s no secret that MTV’s parent company, Paramount Global, has been going through a lot of changes and turbulence, especially after the FCC officially approved the $8.4 billion Paramount-Skydance merger. But even before the merger was finalized, MTV was already undergoing plenty of changes in recent years. In 2023, it was announced that MTV News, the news production arm of MTV in the United States, would shut down in 2023, with the corresponding website officially shuttering last summer. The initial move resulted in Paramount laying off 25% of its staff at the time. The latest decision to cease broadcasting music channels in the U.K. continues to highlight the global shift in how consumers today are discovering and consuming music videos, and other music-related content like news, on social media and platforms like TikTok and YouTube, rather than broadcast TV or traditional media outlets. The rise of MusicTok According to Vevo’s new Fandom = Cultural Currency report, 44% of fans search for related content on social media. Meanwhile, according to a MIDiA Research Consumer Survey from this year, the top music discovery method for 16-to-24-year-olds is TikTok, followed by YouTube, streaming, and social media. And a joint TikTok and Luminate report that came out earlier this year found that TikTok has been a “key driver” of music discovery, monetization, and chart success. The same research found that U.S. TikTok users are 74% more likely to discover and share new music on social and short-form video (SFV) platforms than the average user of these platforms. Popular chart-topping artists like Taylor Swift, Sabrina Carpenter, and Chappell Roan have all gone viral on TikTok, and have utilized social media as a way to reach their fans. Meanwhile, TikTok has been leaning into its throne as a newly emerged platform for music discovery and consumption through marketing campaigns like “See Where Music Takes You,” which launched this summer. TikTok has also launched several new features over the past few years to help make discovering music easier for its users, including the Add to Music App feature, which was previously launched in partnership with major music streaming services like Amazon Music and Spotify. The feature allows users to save songs they find on the app to the music streaming platform of their choice. However, despite MTV closing down its music channels in other parts of the world—and fans wondering if the U.S. would be next—The Wall Street Journal recently reported that newly appointed Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison supposedly has plans up his sleeve to revive and reinvent MTV as a music channel in the U.S. If the news ends up being true, one has to wonder how successful those plans will be, given all the data and headlines pointing to music shifting away from cable TV—unless, of course, social media will play a part in promoting the channel. Paramount and MTV did not respond to a request for comment. View the full article

London properties worth £130mn frozen in action against group accused of large-scale online romance fraudView the full article

I love being able to go to the pharmacy for my own (or my kids’) flu shots. Pop in, get the shot, then go about my day. That process has now gotten even easier: Last year, the FDA approved the first flu vaccine that you can administer yourself, or that parents can administer to their children, and it's now available for at-home ordering. I just placed my order. And best of all: It’s a nasal spray, so no needles. How can you get the at-home flu vaccine? The nasal spray vaccine, called FluMist, still needs to be prescribed by a medical provider. But since nearly everyone aged two through 49 is eligible, FluMist’s maker (AstraZeneca) has a telehealth website that bundles the provider's approval with an order to an online pharmacy. The process takes about five minutes on average, they say, and I found that to be accurate. I've already had my flu shot this year, but my kids haven't gotten it yet. (I also know my daughter strongly prefers the nasal to the injection when possible.) The website allowed me to add multiple people to the same order, so I filled out the questionnaire for each child, giving their names, ages, allergies, and so on. The website then reached into some big data cloud out there and told me it already knew their insurance information (existentially frightening, yet convenient!) and presented me with my bill: an $8.99 fee, which included $2.50 for physician evaluation and $6.49 for shipping and processing. Insurance covers the cost of the vaccine itself. Who can use the at-home flu vaccine? The at-home vaccine is the same as regular FluMist, which is approved for ages two through 49. That means babies and older adults will still need to visit a provider for the regular, injectable flu vaccine. Children can get flu shots starting at the age of six months. FluMist uses a live, weakened virus. It can't give you the actual flu, but it can cause some respiratory symptoms in people with weakened immune systems. So it's not recommended for people who are pregnant, have certain medical conditions, or are immunocompromised or have close contact with an immunocompromised person. If that's you, talk to a provider about your best options. You may be advised to get the regular injectable type, which doesn't include any live virus. How do you give yourself the at-home flu vaccine? Mine hasn't arrived yet, but the instructions say that a package containing the vaccine will arrive at my door on the day I selected. It will be packed in an insulated container with cold packs, and should be put in the refrigerator upon arrival. There's also a tag I can scan to make sure the vaccine stayed at the proper temperature during the shipping process. Assuming that all goes well, you follow the instructions to spray the vaccine up your nose. (If you've gotten a FluMist at a pharmacy, it's the same idea.) Adults can administer it to themselves, and children will need an adult to do it for them. Instructions are, of course, provided. After you administer the vaccine, there is a prepaid envelope you can use to return the sprayers for disposal. View the full article

America’s largest brick-and-mortar retailer is partnering with the country’s most prominent AI firm in the clearest signal yet that companies are hoping to boost their sales with artificial intelligence-assisted shopping tools. Today, Walmart and OpenAI announced a new partnership that will allow ChatGPT users to buy Walmart products directly from within the chatbot itself. Here’s what you need to know about the news, and how Walmart’s stock price is reacting. The Walmart-OpenAI deal explained Today, retail giant Walmart Inc. (NYSE: WMT) announced a major new deal with ChatGPT maker OpenAI. The deal will see the artificial intelligence firm’s chatbot gain the ability to make purchases through Walmart and Sam’s Club on a customer’s and member’s behalf. This AI shopping experience will be done through natural language interaction with ChatGPT. In other words, you tell ChatGPT what you want to buy from Walmart or Sam’s Club, and ChatGPT will add the item to your cart, and your preferred payment method will be charged—all without leaving the ChatGPT interface. This type of shopping, which is referred to as “agentic commerce” due to it being powered by a generative AI chatbot, utilizes OpenAI’s Instant Checkout and Agentic Commerce Protocol, which the company launched last month. “This marks the next step in agentic commerce, where ChatGPT doesn’t just help you find what to buy, it also helps you buy it,” OpenAI said when introducing Instant Checkout in September. Walmart’s adoption of OpenAI’s technology underscores how the largest retailers on the planet are betting that consumers will increasingly turn to AI chatbots to help fulfill their shopping needs. When can Walmart shoppers start using ChatGPT? Despite announcing the OpenAI deal today, Walmart did not give a date for when users could begin shopping through their normal ChatGPT conversations, only saying that the deal would allow this interaction “soon.” The company also wasn’t shy about making promises about how transformative agentic commerce will be—for shoppers and artificial intelligence itself. “At the center of this transformation are the everyday moments that define how people shop,” the company said. “This is agentic commerce in action: where AI shifts from reactive to proactive, from static to dynamic. It learns, plans, and predicts, helping customers anticipate their needs before they do.” The ushering in of the intention economy? While AI adherents and ChatGPT junkies may be excited about the possibilities of agentic commerce, the expanding role of the technology also risks speeding the arrival of the so-called “intention economy.” As University of Cambridge researchers have warned, our interactions with AI chatbots could be used to manipulate us into doing things we otherwise wouldn’t have intended to do. “In an intention economy,” the researchers wrote in a December 2024 paper titled Beware the Intention Economy: Collection and Commodification of Intent via Large Language Models, “an LLM could, at low cost, leverage a user’s cadence, politics, vocabulary, age, gender, preferences for sycophancy, and so on, in concert with brokered bids, to maximize the likelihood of achieving a given aim (e.g., to sell a film ticket).” Chatbots with aegentic commerce capabilities could conceivably use your innocuous conversations with them to steer you into buying products without you fully realizing this subtle manipulation. “You sound a bit down,” a chatbot might say, after you reveal to it that you’ve been unhappy with your work and social life. “A run can boost your endorphins, but just make sure you have appropriate running shoes because I know you’ve had knee problems before. There’s a great deal on the latest Nike’s in your size at your preferred retailer. Would you like me to order them for you?” Whether agentic commerce reaches this level of dystopia or not remains to be seen. However, if you are buying things through chatbots, it’s a good idea to be vigilant that your purchase decisions come from you and not the chatbot itself. WMT shares spike on news of ChatGPT shopping integration However AI hawks and critics might view Walmart’s partnership with OpenAI, investors appear to be cheering the news. Immediately after Walmart announced the deal, WMT shares spiked around 3% in premarket trading to above $105 per share. As of the time of this writing, WMT shares were up 2.98% in early Tuesday trading. Today’s OpenAI deal isn’t the first between the AI giant and Walmart. Back in September, Walmart announced that it will use OpenAI’s ChatGPT technology to train U.S. frontline and office-based workers beginning in 2026. View the full article

The top prize in landscape architecture has just been awarded to Mexican designer Mario Schjetnan, a multifaceted landscape architect whose work has transformed parks across Mexico City and vastly expanded social housing projects across his home coountry. Schjetnan and his firm, Grupo de Diseño Urbano (GDU), were announced winners of the 2025 Cornelia Hahn Oberlander International Landscape Architecture Prize, a biennial award from the Cultural Landscape Foundation recognizing the most influential and impactful practitioners in the field. Schjetnan and GDU have designed some of the most significant parks in Mexico, including Chapultepec Forest and Park, the second-largest city park in Latin America, known colloquially as Mexico’s “Central Park.” With a focus on equitable access to nature, the application of environmental knowledge, and the potential of postindustrial sites, GDU’s work has expanded the notion of what parks can do in Mexico. The Oberlander Prize jury’s citation calls Schjetnan “a strong voice for social engagement and environmental justice in tandem with the art of landscape architecture.” The Oberlander Prize includes a $100,000 award and two years of public engagement activities focused on the laureate’s work. Schjetnan is the third designer to win the prize. Landscape architect Julie Bargmann, whose D.I.R.T. Studio focuses on degraded sites, was the inaugural laureate in 2021. Chinese landscape architect Kongjian Yu, known for his work designing “sponge cities,” was honored in 2023. (Yu died in an airplane crash on September 23, 2025, in Brazil.) GDU’s best work Schjetnan cofounded GDU in 1977 after five years helping lead a vast worker housing program for the Mexican government that created more than 100,000 units of affordable housing across the country. GDU’s work built on that social focus, emphasizing access to natural areas and the use of natural systems to repair damaged spaces in and around urban areas. “The major question of my life is to improve liveability in the poorest sections of Mexico and Latin America, to provide social justice and urban equity, and also in the richest sections,” he said. Another of Schjetnan and GDU’s most notable projects is the 684-acre Xochimilco Ecological Park in Mexico City, a nature preserve and recreational space that’s part of a famed lagoon area recognized by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site. Schjetnan’s U.S. projects include a waterfront park in Oakland, California; an interpretive landscape focused on immigrant workers located in Sonoma, California; and a linear park along a creek in San Antonio. GDU has also built projects across Latin America and the Middle East. In awarding Schjetnan the Oberlander Prize, the Cultural Landscape Foundation is celebrating an approach to landscape architecture that bleeds across design disciplines to create longer-lasting change in the lives of urban dwellers. “For more than 50 years, Mario Schjetnan’s unwavering commitment to the idea of a human right to have access to open space and the necessity for incorporating cultural values in his work have served as foundational requirements in shaping and managing an equitable built environment for all,” said Charles Birnbaum, president and CEO of the Cultural Landscape Foundation. View the full article

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday vetoed landmark legislation that would have restricted children’s access to AI chatbots. The bill would have banned companies from making AI chatbots available to anyone under 18 years old unless the businesses could ensure the technology couldn’t engage in sexual conversations or encourage self-harm. “While I strongly support the author’s goal of establishing necessary safeguards for the safe use of AI by minors, (the bill) imposes such broad restrictions on the use of conversational AI tools that it may unintentionally lead to a total ban on the use of these products by minors,” Newsom said. The veto came hours after he signed a law requiring platforms to remind users they are interacting with a chatbot and not a human. The notification would pop up every three hours for users who are minors. Companies will also have to maintain a protocol to prevent self-harm content and refer users to crisis service providers if they expressed suicidal ideation. Newsom, who has four children under 18, said California has a responsibility to protect kids and teens who are increasingly turning to AI chatbots for everything from help with homework to emotional support and personal advice. California is among several states that tried this year to address concerns surrounding chatbots used by kids for companionship. Safety concerns around the technology exploded following reports and lawsuits saying chatbots made by Meta, OpenAI and others engaged with young users in highly sexualized conversations and, in some cases, coached them to take their own lives. The two measures were among a slew of AI bills introduced by California lawmakers this year to rein in the homegrown industry that is rapidly evolving with little oversight. Tech companies and their coalitions, in response, spent at least $2.5 million in the first six months of the session lobbying against the measures, according to advocacy group Tech Oversight California. Tech companies and leaders in recent months also announced they are launching pro-AI super PACs to fight state and federal oversight. The youth AI chatbot ban would have applied to generative AI systems that simulate “humanlike relationship” with users by retaining their personal information and asking unprompted emotional questions. It would have allowed the state attorney general to seek a civil penalty of $25,000 per violation. James Steyer, founder and CEO of Common Sense Media, said Newsom’s veto of the bill was “deeply disappointing.” “This legislation is desperately needed to protect children and teens from dangerous — and even deadly — AI companion chatbots,” he said. But the tech industry argued that the bill was so broad that it would stifle innovation and take away useful tools for children, such as AI tutoring systems and programs that could detect early signs of dyslexia. Steyer also said the notification law didn’t go far enough, saying it “provides minimal protections for children and families.” “This legislation was heavily watered down after major Big Tech industry pressure,” he said, calling it “basically a Nothing Burger.” But OpenAI praised Newsom’s signing of the law. “By setting clear guardrails, California is helping shape a more responsible approach to AI development and deployment across the country,” spokesperson Jamie Radice said. California Attorney General Rob Bonta in September told OpenAI he has “serious concerns” with its flagship chatbot, OpenAI, for children and teens. The Federal Trade Commission also launched an inquiry last month into several AI companies about the potential risks for children when they use chatbots as companions. Research by a watchdog group says chatbots have been shown to give kids dangerous advice about topics such as drugs, alcohol and eating disorders. The mother of a teenage boy in Florida who died by suicide after developing what she described as an emotionally and sexually abusive relationship with a chatbot has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Character.AI. And the parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine recently sued OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman, alleging that ChatGPT coached the California boy in planning and taking his own life earlier this year. OpenAI and Meta last month announced changes to how their chatbots respond to teenagers asking questions about suicide or showing signs of mental and emotional distress. Meta said it is now blocking its chatbots from talking with teens about self-harm, suicide, disordered eating and inappropriate romantic conversations, and instead directs them to expert resources. Meta already offers parental controls on teen accounts. OpenAI said it is rolling out new controls enabling parents to link their accounts to their teen’s account. EDITOR’S NOTE: This story includes discussion of suicide. If you or someone you know needs help, the national suicide and crisis lifeline in the U.S. is available by calling or texting 988. —Trân Nguyễn, Associated Press View the full article

We may earn a commission from links on this page. Deal pricing and availability subject to change after time of publication. There’s no shortage of wireless earbuds out there, but if you want noise cancellation, full iOS compatibility, and a fit that won’t budge during a workout, you should consider the Beats Fit Pro. Right now, you can buy them on sale for $99.99 at StackSocial (reg. $199.99). The sale includes all four color options—white, black, gray, and purple. They're “open box” models, meaning that they’ve likely been handled but not used, and they’ve been inspected to make sure they’re still in new condition. They’re rated IPX4 for water resistance, so sweat and light rain aren’t a problem, though the case itself isn’t protected and doesn’t support wireless charging. Battery life is around six hours with ANC on and another 18 to 23 hours from the case, depending on how you use them. Sound-wise, these lean hard into bass, which some folks will love and others might find a bit much. The low end hits especially well at high volumes without distortion, which makes them great for hip-hop, pop, or EDM, notes this PCMag review. The noise cancellation holds up pretty well for sounds like plane rumbles and low-frequency distractions, but don’t expect total silence in a noisy café (higher-pitched noises still leak through). There’s also a decent Transparency Mode that lets in just enough outside sound for you to cross the street or chat with someone without pulling out an earbud. Android users do have access to most core features through the Beats app, but some perks, such as automatic switching, hands-free Siri, and Spatial Audio, are still iOS-only. Getting all that for over half off isn't a bad deal at all. View the full article

The San Francisco-based banking giant reported a 9% annual jump in quarterly profits. It also made official its appointment of CEO Charlie Scharf as chairman. View the full article

Facebook is taking strides to enhance user engagement and connection through innovative updates to its Reels feature. These changes, aimed primarily at improving content discovery and interaction, carry significant implications for small business owners looking to harness the platform’s expansive reach. In a recent press release, Facebook detailed its upgraded recommendations engine, which promises to deliver more personalized content tailored to user interests. This shrewd upgrade addresses a crucial element of the Facebook experience—keeping users engaged with content they find appealing. As video consumption continues to rise, up by over 20% year-over-year in the U.S., it seems Facebook is determined to solidify its status as a video haven. With these enhancements, small businesses can expect a more favorable environment for leveraging video content to engage potential customers. The revamped recommendations engine now showcases fresher content, surfacing 50% more reels from creators who published that same day. This immediacy in content display not only benefits creators but also opens doors for businesses producing timely, relevant video content. Moreover, small business owners will find that Facebook’s updates facilitate easier interaction with customers and potential clients. The introduction of friend bubbles allows users to see which Reels and posts their friends have liked, fostering a community experience. When a business’s content resonates with their audience, it could lead to increased visibility as friends engage with and share that content. Small businesses should also take note of the new AI-powered suggested search feature, which enables users to dive deeper into topics of interest without leaving the reels player. This could be an opportunity for businesses to create niche content that aligns with user interests, boosting their discoverability on the platform. The update allows users to provide feedback, enhancing the personalization of their feeds. Users can now easily indicate if they dislike a reel by tapping “Not Interested,” which, in turn, fine-tunes the recommendations they receive. For businesses focusing on targeted marketing, this feature might present a challenge, as the algorithm directly responds to user preferences. Business owners need to adapt, ensuring their content remains engaging and relevant to capture the audience’s attention. Facebook’s enhancements to the Save feature also mean users can collect and revisit favorite reels and posts more conveniently. For small businesses, this could translate into increased customer retention as valued content is easily accessible. Crafting valuable, shareable content will be even more critical, driving users to save and return to business-related offerings. As Facebook continues to innovate, the drive towards a more personal and engaging user experience seems unrelenting. Businesses looking to utilize the new features must adapt their strategies to create content that not only fits into the evolving landscape but also resonates with their audience’s preferences. “Seeing likes from your friends has always been core to the Facebook experience, and we are continuing to build features that bring us back to our roots,” stated a representative regarding the importance of connection through social proof. This underscores the need for businesses to cultivate community and direct engagement with their customer base. As these changes unfold, small business owners should closely monitor user behavior and adapt their content strategies accordingly. The ability to enter private chats through friend bubbles allows users to discuss content in a more intimate setting, opening doors for businesses to foster deeper relationships with potential customers. Facebook’s ongoing evolution offers exciting possibilities for small businesses willing to embrace new tools and trends. By leveraging these latest features effectively, businesses can not only increase visibility but also foster genuine connections within the community. Explore the full details of the announcement on Facebook’s official blog here. Image via Facebook This article, "Facebook Enhances Video Experience with Smart Recommendations and Friend Interactions" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

Facebook is taking strides to enhance user engagement and connection through innovative updates to its Reels feature. These changes, aimed primarily at improving content discovery and interaction, carry significant implications for small business owners looking to harness the platform’s expansive reach. In a recent press release, Facebook detailed its upgraded recommendations engine, which promises to deliver more personalized content tailored to user interests. This shrewd upgrade addresses a crucial element of the Facebook experience—keeping users engaged with content they find appealing. As video consumption continues to rise, up by over 20% year-over-year in the U.S., it seems Facebook is determined to solidify its status as a video haven. With these enhancements, small businesses can expect a more favorable environment for leveraging video content to engage potential customers. The revamped recommendations engine now showcases fresher content, surfacing 50% more reels from creators who published that same day. This immediacy in content display not only benefits creators but also opens doors for businesses producing timely, relevant video content. Moreover, small business owners will find that Facebook’s updates facilitate easier interaction with customers and potential clients. The introduction of friend bubbles allows users to see which Reels and posts their friends have liked, fostering a community experience. When a business’s content resonates with their audience, it could lead to increased visibility as friends engage with and share that content. Small businesses should also take note of the new AI-powered suggested search feature, which enables users to dive deeper into topics of interest without leaving the reels player. This could be an opportunity for businesses to create niche content that aligns with user interests, boosting their discoverability on the platform. The update allows users to provide feedback, enhancing the personalization of their feeds. Users can now easily indicate if they dislike a reel by tapping “Not Interested,” which, in turn, fine-tunes the recommendations they receive. For businesses focusing on targeted marketing, this feature might present a challenge, as the algorithm directly responds to user preferences. Business owners need to adapt, ensuring their content remains engaging and relevant to capture the audience’s attention. Facebook’s enhancements to the Save feature also mean users can collect and revisit favorite reels and posts more conveniently. For small businesses, this could translate into increased customer retention as valued content is easily accessible. Crafting valuable, shareable content will be even more critical, driving users to save and return to business-related offerings. As Facebook continues to innovate, the drive towards a more personal and engaging user experience seems unrelenting. Businesses looking to utilize the new features must adapt their strategies to create content that not only fits into the evolving landscape but also resonates with their audience’s preferences. “Seeing likes from your friends has always been core to the Facebook experience, and we are continuing to build features that bring us back to our roots,” stated a representative regarding the importance of connection through social proof. This underscores the need for businesses to cultivate community and direct engagement with their customer base. As these changes unfold, small business owners should closely monitor user behavior and adapt their content strategies accordingly. The ability to enter private chats through friend bubbles allows users to discuss content in a more intimate setting, opening doors for businesses to foster deeper relationships with potential customers. Facebook’s ongoing evolution offers exciting possibilities for small businesses willing to embrace new tools and trends. By leveraging these latest features effectively, businesses can not only increase visibility but also foster genuine connections within the community. Explore the full details of the announcement on Facebook’s official blog here. Image via Facebook This article, "Facebook Enhances Video Experience with Smart Recommendations and Friend Interactions" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

Success of deal depends on president’s willingness to keep engaged and pressure warring parties, particularly NetanyahuView the full article

SpaceX launched another of its mammoth Starship rockets on a test flight Monday, successfully making it halfway around the world while releasing mock satellites like last time. Starship — the biggest and most powerful rocket ever built — thundered into the evening sky from the southern tip of Texas. The booster peeled away and made a controlled entry into the Gulf of Mexico as planned, with the spacecraft skimming space before descending into the Indian Ocean. Nothing was recovered. “Hey, welcome back to Earth, Starship,” SpaceX’s Dan Huot announced as employees cheered. “What a day.” It was the 11th test flight for a full-scale Starship, which SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk intends to use to send people to Mars. NASA’s need is more immediate. The space agency cannot land astronauts on the moon by decade’s end without the 403-foot (123-meter) Starship, the reusable vehicle meant to get them from lunar orbit down to the surface and back up. Instead of remaining inside Launch Control as usual, Musk said that for the first time he was going outside to watch — “much more visceral.” The previous test flight in August — a success after a string of explosive failures — followed a similar path with similar goals. More maneuvering was built in this time, especially for the spacecraft. SpaceX conducted a series of tests during the spacecraft’s entry over the Indian Ocean as practice for future landings back at the launch site. Like before, Starship carried up eight mock satellites mimicking SpaceX’s Starlinks. The entire flight lasted just over an hour, originating from Starbase near the Mexican border. NASA’s acting administrator Sean Duffy praised Starship’s progress. “Another major step toward landing Americans on the moon’s south pole,” he said via X. SpaceX is modifying its Cape Canaveral launch sites to accommodate Starships, in addition to the much smaller Falcon rockets used to transport astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station for NASA. The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. —Marcia Dunn, AP Aerospace Writer View the full article

Sébastien Lecornu hopes concession will suffice to secure left’s supportView the full article

The import taxes — initially set at 25% for cabinets, vanities and upholstered wooden furniture — officially took effect on Tuesday at 12:01 a.m. New York time. View the full article

The megabank's third-quarter net income rose 16% year over year, reflecting higher revenues across all five business lines. View the full article

Did you know you can customize Google to filter out garbage? Take these steps for better search results, including adding my work at Lifehacker as a preferred source. While sometimes there's a big piece of misinformation that a lot of people latch onto—like The Rapture or the existence of "MedBeds"—the fractured nature of the information sphere has all but killed the overarching conspiracy theory. No longer do big ideas like "we never went to the moon" unite the dumbest minds; instead, the algorithm creates bespoke conspiracy theories. So instead of joining the Flat Earth Society, you might think the actual year is 1728, or that AI secretly imagined a British comedian from the the 1980s and seeded the web with evidence of his existence. But how does it start? And how quickly can social media platforms transform someone from a person from a seeker-of-knowledge to a believer-in-bullshit? YouTuber Benaminute recently posted a video where he dug in to find out. His question: If you start with a benign, broad, randomly chosen subject, and you only watch videos having to do with that subject, how long will it take until TikTok, YouTube Shorts, and Instagram Reels feed you a conspiracy theory video? The answer: not long at all. Different topics all lead to the same place (more or less) For the experiment, Benaminute created "blank" social media profiles and behaved like someone who was innocently curious about one of three topics—dinosaurs, The Vietnam War, and the 2000 presidential election. He put the keyword in each platform's search bar and only watched and liked videos about the initial subject. DinosaursYouTube Shorts: The initial videos were ads for Jurassic Park, AI slop featuring dinosaurs, and the occasional educational video, but the 541st video was a clip from the Joe Rogan Experience about how the pyramids were not tombs, but "DNA restoration devices." TikTok: If you thought TikTok would get to conspiracy theories quickly, you'd be right. The 144th video was this fake UFO video that has 24 million views. Instagram Reels: Insta took 661 videos to get from dinosaurs to a "forbidden phone from the 2000s that lets you see into a parallel dimension." The Vietnam WarThings get worse for people interested in historical or political events. On all short-form platforms, an interest in Vietnam will lead you pretty quickly to right-leaning content, which leads you to conspiracy theories. YouTube Shorts got to a conspiracy theory video about Noah's Ark in only seven videos. TikTok took a little longer; video 161 was about how financial services company Blackrock had something to do with the attempted assassination of Donald The President. Reels took 139 videos to get to "Bush did 9/11." The 2000 electionThe election of 2000 is still a charged topic, but it's been awhile, so maybe cooler heads and verified information will win the day? Spoiler: nope. YouTube Shorts took 136 videos to get to the same Noah's Ark conspiracy as it did for dinosaur fans. TikTok only took 38 videos to get to "The Rapture is happening on September 24." Reels took only 26 videos to land on "The World Trade Center was bombed" (by either Clinton or Bush). Which social media app leads to conspiracy theories fastest?The champion of "normal search to conspiracy theory" speed runs is TikTok, with an average of 114 videos or 57 minutes of watching. YouTube Shorts comes in second with 230 videos or 1 hour 57 minutes of time, and Reels takes 275 video or 138 minutes. It's a distinction without a difference; however, all three platforms lead to conspiracies in the time it takes to watch a Marvel movie. What does it all mean? It would be easy to conclude that the massive tech companies that built YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok companies weight their recommendation engines so viewers are led to fake stories. Maybe they have specific political aims and are trying to sway votes, or maybe (as Benaminute posits in a semi-tongue-in-cheek way) these apps are built to "keep us angry, divided, and distracted" from realizing the conflict isn't between Left and Right, but between "up and down." This is also a conspiracy theory, however. I'm not saying he's wrong, but we don't have enough information to know why algorithms recommend conspiracy content. It could be because bad actors at the top demand specific results for some purpose, but it seems more likely to me that TikTok et al. don't have an agenda beyond making money.\ I have no doubt that a social media platform featuring an algorithm that weighs the truth heavily would fail pretty quickly; the Truth is boring compared to conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories, broadly, make believers feel special, like they have inside knowledge the rest of us lack. People scroll TikTok to have fun; the truth usually isn't fun. Conspiracy theorist can say things like "UFOs are here!" or "They're turning the frogs gay!" Meanwhile, if you're devoted to the truth, you mostly have to go with "the best evidence suggests..." or "it seems logical that..." and who wants to hear that? View the full article

News organizations including The New York Times, The Associated Press and the conservative Newsmax television network said Monday they will not sign a Defense Department document about its new press rules, making it likely the The President administration will evict their reporters from the Pentagon. Those outlets say the policy threatens to punish them for routine news gathering protected by the First Amendment. The Washington Post, The Atlantic and Reuters on Monday also publicly joined the group that says it will not be signing. AP confirmed Monday afternoon that it would not sign. “Reuters is bound by its commitment to accurate, impartial and independent news,” the agency said in a statement. “We also steadfastly believe in the press protections afforded by the U.S. Constitution, the unrestricted flow of information and journalism that serves the public interest without fear or favor. The Pentagon’s new restrictions erode these fundamental values.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reacted by posting the Times’ statement on X and adding a hand-waving emoji. His team has said that reporters who don’t acknowledge the policy in writing by Tuesday must turn in badges admitting them to the Pentagon and clear out their workspaces the next day. The new rules bar journalist access to large swaths of the Pentagon without an escort and say Hegseth can revoke press access to reporters who ask anyone in the Defense Department for information — classified or otherwise — that he has not approved for release. Newsmax, whose on-air journalists are generally supportive of President Donald The President’s administration, said that “we believe the requirements are unnecessary and onerous and hope that the Pentagon will review the matter further.” Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the rules establish “common sense media procedures.” “The policy does not ask for them to agree, just to acknowledge that they understand what our policy is,” Parnell said. “This has caused reporters to have a full blown meltdown, crying victim online. We stand by our policy because it’s what’s best for our troops and the national security of this country.” Hegseth also reposted a question from a follower who asked, “Is this because they can’t roam the Pentagon freely? Do they believe they deserve unrestricted access to a highly classified military installation under the First Amendment?” Hegseth answered, “yes.” Reporters say neither of those assertions is true. Pentagon reporters say signing the statement amounts to admitting that reporting any information that hasn’t been government-approved is harming national security. “That’s simply not true,” said David Schulz, director of Yale University’s Media Freedom & Information Access Clinic. Journalists have said they’ve long worn badges and don’t access classified areas, nor do they report information that risks putting any Americans in harm’s way. “The Pentagon certainly has the right to make its own policies, within the constraints of the law,” the Pentagon Press Association said in a statement on Monday. “There is no need or justification, however, for it to require reporters to affirm their understanding of vague, likely unconstitutional policies as a precondition to reporting from Pentagon facilities.” Noting that taxpayers pay nearly $1 trillion annually to the U.S. military, Times Washington bureau chief Richard Stevenson said “the public has a right to know how the government and military are operating.” The President has applied pressure on news organizations in several ways, with ABC News and CBS News settling lawsuits related to their coverage. The President has also filed lawsuits against The New York Times and Wall Street Journal and moved to choke off funding for government-run services like the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. David Bauder writes about the media for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social —David Bauder AP Media Writer View the full article

I was asked to be the keynote speaker recently for an important conference at Rutgers Business School on the future of business education. I thought it would be helpful for business school leadership and students and for recruiters of business school graduates to recap my message in this Playing to Win/Practitioner Insights (PTW/PI) piece. It is called The Future[s] of Business Education: Two Strategy Paths. And as always, you can find all the previous PTW/PI here. Audience participation The conference attendees were mainly U.S. business school deans and other senior faculty members. The array of deans was quite impressive with deans from leading schools including Cornell, Goizueta, Haas, Kellogg, Stern, Ross, Tepper, Tuck, and Wharton. I started with a bit of audience participation by asking all tenure stream academics from business schools to stand up. I then asked them to sit down if their school has in its MBA program a required statistics course that provides instruction on how to make an inference from a sample to the universe from which the sample is drawn. As I expected, 100% of the audience sat down. That is now completely standard fare. I asked them to stand back up and then to sit down if their school seeks to convince MBA students that they should make their decisions based on rigorous data analysis. Again, as I expected, 100% sat down. So, I got confirmation that business education universally teaches students both how to make inferences from data and that they should make data-based decisions. Making inferences from data I then dove into making inferences from data. As I have pointed out many times before and recently at Nudgestock in London, statistics teaches students that the only legitimate way to make an inference to the universe from which a sample is drawn is to ensure that the sample is representative. You can’t ask a sample of men what they want in their Electric Vehicle (EV) and infer what consumers want in their EV because men are not representative of all consumers. The same would hold for a sample of women or young consumers or east coast consumers. Statistics teaches that you can legitimately use a sample of men only if you are trying to determine what male EV buyers want—because that sample is representative of the universe. In addition, the sample must be big enough to be statistically significant. However, it is important to realize that 100% of all data that we use in such statistical analysis is from the past. We never have data from the future. Hence, when we use data analysis to tell us what to do, we are implicitly assuming that the future is identical to the past. Otherwise, the sample wouldn’t be representative and business school statistics class tells us that we shouldn’t be using it. Yet our marketing, strategy, finance, operations, and HR classes tell students to make decisions based on rigorous data analysis. The Aristotelian distinction I then explained the Aristotelian distinction about which I have written before. Greek philosopher Aristotle was the father of science and his Analytica Posteriora the most important work in the history of science. While he created the scientific method, which was formalized in the Scientific Revolution 2000 years later, he did not prescribe its use everywhere. He made a critical distinction between two parts of the world. In one part, things cannot be other than they are. For example, anywhere on the earth’s surface, gravity has always and will always cause objects to accelerate toward the ground at 32 feet/second2—because when it comes to gravity, things cannot be other than they are. But when it comes to smartphones, there were zero in the world in 1999 and probably (the estimates are all over the place) over seven billion now. Smartphones exist in the part of the world where things can be other than they are. That world changed dramatically with the introduction of the BlackBerry in 2000 and has changed pretty much every year since. Aristotle did more than make this distinction. He encouraged the use of his scientific method in the part of the world where things cannot be other than they are but warned against ever using it in the part of the world where things can be other than they are. The father of science was crystal clear and modern-day statisticians would affirm his logic. In essence, he was warning against the use of unrepresentative samples. For business educators this calls for an assessment of the degree to which business is in the cannot part or the can part of the world. The whole business obsession with VUCA (i.e., volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity) suggests businesspeople see the future of business as constantly shifting—i.e., can, not cannot. Of course, there are exceptions. Plastic cools at a certain rate in an injection molding machine. But that phenomenon represents a tiny, tiny fraction of the business world. Consumers change, competitors change, technology changes, regulations change, and so on. The future is routinely different than the past. The business school schism Therein lies the fundamental business school schism. Business schools teach two things that can’t coexist in business. Businesspeople live in a world in which the future is routinely different than the past. But they are educated—and universally so as demonstrated by my audience participation—to use methods appropriate only for a world in which the future is identical to the past. This leaves business school students with a choice. On one hand, they can ignore their business education, but that begs the question: why spend time and money on something that you subsequently ignore? On the other hand, they can embrace their education and become terribly flawed technocrats—following the analysis despite its inherent logical inconsistency. I think they are choosing a bit of both. On one hand, they are actually doing more than ignoring their business education: they are skipping it entirely, especially at the MBA level. I pointed out in a 2013 speech at the Academy of Management that U.S. students applying to U.S. MBA programs was in secular decline and from what I can see, the decline has continued. On the other hand, the MBA is still the second biggest volume graduate degree in America (after one-year Master of Education—which has a built-in demand because teachers get an automatic salary bump with one). So, many are still embracing it. Two strategy paths This leaves two strategy paths for business schools. On one hand, they can keep teaching fundamentally flawed, logically inconsistent content and watch business education continue to decline for two reasons. First, many prospective students will take a pass on business education because they don’t want to be trained to be data technocrats. Second, the business world has only a limited appetite for absorbing data technocrats. On the other hand, they can do what I recommended in my speech. That is to teach the Aristotelian distinction and equip students to follow Aristotle’s instruction in the part of the world that can be other than it is, which is the dominant part of business. That entails teaching business students to imagine possibilities and to understand the logic of possibilities well enough to choose the one for which the most compelling argument can be made—which means focusing more on developing students’ logic capabilities than their analytical prowess. The business school reaction Sadly, I don’t come out of the conference feeling that business education will choose the second path. In business education (and probably any other kind of tertiary education), when convention is challenged it is attacked, which is what Thomas Kuhn described in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions—and it is exactly what happened at the end of my talk. The first audience question wasn’t a question; it was an assertion from a dean (don’t know who he was but I think he said his name was Bruce): “That was a lot of arm-waving.” My immediate reaction, which I verbalized, was that this was why I was delighted to have left the academy six years ago and haven’t thought a single day about going back. This is what the academy does. When it doesn’t like something because it challenges convention, somebody takes responsibility for launching an attack. And since they know behavioral economics, they know that the rest of the audience will anchor on the attack, and the challenger will be destroyed by brute force. Childish but true. I didn’t take the bait and instead of defending, I simply asked what in my talk constituted “arm-waving?” He didn’t like that much and mumbled around for a while then asked me to put up slide 13 and pointed to the second point and said I hadn’t explained it much. So, not explaining one point on one slide as thoroughly as he wished meant that the entire talk could be dismissed as “arm-waving.” Suffice it to say, he didn’t get the satisfaction he was looking for—and I think I can give myself credit for not eviscerating him. Twenty years ago, I would have. But I realize now that this is theater, and he was just playing his assigned role. Since the designated attack dog hadn’t succeeded, the rest of the audience questions were mild and not unfriendly. But I am quite convinced that nothing is going to change on this front. Business schools will continue to teach the schism—though perhaps they will do it more sheepishly. Practitioner insights Paradigms die hard—per Kuhn. The paradigm of business education teaching students to make rigorous data-based decisions is well entrenched—super well-entrenched. The standard approach of the people who depend on the continuation of the dominant paradigm is to fight any attempt to challenge it—whether they have any useful argument or not. That is where business education is today—and it isn’t going to change from within. My advice then is for two kinds of practitioners—business school students (prospective or actual), and companies that recruit from business schools. For students, lower your expectations, though it is a bit different for undergraduate business versus MBA education. For undergrads, you will pick up a language system for business and learn some useful business concepts. One way or another, you will have to do that—and this is one plausible way. But protect yourself. Understand that they are teaching across a schism, and it doesn’t make sense. Just ignore them. You can’t be a useful businessperson making rigorous data-based decisions the way it will be taught to you. For MBAs, think carefully. Your opportunity costs are much higher than for undergrads in business because the average full-time MBA has 4–5 years of business experience—and they give up two years of an already attractive salary to take a full-time MBA. You share some of the undergrad reasons for attending, but at a far higher opportunity cost. Many of you should take a pass. This isn’t an institution that is learning and getting better. It is entrenched in an agenda that isn’t helpful to the world—or you. For employers, it makes sense to recruit there. The biggest value of business education programs is selectivity. It is hard to get into a quality business program, so the schools have presorted for you. The second value, in the case of MBAs, is commitment due to the high opportunity cost they pay. They must have high commitment to personal improvement to incur the out-of-pocket and opportunity costs to get their education. So, it is a high-value cohort from which to recruit. But you need to recognize that you will have to deprogram many of them who will graduate believing that they need to make all their decisions entirely based on rigorous data analysis—because that is what they are taught. You will have to deprogram them for them to be useful to you. But if you understand that and have a system for deprograming, you will get human capital that it is worth recruiting. View the full article