All Activity

Full-screen message effects are among the most fun-to-use features in iMessage, and now they're becoming a lot easier to use in Google Messages for Android, too. In the latest Google Messages beta, these full-screen effects will now automatically play for you (and your texting partner, if they're also on the beta) when you send them certain emoji in Google Messages for Android. That makes them a bit easier to use than Apple's version of this feature, which can only be triggered by certain phrases (eg: "Happy New Year"), or by long-pressing the send button and selecting the effect manually. Google had previously rolled out full-screen effects for certain phrases, but this time around, all you need to do is send one emoji to trigger them. How to use Android's full-screen message effectsAt the moment, Google is still testing this new way to send full-screen message effects, which means you'll have to become a beta tester for Google Messages in order to try them out. To do that, either follow this link or go to the Play Store page for Google Messages, tap Become a tester, and follow the on-screen instructions. Once you have the beta up and running, just send an applicable emoji to any of your contacts to trigger its corresponding full-screen effect. Message effects aren't enabled for every single emoji, but they do work with quite a few commonly used ones, such as clap, sleep, party, etc. Note that you'll need to limit your text to just one emoji to see the effect. If you send an emoji along with some text, or more than one emoji, it won't work (prior versions of the feature required you to send two of the same emoji to trigger an effect, although I couldn't make that work on the new beta). Personally, I quite like how these effects look. It's like watching a short, animated video the moment you send an emoji, which makes for some really pleasing feedback. How to turn off full-screen effects in Google Messages Credit: Khamosh Pathak Unless you find yourself frequently sending or receiving texts that only have a single emoji in them, these effects probably won't pop up so frequently that you'll need to turn them off. However, if they do start to annoy you, you can easily disable them. In Google Messages, tap the profile icon and select Settings. Disable Show expressive animations to stop seeing full-screen effects. View the full article

Stock prices for Netflix, Disney, and Warner Bros. Discovery fell this morning after President The President took to social media to warn of major incoming tariffs for films made overseas. This Sunday, The President used Truth Social to announce another escalation of his ongoing trade war. In the post, The President claimed that America’s movie industry is dying “a very fast death,” as “Other Countries are offering all sorts of incentives to draw our filmmakers and studios away.” The president went on to call this rise of foreign production both “propaganda” and a national security threat, ending by stating that, “I am authorizing the Department of Commerce, and the United States Trade Representative, to immediately begin the process of instituting a 100% Tariff on any and all Movies coming into our Country that are produced in Foreign Lands.” Howard Lutnick, the U.S. commerce secretary, responded to The President’s rant with the brief note posted to X: “We’re on it.” Neither The President nor Lutnick provided any clarification on how such a tariff would be applied, or who might be affected. But this morning, production and streaming companies are already feeling the impact of The President’s proposed plan: Shares for Netflix, Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Paramount Global took a sharp decline in early Monday trading, although Disney has since quickly bounced back. A potential industry-wide “chilling effect” So far, The President’s announcement has left media experts scratching their heads—and incited its fair share of backlash. First, it’s difficult to parse how an 100% tariff on movies “produced in foreign lands” would actually be implemented. Experts have noted that it’s unclear whether this tariff would apply only to foreign-language films imported to the United States or to any production shot overseas, including those led by major U.S. studios. It’s also not apparent whether this move will affect streaming services like Netflix and Disney+, which host plenty of titles that are either fully foreign-made or produced in part in another country, and whether short-form content like TV shows will also be impacted. “So many questions,” Simon Pulman, an entertainment lawyer at Pryor Cashman, wrote on LinkedIn. “Who is ultimately charged the tariff, and on what basis? Production spend? Distributor gross? Do you seek to hit the distributors and platforms that exhibit foreign-produced content? What about Netflix, whose titles do not generate direct revenue? What happens if production occurs offshore but post happens in the US? What about cross-border productions?” It’s true that producers are filming more overseas In an interview with Fast Company, Pulman said that while the implementation of The President’s proposed plan is unknown, its main goal appears to be convincing major movie studios to bring production back to the U.S. In the wake of Hollywood’s 2023 writer and actor strikes, it’s become more common for major Hollywood films (Gladiator II, the soon-to-be-released Mission: Impossible—The Final Reckoning, and several upcoming Avengers films, for example) to be produced at least partly overseas. That’s because, Pulman says, the strikes caused many production companies to reevaluate costs, while, simultaneously, foreign jurisdictions like the U.K., Hungary, and the Czech Republic began instating “aggressive tax incentives” for producers. Already, politicians and executives from Australia, New Zealand, France, and Italy have spoken out against The President’s plan. According to the nonprofit media tracker FilmLA, film and television production in Los Angeles has fallen by nearly 40% over the past decade. Given this offshoring trend, Pulman says, the idea of re-incentivizing production in the U.S. is laudable to some extent. But he thinks adding major tariffs to overseas production is more likely to both increase domestic ticket prices and decrease the number of movies being made rather than convincing American filmmakers to shoot in the U.S. “To my knowledge, every jurisdiction, whether it’s a state in the U.S. or a country like France or Canada, they don’t achieve [more production] by penalizing companies that go offshore,” Pulman says. “They try to attract and incentivize companies to shoot in their jurisdictions by offering various benefits to them.” The worst kind of Hollywood cliffhanger At this point, Pulman adds, it’s difficult to predict exactly how production companies will react to The President’s announcement—but he believes it’s most likely to have a “chilling effect” on the industry. “The reality is, until we know the details, and until there’s actually some kind of plan here, we’re not going to have a true sense of what this means,” Pulman says. “But the challenge with that is it creates uncertainty. If you’re a major streamer or a major studio, you’ve got this potentially hanging over your head.” View the full article

When the email came from the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Jacques Agbobly at first didn’t quite believe it. The Brooklyn-based fashion designer had only been in the business for five years. Now, one of the world’s top museums was asking for two of his designs to be shown in “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style,” the exhibit launched by the starry Met Gala. “I was just floored with excitement,” Agbobly said in an interview. “I had to check to make sure it was from an official email. And then the excitement came, and I was like . . . am I allowed to say anything to anyone about it?” Agbobly grew up in Togo, watching seamstresses and tailors create beautiful garments in part of the family home that they rented out. Studying fashion later in New York, the aspiring designer watched the Met Gala carpet from afar and dreamed of one day somehow being part of it. “Superfine: Tailoring Black Style” is the first Costume Institute exhibit to focus exclusively on Black designers, and the first in more than 20 years devoted to menswear. Unlike past shows that highlighted the work of very famous designers like Karl Lagerfeld or Charles James, this exhibit includes a number of up-and-coming designers like Agbobly. “The range is phenomenal,” says guest curator Monica L. Miller, a Barnard College professor whose book, “Slaves to Fashion: Black Dandyism and the Styling of Black Diasporic Identity,” is a foundation for the show. “It’s super exciting to showcase the designs of these younger and emerging designers,” says Miller, who took The Associated Press through the show over the weekend before its unveiling at Monday’s Met Gala, “and to see the way they’ve been thinking about Black representation across time and across geography.” The gala had already raised a record $31 million, Metropolitan Museum of Art CEO Max Hollein said Monday—the first time the fundraiser for the Met’s Costume Institute has crossed the $30 million mark and eclipsing last year’s haul of more than $26 million. Defining dandyism The exhibit covers Black style over several centuries, but the unifying theme is dandyism, and how designers have expressed that ethos through history. For Agbobly, dandyism is “about taking space. As a Black designer, as a queer person, a lot of it is rooted in people telling us who we should be or how we should act . . . dandyism really goes against that. It’s about showing up and looking your best self and taking up space and announcing that you’re here.” The exhibit, which opens to the public May 10, begins with its own definition: someone who “studies above everything else to dress elegantly and fashionably.” Miller has organized it into 12 conceptual sections: Ownership, presence, distinction, disguise, freedom, champion, respectability, jook, heritage, beauty, cool and cosmopolitanism. How clothing can dehumanize, but also give agency The “ownership” section begins with two livery coats worn by enslaved people. One of them, from Maryland, looks lavish and elaborate, in purple velvet trimmed with gold metallic threading. The garments were intended to show the wealth of their owners. In other words, Miller says, the enslaved themselves were items of conspicuous consumption. The other is a livery coat of tan broadcloth, likely manufactured by Brooks Brothers and worn by an enslaved child or adolescent boy in Louisiana just before the Civil War. Elsewhere, there’s a contemporary, glittering ensemble by British designer Grace Wales Bonner, made of crushed silk velvet and embroidered with crystals and the cowrie shells historically used as currency in Africa. There’s also a so-called “dollar bill suit” by the label 3.Paradis—the jacket sporting a laminated one-dollar bill stitched to the breast pocket, meant to suggest the absence of wealth. How dress can both disguise and reveal The “disguise” section includes a collection of 19th-century newspaper ads announcing rewards for catching runaway enslaved people. The ads, Miller notes, would often describe someone who was “particularly fond of dress”—or note that the person had taken large wardrobes. The reason was twofold: The fancy clothes made it possible for an enslaved person to cloak their identity. But also, when they finally made it to freedom, they could sell the clothing to help fund their new lives, Miller says. “So dressing above one’s station sometimes was a matter of life and death,” the curator says, “and also enabled people to transition from being enslaved to being liberated.” The contemporary part of this section includes striking embroidered jackets by the label Off-White that purposely play with gender roles—like displaying an ostensibly “male” jacket on a female mannequin. Views of an emerging Black middle and upper-middle class Stopping by a set of portraits from the early 19th century, as abolitionism was happening in the North, Miller explains that the subjects are Black men who were successful, well off enough to commission or sit for portraits, and dressed “in the finest fashions of the day.” Like William Whipper, an abolitionist and wealthy lumber merchant who also founded a literary society. They represent the beginnings of a Black middle and upper middle class in America, Miller says. But she points out a group of racist caricatures in a case right across from the portraits. “Almost as soon as they are able to do this,” she says, referring to the portraits, “they are stereotyped and degraded.” Projecting respectability: W.E.B. Du Bois and Frederick Douglass W.E.B. Du Bois, Miller points out, was not only a civil rights activist but also one of the best-dressed men in turn-of-the-century America. He traveled extensively overseas, which meant he needed “clothing befitting his status as a representative of Black America to the world.” Objects in the display include receipts for tailors in London, and suit orders from Brooks Brothers or his Harlem tailor. There is also a laundry receipt from 1933 for cleaning of shirts, collars, and handkerchiefs. Also highlighted in this section: Frederick Douglass, the abolitionist, writer, and statesman and also “the most photographed man of the 19th century.” The show includes his tailcoat of brushed wool, as well as a shirt embroidered with a “D” monogram, a top hat, a cane and a pair of sunglasses. Designers reflecting their African heritage One of Miller’s favorite items in the heritage section is Agbobly’s bright-colored ensemble based on the hues of bags that West African migrants used to transport their belongings. Also displayed is Agbobly’s denim suit embellished with crystals and beads. It’s a tribute not only to the hairbraiding salons where the designer spent time as a child, but also the earrings his grandmother or aunts would wear when they went to church. Speaking of family, Agbobly says that he ultimately did tell them—and everyone—about his “pinch-me moment.” “Everyone knows about it,” the designer says. “I keep screaming. If I can scream on top of a hill, I will.” —Jocelyn Noveck and Gary Gerard Hamilton, Associated Press View the full article

Adobe has released new survey findings showing how small business owners in the U.S. are redefining entrepreneurship through digital savvy, relentless hustle, and tools like Adobe Express. According to Adobe, the survey of 400 small business owners reveals a mix of optimism, overwork, and creative ambition among today’s entrepreneurs — many of whom are leveraging Adobe Express to overcome marketing challenges and build meaningful brands. The data show a significant shift in the makeup and mindset of small business owners. Forty percent of respondents have been in business for fewer than four years, indicating a rise in new, digitally native entrepreneurs. Adobe describes this group as bold, mobile, and creative, with many working from anywhere — including their beds, cars, or while running errands. Driven by Passion and Purpose Among the top reasons small business owners started their ventures: a desire to be their own boss, a passion turned into business, and income potential. For Gen Z founders, passion led the way. “My favorite thing about being a business owner is being able to be my own boss. I realized quickly that I didn’t like having someone tell me how to spend my time every day. It made me feel trapped, like I didn’t have any control over my own life. Now I can make my own schedule and prioritize things I think are important, not just what my boss cares about,” said Lexi Larson, founder of Sunday Cherries. “I started my entrepreneurial journey during Covid, just looking for a way to simply connect with other people my age when everything felt super isolating. What began as a little passion project turned into Our Era–my digital and print magazine all about Gen Z culture and media,” said Lucy Ivey, founder and editor-in-chief of Our Era Magazine. “Like a lot of Gen Z founders, I built this from pure passion, not just for the income or independence (though that’s been cool too!). For our generation, it’s not just about starting a business, it’s about building something that’s actually meaningful.” Pressures and Pain Points Despite high energy and intent, SMB owners report challenges balancing workload and growth. Adobe found that 41 percent say wearing “all the hats” is their biggest challenge, followed by generating consistent income (39 percent), and work-life balance (14 percent). Three out of four work full-time or more, and 43 percent report working well over 40 hours a week. Even with the strain, 77 percent say they rarely or never considered giving up their business in the past year. Marketing Confidence Gaps Marketing remains a sore spot for many. Adobe’s data show that 71 percent of small business owners consider themselves “average” marketers, and only 14 percent rate themselves highly. Just 10 percent feel their marketing content provides a competitive edge, while a quarter believe it blends in. Adobe says tools like Adobe Express are helping close that confidence gap. By providing professionally designed, easy-to-customize templates and AI-powered features, Adobe Express supports small businesses in producing high-quality, brand-consistent content more efficiently. “Biggest lesson? Consistency and clarity are better than perfection. Early on, I used to overthink every single post,” said Jerry Lee, Co-Founder of Wonsulting. Video and animation content remain intimidating for most respondents. Eighty percent say they lack confidence in video creation, and 60 percent rarely or never use animation. Gen Z is the exception, with 44 percent confident in video and twice as likely to use animation as the general SMB population. Social Media is Essential — and Overwhelming The survey highlights that 53 percent of small business owners see social media as their primary visibility tool, far ahead of websites. Gen Z SMB owners rely on social media even more, at 65 percent. Yet only 12 percent believe their social content gives them a competitive edge, and 30 percent say it looks like everyone else’s. Adobe notes that features in Adobe Express — such as customizable templates and AI-powered enhancements — are aimed at helping small business owners stand out more confidently and consistently. Confidence and Commitment Remain Strong Despite long hours and tough marketing terrain, small business owners report a strong sense of perseverance. Twenty-three percent say they’re outperforming competitors, and 36 percent of Gen Z respondents say they feel especially confident. Adobe concludes that today’s small business owners are resilient, passionate, and leaning on creative tools to succeed on their own terms. Image: Canva This article, "Adobe Express Survey Reveals How Small Business Owners Are Hustling with Passion and Creative Tools" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

Adobe has released new survey findings showing how small business owners in the U.S. are redefining entrepreneurship through digital savvy, relentless hustle, and tools like Adobe Express. According to Adobe, the survey of 400 small business owners reveals a mix of optimism, overwork, and creative ambition among today’s entrepreneurs — many of whom are leveraging Adobe Express to overcome marketing challenges and build meaningful brands. The data show a significant shift in the makeup and mindset of small business owners. Forty percent of respondents have been in business for fewer than four years, indicating a rise in new, digitally native entrepreneurs. Adobe describes this group as bold, mobile, and creative, with many working from anywhere — including their beds, cars, or while running errands. Driven by Passion and Purpose Among the top reasons small business owners started their ventures: a desire to be their own boss, a passion turned into business, and income potential. For Gen Z founders, passion led the way. “My favorite thing about being a business owner is being able to be my own boss. I realized quickly that I didn’t like having someone tell me how to spend my time every day. It made me feel trapped, like I didn’t have any control over my own life. Now I can make my own schedule and prioritize things I think are important, not just what my boss cares about,” said Lexi Larson, founder of Sunday Cherries. “I started my entrepreneurial journey during Covid, just looking for a way to simply connect with other people my age when everything felt super isolating. What began as a little passion project turned into Our Era–my digital and print magazine all about Gen Z culture and media,” said Lucy Ivey, founder and editor-in-chief of Our Era Magazine. “Like a lot of Gen Z founders, I built this from pure passion, not just for the income or independence (though that’s been cool too!). For our generation, it’s not just about starting a business, it’s about building something that’s actually meaningful.” Pressures and Pain Points Despite high energy and intent, SMB owners report challenges balancing workload and growth. Adobe found that 41 percent say wearing “all the hats” is their biggest challenge, followed by generating consistent income (39 percent), and work-life balance (14 percent). Three out of four work full-time or more, and 43 percent report working well over 40 hours a week. Even with the strain, 77 percent say they rarely or never considered giving up their business in the past year. Marketing Confidence Gaps Marketing remains a sore spot for many. Adobe’s data show that 71 percent of small business owners consider themselves “average” marketers, and only 14 percent rate themselves highly. Just 10 percent feel their marketing content provides a competitive edge, while a quarter believe it blends in. Adobe says tools like Adobe Express are helping close that confidence gap. By providing professionally designed, easy-to-customize templates and AI-powered features, Adobe Express supports small businesses in producing high-quality, brand-consistent content more efficiently. “Biggest lesson? Consistency and clarity are better than perfection. Early on, I used to overthink every single post,” said Jerry Lee, Co-Founder of Wonsulting. Video and animation content remain intimidating for most respondents. Eighty percent say they lack confidence in video creation, and 60 percent rarely or never use animation. Gen Z is the exception, with 44 percent confident in video and twice as likely to use animation as the general SMB population. Social Media is Essential — and Overwhelming The survey highlights that 53 percent of small business owners see social media as their primary visibility tool, far ahead of websites. Gen Z SMB owners rely on social media even more, at 65 percent. Yet only 12 percent believe their social content gives them a competitive edge, and 30 percent say it looks like everyone else’s. Adobe notes that features in Adobe Express — such as customizable templates and AI-powered enhancements — are aimed at helping small business owners stand out more confidently and consistently. Confidence and Commitment Remain Strong Despite long hours and tough marketing terrain, small business owners report a strong sense of perseverance. Twenty-three percent say they’re outperforming competitors, and 36 percent of Gen Z respondents say they feel especially confident. Adobe concludes that today’s small business owners are resilient, passionate, and leaning on creative tools to succeed on their own terms. Image: Canva This article, "Adobe Express Survey Reveals How Small Business Owners Are Hustling with Passion and Creative Tools" was first published on Small Business Trends View the full article

I'm Lifehacker's resident marathon runner and senior finance writer—and now, I'm merging my two worlds. While running requires minimal equipment compared to other activities, the right footwear can make or break your experience—and your budget. Let's break down what various types of runners should expect to spend on shoes, which investments are worth it, and where you can save without compromising your running experience. The casual beginner ($60-$90)If you're just starting out with one or two short runs per week, or mixing running with other forms of exercise, you don't need to spend a fortune. Marketing will tempt you, but I promise, you shouldn't have to go over $100. What to look for: Simple cushioning, basic support, and comfort. Worth investing in: A proper fitting. Even at discount retailers like DSW or Famous Footwear, find someone who can watch you walk or run to ensure you're not severely overpronating. Where to save: Last year's models from major brands like Nike, Adidas, and Asics often hit the $60-90 range during clearance sales. The Asics Gel-Contend ($59.95) and Nike Revolution ($60-75) offer reliable performance at accessible price points. What to avoid: Ultra-cheap generic athletic shoes under $40—these often lack the minimal cushioning and support needed even for casual running. Asics Women's Gel-Content 9 $59.95 at Amazon $70.00 Save $10.05 Shop Now Shop Now $59.95 at Amazon $70.00 Save $10.05 The practical enthusiast ($100-$140)For those running three to four times weekly, totaling 10-20 miles, you'll want something more substantial that balances price and performance. What to look for: Good cushioning, modest stability features, and durability for at least 300-400 miles. Worth investing in: One "do-everything" shoe from a reputable running brand. Popular options include the Brooks Ghost ($109.95), Saucony Ride ($139.95), or New Balance 880 ($139.99). Where to save: Shop previous generation models or check running specialty stores' clearance racks. Running warehouse websites frequently offer last season's designs at significant discounts. What to avoid: Premium racing shoes or highly specialized models—you'll pay more for features you don't need yet. The dedicated athlete ($120-$160+)These days, I find myself in this category. If you're running 20+ miles weekly, training for half or full marathons, or hitting the track for speedwork, your footwear becomes a crucial training tool. What to look for: Shoes specific to your running style, gait, and training needs. Worth investing in: A professional fitting at a specialty running store. The $10-20 premium you might pay for shoes is offset by expert guidance preventing injury. Consider a rotation of two complementary shoes—a cushioned model for long runs (like the NUCLEO 2 at $160) and a lighter, responsive shoe for faster workouts (like the Saucony Kinvara at $119.95). Where to save: Look for shoes with high mileage ratings (450-500+) to get more value per dollar. They might cost more upfront, but often outlast cheaper alternatives. What to avoid: Buying solely based on looks or trends. That Instagram-famous shoe might not work for your specific running style. Saucony Men's Kinvara 15 $119.95 at Amazon /images/amazon-prime.svg Shop Now Shop Now $119.95 at Amazon /images/amazon-prime.svg The competitive racer ($160-$250+)For serious competitors focused on performance, shoe technology becomes a legitimate competitive advantage. My word of advice: Don't spend money like a competitive racer unless you're confident this is your running identity. What to look for: Race-specific shoes with carbon plates, specialized foams, and performance-oriented features. Worth investing in: A proper "super shoe" for race day. The Nike Vaporfly/Alphafly ($250+), Saucony Endorphin Pro ($225), or Adidas Adios Pro ($249.90) can genuinely improve performance through energy return technology. Again: This science only matters once you're running at true elite paces. Where to save: Reserve these expensive shoes exclusively for races and key workouts. For daily training, use more durable, less expensive models. What to avoid: Using these high-tech racing shoes for everyday training—they'll wear out quickly and you'll lose the "special" feeling on race day. The minimalist ($80-$110)If you prefer natural running with minimal interference between your foot and the ground, you can sometimes spend less—but not always. What to look for: Low drop (difference between heel and forefoot height), flexible materials, wide toe box. Worth investing in: Proper transition shoes if you're new to minimalist running. The Altra Escalante ($99.99) or Topo Athletic Phantom 3 ($97.95) offer good value in this category. Where to save: True minimalist shoes, like Xero Shoes, often cost less than traditional running shoes—but you have to be prepared to train as a borderline barefoot runner. What to avoid: Ultra-cheap "barefoot-style" knockoffs that don't actually provide the proper anatomical fit needed for safe minimalist running. ALTRA Men's Escalante 3 $99.99 at Amazon /images/amazon-prime.svg Shop Now Shop Now $99.99 at Amazon /images/amazon-prime.svg The trail runner ($130-$180)While I don't have as much personal experience here, I know off-road enthusiasts face different demands and usually require specialized footwear. What to look for: Aggressive tread patterns, rock plates, durable uppers, and protective features. Worth investing in: Good traction and protection. The Salomon Speedcross ($145) or Brooks Men’s Cascadia 18 Mountain Trail ($139.95) are popular for a reason—they prevent slips and protect against rocks and roots. Where to save: Unless you're exclusively a trail runner, one pair of trail shoes alongside your road shoes is sufficient. Many road shoes can handle light trails, eliminating the need for multiple specialized trail models. What to avoid: Waterproof trail shoes unless you run in consistently cold, wet conditions—they're more expensive and less breathable. What's never really worth itRegardless of your running style, here are some features that I constantly see marketed, but in my opinion never justify a higher price tag: Fashion collaborations: Designer-branded running shoes typically add $30-50 without performance benefits. Gimmicky technology: Be skeptical of proprietary features that can't be explained in simple terms. "Smart" shoes: Shoes with smart tracking and embedded sensors are neat for about one day, but their value proposition can't compete with a good running watch or app. Limited edition designs: While they look cool, they function identically to standard versions. As a runner, I understand the temptation. As a personal finance writer, I cannot endorse this type of spending. Where everyone can saveThe right shoes aren't just about performance—they're injury prevention tools. Some money-saving strategies work across all runner types: Rotation to extend life: Using two pairs alternately can give each shoe time to decompress, allowing you to extend how long each pair lasts. Outlet shopping: Factory outlets for major brands often sell shoes at 30-40% below retail. Timing purchases: New models typically release annually, making previous versions excellent values. Running specialty store loyalty programs: Many offer discounts after multiple purchases or will price-match online retailers. Remember that the most expensive shoe isn't necessarily the best for you—it's about finding the right match for your specific needs, gait, and running goals. A proper fitting at a specialty running store is worth the time investment, even if you eventually purchase elsewhere. For more, check out my round-up of the best running shoes on the market right now, according to the experts. View the full article

Running a small business demands many skills, including ambition and resilience. However, nothing beats financial preparedness—especially as the The President administration’s tariffs loom. A new survey from TD Bank suggests that small business owners may not be as prepared for revenue shortfalls as they’d like to believe. Wakefield Research conducted the Financial Preparedness Survey among U.S. small business owners who have 100 employees or fewer and revenues of $100,000+ annually. Overwhelmingly, respondents reported that their business is equipped for whatever challenges the next 12 to 18 months may bring, with 94% saying they were ready. But most also admitted their business could not withstand temporary revenue shortfalls. In the survey, 72% of respondents said insufficient revenue for two quarters or less would cause them concern about their business’s future. And, more concerningly, 43% said longer dips, for three to four quarters, would be catastrophic. In other words, their business would not survive the impact of more than two quarters where revenue fell short. With the impact of federal layoffs and tariffs already setting in, 99% of respondents said they are assessing overall preparedness more frequently. “Now, more than ever, it is critical for business owners to be financially prepared,” Andy Bregenzer, cohead of U.S. Commercial Banking at TD Bank, said in the report. “Business owners who invest the time to create a financial plan will be better positioned to face challenges and seize new opportunities.” Still, respondents were divided on how to gauge their readiness. More than half say a positive cash flow is a telltale signal for how well equipped they are, while 37% said enough capital to cover emergencies is the most important way to stay afloat. Small business owners are not the only ones who are worried about stability in the wake of tariffs. In a recent survey of 5,000 frontline workers, 52% said they fear they will be laid off, while 74% said they expect The President’s tariffs to impact their earning potential. Unsurprisingly, 77% of these workers said it’s small business owners, rather than Wall Street, who will be hurt by tariffs. View the full article

The company took a break from securitization during the first quarter but was able to get a deal done shortly after the fiscal period ended. View the full article

The Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta exceeded its funding commitment by nearly $1 million, while its Dallas counterpart gave out $2 million in 2024. View the full article

A reader writes: I’m a manager at a large organization and am almost always in the midst of a recruitment process for one role or another. Our hiring and interview guides are built to stop as much bias from creeping in as possible. In practice, this means that I usually have a set of questions that I plan to ask all candidates, and then I leave time for candidates’ questions. Unless they ask our recruiter, they don’t generally get given any information on the format ahead of time, nor are they asked to prepare anything. Today, however, I was surprised. A candidate walked into the interview room with his laptop and, after pleasantries, proceeded to tell me he had a presentation he wanted to make that would take 15-20 minutes! This threw me off, and I quickly reacted by saying that I felt that would take up too much time and we would stick to a regular question and answer format — which he actually did quite well at. In a conversation with some other hiring managers, others said they’ve seen this happen lately as well. This makes me wonder: should I have allowed him to present? Is this something that job-seekers are now routinely doing? I answer this question over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here. The post a job candidate tried to give us a presentation we didn’t want appeared first on Ask a Manager. View the full article

Is a side hustle really the only thing separating you from the life you desire? Listening to some influencers on social media could certainly have you thinking so. Side hustles encompass a range of self-directed entrepreneurial activities undertaken while also working a job. For young people with limited access to capital, they’re the most accessible opportunity to engage in entrepreneurship. Yet, we still know very little about who takes them on and why, and what kind of impact they have on working life in economies like Australia. Our new report, Side Hustles: How Young People Are Redefining Work, presents the first wave of findings from an ongoing three-year, mixed-methods study that seeks to answer these questions. In our first year of data collection, we surveyed 1,497 side hustlers ages 18 to 34 and interviewed a further 68. Our findings raise questions about the merits of entrepreneurship as a solution to youth unemployment or a pathway to financial freedom. What makes a side hustle? To be included in our project, a young person had to be employed, but also carrying out some form of entrepreneurship. We defined entrepreneurship as self-directed economic activity, where the side hustler has some measure of control over when they work, who they work for, and what they charge. The most popular side hustle among participants was selling goods (42.9%). Others included: services such as gardening, dog-walking or moving furniture (29.2%) creating media content (16.5%) creative work such as graphic design or photography (11.3%). Side hustling could include some “gig work” through online platforms, but only when these platforms allow workers to negotiate prices with clients and make choices about their work. As such, we excluded ride-share and food delivery drivers from the project. Projects for the privileged While some people may assume that young people start a side hustle out of financial stress, we found side hustlers are actually a relatively privileged cohort. They are a well-educated group. Almost two-thirds of our sample had university degrees and many of the remainder were studying. They also generally report their financial well-being as comfortable. Why is this? Side hustles often don’t make much money, cost money to set up, and carry risk—all of the hallmarks of entrepreneurship. Median hourly earnings from their side hustles are less than what they would make working in retail or hospitality, and on average they are about 50% what they make in their main job. As one e-commerce side-hustler put it: “If I really put my time and energy into the consideration, I would say we’re not making much money at all. … It’s just something I enjoy doing in my free time.” Their side-hustle earnings are also uncertain: 65% say they are unsure what their earnings will look like in three months. In other words, you need to be financially secure already to even contemplate a side hustle. Passion over pay Side hustles don’t make enough to help someone who is really financially struggling, and they are unlikely to be a pathway out of the employment “rat race.” Despite this, our participants are overwhelmingly satisfied with their side hustles and say they have good work-life balance. So what motivates them? The top motivation reported in our study is passion and enjoyment. Side hustlers say they want work that relates to their interests and enjoy the autonomy and flexibility that a side hustle allows. Even though side hustles are often less profitable than a second job, the second-highest motivation was still money. That’s likely because they offer a way of making some supplementary income in a way that is flexible and autonomous. They’re often a source of “play money.” One 33-year-old man with an e-commerce side hustle told us: “If I was to pick up a second job, like … Uber driving at night time, I won’t be happy. I’ll be tired. I’ll be stressed out trying to do that. Whereas, I think because I’ve got the passion for it here, I’m happy to do it because, like I said, I’m doing it at my own pace.” Pressure to be productive Our research suggests that rather than being a pathway out of unemployment, side hustles actually represent a broader social and economic trend: More and more of young people’s lives are being encompassed by work. Interviewees frequently talked about feeling like they needed to make their time outside of work productive in some way. For some, it was as though they could not justify leisure time unless it was financially profitable. One participant told us: “You obviously want to enjoy life and have a bit of a chill time, but some days you just go, like, ‘What am I doing? Just sitting at home and just relaxing watching Netflix or whatever. I should probably be out there making more money.’ ” Blurring work life boundaries? Most participants were also not very concerned about growing their side hustles into businesses. Instead, they aspired for balanced working lives with a side hustle offering passion, flexibility, and autonomous work, and paid employment supporting them financially and offering the option of a traditional career. They also did not necessarily see the time spent on their side hustles as work, being much more personally invested and self-directed in their side hustles than in their paid jobs. But this means that much of their “leisure” time looks very much like work, and more and more of their lives are dedicated to being productive. David Farrugia is an ARC Future Fellow at the School of Education at Deakin University. Brendan Churchill is an ARC senior research fellow and senior lecturer in sociology at The University of Melbourne. Kim Allen is a professor of sociology of youth and culture at the University of Leeds. Stephanie Patouras is a research officer and PhD candidate at Deakin University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. View the full article

A U.S. lawmaker plans to introduce legislation in coming weeks to verify the location of artificial-intelligence chips like those made by Nvidia after they are sold. The effort to keep tabs on the chips, which drew bipartisan support from U.S. lawmakers, aims to address reports of widespread smuggling of Nvidia’s chips into China in violation of U.S. export control laws. Nvidia’s chips are a critical ingredient for creating AI systems such as chatbots, image generators and more specialized ones that can help craft biological weapons. Both President Donald The President and his predecessor, Joe Biden, have implemented progressively tighter export controls of Nvidia’s chips to China. But Reuters and other news organizations have documented how some of those chips have continued to flow into China, and Nvidia has publicly claimed it cannot track its products after they are sold. U.S. Representative Bill Foster, a Democrat from Illinois who once worked as a particle physicist, said the technology to track chips after they are sold is readily available, with much of it already built in to Nvidia’s chips. Independent technical experts interviewed by Reuters agreed. Foster, who successfully designed multiple computer chips during his scientific career, plans to introduce in coming weeks a bill that would direct U.S. regulators to come up with rules in two key areas: Tracking chips to ensure they are where they are authorized to be under export control licenses, and preventing those chips from booting up if they are not properly licensed under export controls. Foster told Reuters that there are already credible reports – some of which have not been publicly disclosed – of chip smuggling occurring on a large scale. “This is not an imaginary future problem,” Foster told Reuters. “It is a problem now, and at some point we’re going to discover that the Chinese Communist Party, or their military, is busy designing weapons using large arrays of chips, or even just working on (artificial general intelligence), which is as immediate as nuclear technology.” Nvidia declined to comment for this story. Chip smuggling has taken on new urgency after the emergency of China’s DeepSeek, whose AI systems posed a strong challenge to U.S. systems and were built with Nvidia chips that were prohibited for sale to China, according analyst firm SemiAnalysis. Prosecutors in Singapore have charged three Chinese nationals with fraud in a case that involved servers that may have contained Nvidia chips. Though it has not been put into broad use, the technology to verify the location of chips already exists. Alphabet’s Google already tracks the location of its in-house AI chips and others in its vast network of data centers for security purposes, according to two sources with direct knowledge of its operations. Google did not respond to a request for comment. Foster’s legislation would give the U.S. Department of Commerce six months to come up with regulations to require the technology. Bipartisan support Foster’s bill has support from fellow Democrats such as Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, the ranking member on the House Select Committee on China. “On-chip location verification is one creative solution we should explore to stop this smuggling,” Krishnamoorthi said in a statement. Republicans are also supportive, with Representative John Moolenaar, who chairs the committee, telling Reuters that “the Select Committee has strong bipartisan support for requiring companies like Nvidia to build location-tracking into their high-powered AI chips — and the technology to do it already exists. The technology for verifying the location of chips would rely on the chips communicating with a secured computer server that would use the length of time it takes for the signal to reach the server to verify where chips are, a concept that relies on knowing that computer signals move at the speed of light. Tim Fist, a former engineer and director of emerging technology policy at Washington think tank Institute for Progress, said such tracking would provide a general, country-level location for chips. But that is far more information than the Bureau of Industry and Security, the arm of the U.S. Commerce Department responsible for enforcement of export controls, currently has. “BIS has no idea which chips they should be targeting as a potential high priority to investigate once they’ve gone overseas,” Fist said. With location verification, “they now at least have bucketed the set of chips that are out there in the world into ones that are very likely to not have been smuggled and ones that warrant further investigation.” Foster’s second legislative goal of preventing AI chips from booting up if they are not properly licensed under U.S. export controls would be more technologically complex to implement than location verification, but he said the time has come to begin discussions for both efforts. “We’ve gotten enough input that I think now we can have more detailed discussions with the actual chip and module providers to say, ‘How would you actually implement this?'” Foster told Reuters. —Stephen Nellis and Max A. Cherney, Reuters View the full article

Even if you're on top of your finances and never miss a payment, in the current economic climate, managing your bills can feel like swimming frantically and just keeping your head above water, with your paycheck evaporating before you even have a chance to appreciate it. If you’re on salary and get paid bi-weekly, however, there are two months out of the year in which you are paid three times instead of two—and May is one of those months. Because your budget is probably based on getting paid twice per month, that thirdpay day can feel like a bonus—and it actually can serve you very well, if you play it smart. Here’s how to make the most of this month's "extra" paycheck. Don't budget for itStep one is to live your life like you only get paid 24 times every year. When setting up your budget and planning out your spending for the year (which you totally do...right?), you should pretend those two extra paychecks don’t exist. If you count them in your income, they’ll be absorbed into your everyday spending. That’s not necessarily a bad thing (and you have no choice, if your financial situation calls for it), but the benefit will be diluted. If you want those extra paychecks to feel like a bonus, start by forgetting all about them. Then when they roll in you, have a few smart ways to use them. Put it into a savings account with interestThe most obvious smart way to use that third paycheck is to stash it in your savings—especially if you have a high-yield savings account (HYSA) you can dump it into. This puts that extra money to work for you, and gives you a little more breathing room during the rest of the year, or it can be put aside for future expenses like holiday shopping, a vacation you’ve planned, or a big purchase you know is coming up. If you’re saving that third paycheck you need to have a plan for it. If you just leave it in your bank account there’s a risk it will just evaporate over time as you dip into it here and there when your budget gets a little busted. Again, using it to cover overages isn’t exactly a bad use of the money you earned, but it might not be the most impactful. Invest itA better option might be to invest the money. If you have retirement accounts, you can look into making extra contributions to help Future You have a more comfortable retirement plan. If you don’t have a retirement account, creating one with that extra paycheck could be the best thing you do all year—setting up an Individual Retirement Account (IRA) is pretty easy, and if you make a habit of stuffing your third paychecks into that IRA every year you’ll be very glad you did. Alternatively, if you already have an investment portfolio you can apply that paycheck there and beef up your holdings. Invest in yourselfSpeaking of investment, don’t forget about investing in yourself. That bonus paycheck could be used to make your future brighter in several ways: Professional development. Using that extra money to earn a credential that can help you get promoted or find a better job can pay off in the long term without impacting your daily life. Deferred healthcare. If you’ve been holding off on dental work or some other form of big-ticket healthcare due to the cost, a third paycheck offers an opportunity to do some very necessary self-care. Lifestyle improvement. You could also use the bonus paycheck to pay for a gym membership or equipment to jump-start an exercise regimen that will pay off handsomely. Start a businessA little extra cash can be used to launch a lucrative side hustle (many of these little businesses don’t require much—or any—startup cash) or small business. If you’ve had an idea for a service or product that you think could be turned into a money-making endeavor, that third paycheck might be all the startup capital you need to get it off the ground. Create an emergency fundDistinct from your general savings, an emergency fund protects you from unexpected disasters that would otherwise wipe out your savings and leave you in a terrible financial position. These include job loss, medical emergencies, and home repairs, any of which could spell doom if you’re not ready for them. Since we live in a world where 42% of Americans don’t have any sort of emergency fund at all, setting that extra paycheck aside specifically for that purpose is a very smart idea. Pay down debtYou’re living in the world, which means you’re most likely carrying debt—it’s just a fact of modern life. If you have sufficient savings and an emergency fund, chipping away at your debt is a terrific use for an extra paycheck: Pay down credit cards. The interest rates credit cards charge can be insane, and if you’re paying just minimum payments each month it will take you a very, very long time to erase even a modest balance. A balloon payment thrown at the card charging the most interest can be a dramatic improvement in your financial outlook moving forward. Make an extra mortgage payment. If you have a mortgage on your house and the two third paychecks you get every month allows you to make two extra payments, you can literally shave years off your mortgage. For example, if you have a $300,000 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at 6.75% interest, your principal and interest comes out to $1,946 per month. If you can throw 2 extra payments totaling $3,900 per year using your two third paychecks, you can shave 10 years off your mortgage term and save $145,000 in interest. Other debt. Any other kinds of debt you’re carrying can be reduced or eliminated, of course—student loan debt, personal loans, auto loans. As long as there’s no penalty for paying more than the monthly payment, you can whittle these down by applying that third paycheck. It’s not often we get a break in this world. An extra paycheck is one of those times—but only if you make a plan to take advantage of it. View the full article

About to jump in with technology? Hold on. By Alan Anderson, CPA Transforming Audit for the Future Go PRO for members-only access to more Alan Anderson. View the full article

About to jump in with technology? Hold on. By Alan Anderson, CPA Transforming Audit for the Future Go PRO for members-only access to more Alan Anderson. View the full article

Go PRO for members-only access to more CPA Trendlines Research. View the full article

Go PRO for members-only access to more CPA Trendlines Research. View the full article

The The President administration says the sweeping tariffs it unveiled April 2, then postponed for 90 days, have a simple goal: Force other countries to drop their trade barriers to U.S. goods. Yet President Donald The President’s definition of trade barriers includes a slew of issues well beyond the tariffs other countries impose on the U.S., including some areas not normally associated with trade disputes. Those include agricultural safety requirements, tax systems, currency exchange rates, product standards, legal requirements, and red tape at the border. He’s given countries three months to come up with concessions before tariffs ranging from 10% to more than 50% go into effect. Tariffs on China are already in effect. On many issues it will be difficult, or in some cases impossible, for many countries to make a deal and lower their tariff rates. In addition, many trade officials from targeted countries say privately that it isn’t always clear what the The President administration wants from them in the negotiations. Vice President JD Vance announced that India has agreed to the terms of trade talks with the United States, but other countries are still trying to set the contours for any negotiations. The White House has highlighted conflicting goals for its import taxes: It’s seeking to raise revenues and bring manufacturing back to the U.S., but it also wants greater access to foreign markets and massive changes to other nations’ tax and regulatory policies. Here are several non-tariff areas the administration is targeting: CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES The President has accused Germany, China and Japan of “global freeloading” by — in his view — devaluing their currencies to make their exports cheaper. The European Central bank has been cutting interest rates to support growth. That could also weaken the euro, which has strengthened sharply against the dollar since The President took office. The ECB says it doesn’t target the exchange rate. In Japan’s case, the Bank of Japan has been gradually raising rates anyway after keeping them at zero or in negative territory for years, which should drive the yen up against the dollar. The U.S. dollar has fallen recently to 140-yen levels, down from about 160 yen last summer. Shrikant Kale, a strategist at Jefferies, believes the dollar will fall to 120 yen over the next 18 months. FARM PRODUCTS Agricultural safeguards against importing pests or health hazards have been a sticking point with U.S. trade partners for years. They include Japan’s restrictions on rice and potato imports, the EU’s ban on hormone-treated beef or chlorine-disinfected chickens and Korea’s ban on beef from cows more than 30 months old. Yet changes face stiff political resistance from voters and farm lobbies in those countries. For years, U.S. potato growers have sought access to Japan’s potential $150 million market for table potatoes. Japan has engaged in talks but taken years simply to supply a list of concerns to U.S. negotiators. The delay is “pure politics,” intended to protect domestic growers, says National Potato Council CEO Kam Quarles. If Japanese politicians perceive the pain from The President’s tariffs might be worse than from their own potato growers, “that makes it more likely to make a deal,” Quarles said. But “if they perceive the pain domestically will be worse than the The President administration can bring to them … we’re going to be stuck where we are.” Korea’s beef restrictions started as a measure to keep out bovine spongiform encephalopathy, or mad cow disease. The 30-month rule has been maintained in the wake of mass protests in 2008, even as the U.S. has become the largest beef exporter to Korea. “It’s still politically controversial because of the scar at the time in 2008. I think the government will be very cautious,” said Jaemin Lee, professor of law at Seoul National University and an expert on trade issues. TAXATION The President has railed against value-added tax as a burden to U.S. companies, although economists say this kind of tax is trade-neutral because it applies equally to imports and exports. Value-added tax, or VAT, is paid by the end purchaser at the cash register but differs from sales taxes in that it is calculated at each stage of the production process. The President’s view could mean higher tariffs for Europe, where individual countries levy VAT of 20% or more depending on the type of good, and for the more than 170 countries that use this kind of tax system. The U.S. is an outlier in that it doesn’t use VAT; instead, individual states levy sales taxes. There’s little chance countries will change their tax systems for The President. The EU for one has said VAT is off the table. “The domestic taxation system has not been a conventional topic in trade negotiation because domestic taxation is directly related to national sovereignty or the domestic economic regime,” trade expert Lee said. “It’s very hard to understand why VAT has become an important topic in the trade discussion.” PRODUCT STANDARDS U.S. officials have complained about Japan’s non-recognition of U.S vehicle safety standards and its different testing procedures for car equipment. Japan also provides subsidies for the Japanese-designed ChaDeMo plug standard for electric cars, requiring foreign makers to use an outdated technology if they want the subsidy. BUREAUCRACY Concerns about excessive or baffling bureaucratic procedures to get goods into a country are mentioned repeatedly in the administration’s latest trade assessment. The U.S. has complained about expensive delays getting permission to export seafood to Japan. Meanwhile, Japan requires wheat imports to be sold to a government entity and has “highly regulated and intransparent” quota system that keeps rice imports from the U.S. to a minimum. Most of these issues are years old, raising questions about whether 90 days is enough to make a deal over them. U.S. pharmaceutical companies have complained about Korea’s system for drug imports, while automakers say environmental equipment standards are unclear and expose only importers to criminal penalties in case of violations. BUY AMERICAN Analysts say that despite the long list of non-tariff issues, the administration’s main focus may lie elsewhere: on The President’s desire to reduce trade deficits, cases where a country sells more to the U.S. than it buys. And the solution may be other countries buying more U.S. products, from energy to soybeans, and builingd more plants in the U.S. U.S. energy is already a major export to Europe. The President has mentioned a figure of $350 billion for potential EU gas imports. The EU does need imported gas. But The President’s figure would be a stretch given that last year’s exports of liquefied natural gas to the EU were around $13 billon, and that Europe is seeking to reduce its use of fossil fuels over the longer term. THE HEART OF THE MATTER? Discussions about non-tariff issues may simply be leverage to underpin The President’s stiff tariff levels. “It’s just a thing that’s there to justify my tariffs,” said Tobias Gehrke, senior policy fellow at the European Council of Foreign Relations. While lower level trade officials and industry representatives are acutely aware of non-tariff issues like agricultural safety, “The President and his cabinet… don’t really care about chlorinated chicken regulations in Europe and food standards,” Gehrke said. “They have much bigger thinking.” “They want to have European companies significantly move production to America… and to export from America to Europe. That would change the trade balance.” “And if that’s the main logic, then there’s no real deal to be had on non-tariff barriers.” Rugaber contributed from Washington DC and Kageyama from Tokyo. —David McHugh, Christopher Rugaber and Yuri Kageyama, AP Business Writers View the full article

Plan to be announced by European Commission aimed at forcing member states to end imports of Russian gas View the full article

A teenager who admitted being “addicted to speed” behind the wheel had totaled two other cars in the year before he slammed into a minivan at 112 mph (180 kph) in a Seattle suburb, killing the driver and three of the five children she was transporting for a homeschool co-op. After sentencing Chase Daniel Jones last month to more than 17 years in prison, the judge tacked on a novel condition should he drive again: His vehicle must be equipped with a device that prevents accelerating far beyond the speed limit. Virginia this year became the first state to give its judges such a tool to deal with the most dangerous drivers on the road. Washington, D.C., already is using it and similar measures await governors’ signatures in Washington state and Georgia. New York and California also could soon tap the GPS-based technology to help combat a recent national spike in traffic deaths. “It’s a horror no one should have to experience,” said Amy Cohen, who founded the victims’ advocacy group Families for Safe Streets after her 12-year-old son, Sammy Cohen Eckstein, was killed by a speeding driver in front of their New York home more than a decade ago. Turning tragedy into activism Andrea Hudson, 38, the minivan driver who was killed when Jones ran a red light, was building a backyard greenhouse with her husband to help educate several kids who shuttle between homes during the school day, her father, Ted Smith, said. Also killed in the March 2024 crash near Hudson’s home in Renton, Washington, were Boyd “Buster” Brown and Eloise Wilcoxson, both 12, and Matilda Wilcoxson, 13. Hudson’s two children were sitting on the passenger side and survived, but they spent weeks in a hospital. “You always hear of these horrific accidents, and it’s always far away, you don’t know anybody. But all of a sudden, that’s my daughter,” Smith said. “This guy did not swerve or brake. And it was just a missile.” Smith knew Washington state Rep. Mari Leavitt, who reached out to offer condolences and tell him she was sponsoring legislation to mandate intelligent speed assistance devices as a condition for habitual speeders to get back their suspended licenses. Leavitt predicts it will have an even more powerful impact than revoking driving privileges, citing studies showing around three-quarters of people who lose their licenses get behind a wheel anyway. Between 2019 and 2024, the state saw a 200% increase in drivers cited for going at least 50 mph (80 kph) over the speed limit, according to the Washington Traffic Safety Commission. “I guess I don’t understand why someone is compelled to want to drive that fast,” Leavitt said. “But if they choose to drive that fast with the speed limiter, they can’t. It’s going to stop them in their tracks.” The measure, which Washington legislators passed last month and Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson is expected to soon sign, is called the BEAM Act, using the first letters of the names of the four victims: Buster, Eloise, Andrea and Matilda. Because Jones, 19, didn’t receive a speeding ticket in his two previous crashes, he likely wouldn’t have been required to use the speed-limiter ahead of the fatal one. And because it could be 2029 before the law takes effect, the judge’s requirement at sentencing only applies to his time on probation after being released from prison, Smith said. Evolution of a safety tool Competing tech companies that joined forces to lobby for ignition interlock requirements for drunken drivers have been working in unison again the last few years to pitch intelligent speed assistance. Brandy Nannini, chief government affairs officer at one manufacturer, Grapevine, Texas-based Smart Start, said fleet vehicles including school buses in the nation’s capital have been trying it out for years. But it took a lot of refinement before the GPS technology could instantly recognize speed limit changes and compel vehicles with the devices installed to adjust accordingly. “We’ve got a lot more satellites in the sky now,” said Ken Denton, a retired police officer who is the chief compliance officer at Cincinnati-based LifeSafer, part of the coalition of companies. When court-mandated, the devices would prevent cars from exceeding speed limits or whatever threshold regulators set. An override button allows speeding in emergencies, but states can decide whether to activate it and authorities would be alerted any time the button is pushed. A more passive version, which beeps to alert drivers when they are going too fast, is required for new cars in the European Union. California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar proposal last year, explaining vehicle safety requirements are set by the federal government and he was concerned a patchwork of state laws could stir confusion. Parents take up the cause Before Del. Patrick Hope agreed to sponsor the proposal in the Virginia Legislature, he tried out the device in Nannini’s car, which was calibrated to not go more than 9 mph (14 kph) over the speed limit. “That was my first question: Is it safe?” Hope said. Not only did he come away convinced it was safe, Hope is now pondering whether to install it on the cars of his three children, all of whom are new drivers. For those mandated by a court, the price could be hefty: $4 per day and a $100 installation fee. The fee would be reduced for low-income offenders. Cohen with Families for Safe Streets, which provides support services to the loved ones of crash victims, knows firsthand the kind of impact slowing down speeders can make. A year after her son was struck and killed in front of their New York apartment, another boy was injured in the same spot. By then, the road’s speed limit had been lowered. “That boy lived when he was hit, and mine did not,” she said. “When you are going a few miles slower, there’s more time to stop. And when you hit somebody, it’s much less likely to be deadly.” —Jeff McMurray, Associated Press View the full article

Apple has been under fire for several years after it was discovered that Siri violated user privacy, and the company earlier this year agreed to a $95 million settlement to resolve a class action lawsuit, which includes compensation for affected users. Eligible individuals can now apply for their share of the total. The dispute centered on Siri-enabled devices, including iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Mac, HomePod, iPod touch, and Apple TV, which may have activated and recorded and shared private conversations without user knowledge. If you qualify for the settlement class, you'll receive $20 for each device claimed—up to five devices per individual for a total of $100—though it could be less if too many class members come forward. Am I eligible for a Siri settlement payout? The settlement covers Siri-enabled Apple devices purchased or owned between Sept. 17, 2014 and Dec. 31, 2024. If you can attest that your device accidentally triggered Siri during a private or confidential conversation, you're eligible for a payout. Individuals can submit claims for up to five Siri devices. The deadline to submit a claim is July 2, 2025, though it could take awhile to actually see any settlement cash. The court is scheduled to hold a final approval hearing on the case on August 1, and appeals after that meeting could delay payouts. How to submit a Siri settlement claimTo claim your piece of the Siri settlement pie, you'll need to submit a claim form online. If you received a personalized postcard or email about the suit containing a claim identification number (Notice ID) and confirmation code, you'll use those to log into the site and begin the claims process. If you didn't get a notice but believe you are eligible, select New Claim. You'll need to fill out some personal information—name, address, phone number, and email—as well as the email address attached to your Siri device(s). You'll also need to either upload proof of purchase for each device you are claiming or provide the serial and model numbers. To finalize the form, select a payment option, complete the attestation statement, and hit Submit. Alternatively, you can do nothing—or you can opt out of the settlement. You won't receive any money in either situation, but with the latter, you retain your right to sue Apple in the future on claims related to this case. Instructions for requesting exclusion (also with a July 2 deadline) are detailed on the settlement page FAQ. View the full article

Austin has been on a building boom since it started becoming a tech hub. The Texas city has seen its skyline shift and its fortunes grow. Major tech firms like Apple and Amazon have established key offices, and in the 2010s alone, the city grew 21%, adding 171,000 residents. It now has more than 974,000, the 10th largest in the country. Builders have raced to erect housing for these new arrivals; Austin has seen a boom in market rate apartments in recent years—so much that it led rents to decrease after years of big jumps. And in recent years, according to a new report, part of that building boom has included affordable housing, including permanent housing for the formerly unhoused, low-cost studio units, and even housing for teachers. Austin’s affordable housing construction pipeline outpaces all other U.S. cities, according to research from Yardi Matrix, a real estate data source. In 2024, the city delivered 4,605 affordable units—defined as properties that agree to limit rents as a condition of a tax credit or subsidy. That’s double the rate in 2023. The research shows Austin will also deliver the most affordable units this year, 3,452—more than LA’s 2,752, despite the California city having more than four times as many people. And Austin will continue to lead, with the forecast of units in the pipeline through 2027 showing Austin with 9,528, compared to Seattle’s 6,289. Yardi Matrix “We want to ensure that the population that made Austin what Austin is can stay in Austin,” said James May, Housing and Community Development Officer for the City of Austin Housing Department. It’s also worth mentioning that Austin’s changing demographics are playing a large role in the housing market. As the city continues to morph from a capital and college town to a tech and healthcare nexus, wealth and median income have risen. A recent city memo noted that the city’s housing market had dramatically changed since it laid out its housing plan in the mid 2010s—median home sale price has risen by 58%, and rents went from an average of $1,350 in 2017 to a peak of $1,709 in 2022—so Austin needs to recalibrate its strategy and focus more on deeply affordable units. “Austin used to be a city of musicians and artists, and now income and rent are far higher than what it was 10 years ago,” said Heather Way, a professor at the University of Texas-Austin who specializes in housing law. Yardi Matrix May credited the growth in affordable housing in Austin to three factors. First, was community: Multiple providers including the city, county, housing authority, and private builders have been looking to invest in new housing, with private developers investing in significant new construction using the city’s density-bonus program. The second was money. A series of local bonds for affordable housing raised significant funds for new construction, including a 2022 bond for $350 million, which helped fund new affordable units. In addition, the construction of new transit lines included $300 million in anti-displacement funds that also helped pay for new buildings. May said the city recently purchased a 100-acre property formerly owned by the Top Deal electronic company that it plans to use for mixed-income development, which will include affordable housing. And finally, the third pillar was regulatory reform. The city council has passed many initiatives in recent years to increase density and make it easier to build: transit-oriented development rules allowed for higher buildings near bus and train lines, Affordability Unlocked allowed housing development on land zoned for commercial projects, and the HOME Initiative shrunk the required lot size for homes and made it legal to build multiple units on lots zoned for single-family homes. But even with that surge, it’s still not enough. Despite Austin’s recent lead, the construction rate still lags well behind what’s actually needed to provide sufficient access to affordable housing: tens of thousands of new units would be needed to adequately meet the demand. A record-breaking number of evictions in the surrounding county last year attest to the pressure renters feel making ends meet. And while new supply is definitely a step in the right direction, what isn’t being built is deeply affordable housing. Defined as housing that can support those making around 30% of the median income; in 2023, just 63 such units were built, even though this group makes up 17% of the city’s population. Creating enough affordable units, and building more for those with extremely low incomes, will be even more challenging due to the changing landscape for construction. Stubbornly high interest rates will make getting financing more difficult. Tariffs will make materials more expensive. And the The President administration’s actions against HUD, including threats to withhold funding from sanctuary cities like Austin, might end vital federal support. “It’s going to be a tough market, we won’t see the entire pipeline go all the way through,” May said. Austin’s boost in housing production is a start. But it’s sadly far from finished. 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. Beats headphones are well known for their style and better compatibility with Apple devices. Both of these hold true with their flagship headphones, the Beats Studio Pro, currently $169.95 (originally $349.99), the second-lowest price it has been after a 51% discount, according to price-tracking tools. While it is compatible with Android users, Apple users will get the most out of these premium headphones. Beats Studio Pro $169.95 at Amazon /images/amazon-prime.svg $349.99 Save $180.04 Get Deal Get Deal $169.95 at Amazon /images/amazon-prime.svg $349.99 Save $180.04 The Beats Studio Pro came out in 2023 with a "good" review from PCMag, praising its sculpted sound (but warning sound-sticklers against it), comfort, premium accessories, and spatial audio with head tracking. They also said you can get much better headphones for less than their $349.99 price (which is very true) that have adjustable EQ and better active noise cancelling (ANC). However, at $169.95, these headphones are a great deal, especially if you're an Apple user. These headphones have hands-free Siri access, one-touch pairing on iOS and Android devices (through Google Fast Pair), which gives simultaneous connections with up to two devices, and a transparency mode that lets you hear your surroundings. Apple users will be able to take advantage of the AAC codecs, which work seamlessly with Apple to give much better audio quality, but have limitations with Android devices. You get a quick-access menu to control the ANC and Transparency modes, and you can also use the Find My app if you misplace your headphones. The biggest miss with the Beats Studio Pro that you would expect any premium headphones to have is an adjustable EQ. However, they have plenty of EQ presets for you to choose from. The ANC is slightly above average, which is good for its current price. You can get about 40 hours of playtime at full charge with ANC and Transparency modes off, and a 10-minute charge gives you about four hours of juice. View the full article

A reader writes: I work for a woman who is very highly respected. She is very smart and has accomplished a lot in her life. She also has had a few missteps in her past like anyone has and, although I do not know the extent of some of her previous failures, I feel I can partly link them to her business partner. She runs the day-to-day operations of the company I work at, and her business partner is mainly the financial backing to her current and her previous companies. My boss does speaking engagements and is very women-empowering, especially to women of a certain age and women of color. Her business partner, however, is very crude; he speaks down to me and all of my peers. He gets into “moods” and threatens our jobs. He uses ableist and homophobic language constantly, and my boss, for the most part, laughs it off. He inappropriately “brushes up” against me and other women at work and my boss won’t approach him about his behavior unless one of us lets her know it’s an issue. She has in the past berated him about certain issues and lets us know she is on our side, but it’s hard to feel that way when she cozies up to him right after the incident is “over.” Most of us just ignore him because that’s “just how he is.” Also, because my boss is so open and honest about her life, a lot of people feel they can confide in her, and yet she is also a big gossip and will 100% of the time tell her business partner anything confidential a coworker talks to her about, and he will repeat things to you that you thought were private. I respect my boss and her accomplishments, but I respect her less because of this person she has decided to run her business with, and it makes me not want to work for her anymore. Do I quit and let them continue their circle of misery without me in it? You quit. That could be the entirety of the answer, but I’ll say more anyway. The people we choose to be in business with says something about who we are too. That doesn’t mean that your boss is an ableist, homophobic, crude sexual harasser … but it does mean she’s not that bothered by the fact that he is. Sure, she addresses it with him when people ask her to. She clearly knows on some level that it’s not okay. But it’s okay enough with her that she doesn’t really do anything about it — not enough to actually put a stop to the issues or to stop working with him. I’m sure it’s complicated for her if he provides the financial backing! Maybe in her heart she’s deeply conflicted by accepting his help and feels trapped. But it sounds like he’s been her financial backing through multiple companies; she has had repeated opportunities to separate from him and, yet, here they still are together. And look, a lot of women end up in leadership positions working for or around abusers, and it can be hard to know the right way to navigate it — but this point she’s responsible for who she chooses to do business with, and who she chooses to subject her staff to. Maybe she didn’t know he was like this when they started their first company together. She definitely knew by the second or third. She definitely knows now. At the end of the day, she just doesn’t object to his behavior that much, and she doesn’t take it as seriously as she should. And all that’s before we get into her sharing confidential info with him, knowing he’s a gossip. Your boss may be accomplished, but that doesn’t mean she’s a good person to work for. The post my boss is great, but her business partner is a nightmare appeared first on Ask a Manager. View the full article

Levies on overseas movies going into the US would damage production hubs in countries including UK, Canada and AustraliaView the full article