Congress has overwhelmingly approved bipartisan legislation to enact stricter penalties for the distribution of nonconsensual intimate imagery, sometimes called “revenge porn.” Known as the Take It Down Act, the bill is now headed to President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature.The measure was introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican from Texas, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota, and later gained the support of First Lady Melania Trump. Critics of the bill, which addresses both real and artificial intelligence-generated imagery, say the language is too broad and could lead to censorship and First Amendment issues.
What is the Take It Down Act?
The bill makes it illegal to “knowingly publish” or threaten to publish intimate images without a person’s consent, including AI-created “deepfakes.” It also requires websites and social media companies to remove such material within 48 hours of notice from a victim. The platforms must also take steps to delete duplicate content. Many states have already banned the dissemination of sexually explicit deepfakes or revenge porn, but the Take It Down Act is a rare example of federal regulators imposing on internet companies.
Who supports it?
The Take It Down Act has garnered strong bipartisan support and has been championed by Melania Trump, who lobbied on Capitol Hill in March saying it was “heartbreaking” to see what teenagers, especially girls, go through after they are victimized by people who spread such content. President Trump is expected to sign it into law.Cruz said the measure was inspired by Elliston Berry and her mother, who visited his office after Snapchat refused for nearly a year to remove an AI-generated “deepfake” of the then 14-year-old.Meta, which owns and operates Facebook and Instagram, supports the legislation.“Having an intimate imagereal or AI-generatedshared without consent can be devastating and Meta developed and backs many efforts to help prevent it,” Meta spokesman Andy Stone said last month.The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a tech industry-supported think tank, said in a statement Monday that the bill’s passage “is an important step forward that will help people pursue justice when they are victims of non-consensual intimate imagery, including deepfake images generated using AI.”“We must provide victims of online abuse with the legal protections they need when intimate images are shared without their consent, especially now that deepfakes are creating horrifying new opportunities for abuse,” Klobuchar said in a statement after the bill’s passage late Monday. “These images can ruin lives and reputations, but now that our bipartisan legislation is becoming law, victims will be able to have this material removed from social media platforms and law enforcement can hold perpetrators accountable.”
What are the censorship concerns?
Free speech advocates and digital rights groups say the bill is too broad and could lead to the censorship of legitimate images including legal pornography and LGBTQ content, as well as government critics.“While the bill is meant to address a serious problem, good intentions alone are not enough to make good policy,” said the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights advocacy group. “Lawmakers should be strengthening and enforcing existing legal protections for victims, rather than inventing new takedown regimes that are ripe for abuse.”The takedown provision in the bill “applies to a much broader category of contentpotentially any images involving intimate or sexual content” than the narrower definitions of nonconsensual intimate imagery found elsewhere in the text, EFF said.“The takedown provision also lacks critical safeguards against frivolous or bad-faith takedown requests. Services will rely on automated filters, which are infamously blunt tools,” EFF said. “They frequently flag legal content, from fair-use commentary to news reporting. The law’s tight time frame requires that apps and websites remove speech within 48 hours, rarely enough time to verify whether the speech is actually illegal.”As a result, the group said online companies, especially smaller ones that lack the resources to wade through a lot of content, “will likely choose to avoid the onerous legal risk by simply depublishing the speech rather than even attempting to verify it.”The measure, EFF said, also pressures platforms to “actively monitor speech, including speech that is presently encrypted” to address liability threats.The Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, a nonprofit that helps victims of online crimes and abuse, said it has “serious reservations” about the bill. It called its takedown provision unconstitutionally vague, unconstitutionally overbroad, and lacking adequate safeguards against misuse.”For instance, the group said, platforms could be obligated to remove a journalist’s photographs of a topless protest on a public street, photos of a subway flasher distributed by law enforcement to locate the perpetrator, commercially produced sexually explicit content or sexually explicit material that is consensual but falsely reported as being nonconsensual.
Barbara Ortutay, AP Technology Writer
President Donald Trump signed executive orders Tuesday to relax some of his 25% tariffs on automobiles and auto parts, a significant reversal as the import taxes threatened to hurt domestic manufacturers.Automakers and independent analyses have indicated that the tariffs could raise prices, reduce sales and make U.S. production less competitive worldwide. Trump portrayed the changes as a bridge toward automakers moving more production into the United States.“We just wanted to help them during this little transition, short term,” Trump told reporters. “We didn’t want to penalize them.”Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who spoke earlier at a White House briefing on Tuesday, said the goal was to enable automakers to create more domestic manufacturing jobs.“President Trump has had meetings with both domestic and foreign auto producers, and he’s committed to bringing back auto production to the U.S.,” Bessent said. “So we want to give the automakers a path to do that, quickly, efficiently and create as many jobs as possible.”Trump signed one order on Tuesday that amended his previous 25% auto tariffs, making it easier for vehicles that are assembled in the U.S. with foreign parts to not face prohibitively high import taxes.The amended order provides a rebate for one year of 3.75% relative to the sales prices of a domestically assembled vehicles. That figure was reached by putting the 25% import tax on parts that make up 15% of a vehicle’s sales price. For the second year, the rebate would equal 2.5% of a vehicle’s sales price, as it would apply to a smaller share of the vehicle’s parts.A senior Commerce Department official, insisted on anonymity to preview the order on a call with reporters, said automakers told Trump that the additional time would enable them to ramp up the construction of new factories, after automakers warned that it would take time for them to shift their supply chains. The official said automakers would over the next month announce additional shifts for workers, new hires and plans for new facilities.Stellantis Chairman John Elkann said in a statement that the company appreciates the president’s tariff relief measures.“While we further assess the impact of the tariff policies on our North American operations, we look forward to our continued collaboration with the U.S. Administration to strengthen a competitive American auto industry and stimulate exports,” he said.General Motors CEO Mary Barra said the automaker is grateful for Trump’s support of the industry, and she noted the company looks forward to conversations with the president and working with the administration.“We believe the President’s leadership is helping level the playing field for companies like GM and allowing us to invest even more in the U.S. economy,” Barra said in a statement.Jim Farley, president and CEO of Ford Motor Company, stressed that his company does more than its peers to manufacture domestically.“We will continue to work closely with the administration in support of the president’s vision for a healthy and growing auto industry in America,” Farley said. “As the right policies are put in place, it will be important for the major vehicle importers to match Ford’s commitment to building in America. If every company that sells vehicles in the U.S. matched Ford’s American manufacturing ratio, 4 million more vehicles would be assembled in America each year.”But changing direction doesn’t help an industry that thrives on stability, said Sam Fiorani, analyst at business forecasting firm AutoForecast Solutions.“Finding a way to get the auto industry back working has to be paramount in this,” Fiorani said. “The tariffs have not looked at this industry, the way it works, and expect it to be able to jump and relocate production at the blink of an eye. It just doesn’t work that way.“Making a production change for vehicle manufacturing takes minimum, months, and usually years, along with hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars,” he added. “And so it is not something that they take lightly.”The Wall Street Journal first reported details of the actions. The White House’s Rapid Response account on X said Trump signed a second order Tuesday afternoon to prevent his various tariffs from being stacked on top of his existing taxes on imported autos and auto parts.The tariffs imposed by Trump were seen by some as an existential threat to the auto sector. Arthur Laffer, whom Trump gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom to during his first term, said in a private analysis that the tariffs without any modifications could add $4,711 to the cost of a vehicle.New vehicles sold at $47,462 on average last month, according to auto-buying resource Kelley Blue Book. Tariffs stress the automotive supply chain, a complex web which spans the globe. Not only do many auto parts cross North American borders several times before being assembled into a finished vehicle, auto manufacturers rely on suppliers around the world for thousands of components.Increased levies would certainly cost new car buyerssensitive to inflationmore, driving them to the used vehicle market and quickly straining the availability of pre-owned cars. Tariffs also impact the cost of owning and maintaining a vehicle.The modifications come as Trump marks 100 days back in the White House by going to Michigan, a state defined by auto manufacturing. Trump won the state in last year’s election by promising to increase factory jobs.Still, it remains unclear what impact Trump’s broader tariffs will have on the U.S. economy and auto sales. Most economists say the tariffswhich could ultimately hit most importswould raise prices and slow economic growth, possibly hurting auto sales despite the relief that the administration intends to offer on its previous policies.
St. John contributed from Detroit.
Josh Boak and Alexa St. John, Associated Press
Fraud remains a huge issue, with reports increasing 25% between 2023 and 2024, according to recently released data from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). That amounted to consumers losing more than $12.5 billion to various frauds and scams.
Those eye-popping figures are what spurred AT&T to beef up its fraud-prevention smartphone application, ActiveArmor, with a slate of new features, says Matt Bailey, AT&Ts AVP of product management and development.
And interestingly enough, the app will also provide protection for your physical propertyincluding your credit and debit cards and even your drivers license.
On Wednesday, AT&T announced the five new features being added to the app:
Lost wallet recovery
ID restoration
A password manager
A password manager web extension
Social media identity protection
With the lost wallet recovery feature, AT&T says it will help you replace important items such as a driver’s license or checkbook with a one-click call to its recovery specialists. The service also cancels lost credit or debit cards and “restores other sensitive financial items,” according to the company’s description.
Combined, Bailey says the new features will help fewer people become victims of various scams.
The biggest impetus to our focus on security is the fact that consumers are consistently being victimized by fraudulent activity, and that its increasing, he says. Thats the key concern that our customers have been telling us about, and weve been focused on security relentlessly.
Robocalls and other modern-day rackets
Bailey says that while the ActiveArmor app was originally launched in 2016 to root out robocalls, its since become what he thinks is the most comprehensive security app out there.
And its also available to everyonenot just AT&T customers. AT&T customers will not be charged anything extra, but those on other networks who download and install the app will face a $3.99-per-month charge.
And as for why AT&Twhich is primarily a digital and wireless companydecided to add protection for physical cards, drivers licenses, and even checkbooks? Bailey says that the company already has a dedicated team to help customers replace some of those items, so it made sense to put the physical stuff into the mix, too.
We thought it was a pretty natural tie-in to help customers remain protected, he says.
Want more housing market stories from Lance Lamberts ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter.
Speaking to investors earlier this month, D.R. Horton CEO Paul Romanowski said that the spring 2025 selling season for Americas-largest homebuilder is off to a slower-than-normal start.
This years spring selling season started slower than expected as potential homebuyers have been more cautious due to continued affordability constraints and declining consumer confidence, Romanowski said on the company’s earnings call.
It isnt just D.R. Horton.
We do not see the seasonal pickup typically associated with the beginning of the spring selling season,” Lennar co-CEO Jon Jaffe told investors on March. “So we continue to lean into our machine focusing on converting leads and appointments and adjusting incentives as needed to maintain sales pace. These adjustments came in the form of mortgage rate buydowns, price reductions, and closing cost assistance.
Last quarter, Lennar spent the equivalent of 13% of home sales on buyer incentivesup from 1.5% in Q2 2022 at the height of the pandemic housing boom. A 13% incentive on a $400,000 home translates to $52,000 in incentives.
This weaker housing demand environment is causing unsold inventory to tick up. Indeed, since the pandemic housing boom fizzled out, the number of unsold completed U.S. new single-family homes has been rising:
March 2018: 62,000
March 2019: 77,000
March 2020: 76,000
March 2021: 34,000
March 2022: 32,000
March 2023: 70,000
March 2024: 89,000
March 2025: 119,000
The March 2025 figure (119,000 unsold completed new homes) published this month is the highest level since July 2009 (126,000). Lets take a closer look at the data to better understand what this could mean.
To put the number of unsold completed new single-family homes into historic context, we created a new index: ResiClubs Finished Homes Supply Index.
The index is one simple calculation: The number of unsold completed U.S. new single-family homes divided by the annualized rate of U.S. single-family housing starts.
A higher index score indicates a softer national new construction market with greater supply slack, while a lower index score signifies a tighter new construction market with less supply slack.
If you look at unsold completed single-family new builds as a share of single-family housing starts (see chart below), it still shows we’ve gained slack; however, it puts us closer to pre-pandemic 2019 levels than the Great Recession of 20072009.
While the U.S. Census Bureau doesn’t give us a greater market-by-market breakdown on these unsold new builds, we have a good idea where they are based on total active inventory homes for sale (including existing homes) that have spiked above pre-pandemic 2019 levels. Most of those areas are in the Sun Belt around the Gulf.
Builders are facing pricing pressure in some housing markets, especially in key Florida and Texas markets, where active inventory has jumped back above pre-pandemic 2019 levels.
!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}}))}();
Big picture: Theres greater slack in the new construction market now than a few years ago, giving buyers some leverage in certain markets to negotiate better deals with homebuilders.
Google CEO Sundar Pichai is expected to take the stand on Wednesday morning at a trial in Washington where antitrust enforcers seek an order forcing the company to sell its Chrome web browser and take other measures to boost competition among online search providers.
Pichai will testify in the Alphabet unit’s defense against proposals by the U.S. Department of Justice that the company has said would cause unintended harm to browser developers, smartphone makers and internet users.
The outcome of the case could fundamentally reshape the internet by potentially unseating Google as the go-to portal for information online.
The DOJ and a broad coalition of state attorneys general are pressing for remedies to restore competition even as search evolves to overlap with generative AI products such as ChatGPT. Prosecutors are concerned that Google’s dominance in search could extend to AI.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled last year that Google, the site and app where most U.S. internet users search for information, “has no true competitor.” Google maintained its monopoly in part by paying billions of dollars to companies including Apple, Samsung, AT&T and Verizon to be the default search engine on new mobile devices, the judge said.
The DOJ wants the judge to end those payments and require Google to share search data with competitors.
Google has said the proposals would give away its hard work, and jeopardize its users’ privacy and endanger smaller companies like Mozilla, the developer of the Firefox browser, that rely on Google for revenue.
The company recently loosened its agreements to allow device makers and carriers to pre-install other search and AI apps, according to evidence shown at trial. Google has said it plans to appeal once the judge makes a final ruling.
Jody Godoy, Reuters
Shares in coffee giant Starbucks Corporation (Nasdaq: SBUX) are down significantly in premarket trading this morning after the chain announced its Q2 2025 earnings results yesterday after the bell.
Those results were described as disappointing by Starbucks’s own CEO, Brian Niccol, and demonstrate that the companys turnaround efforts still have a long way to go. Here’s the latest on Starbucks and what has investors nervous:
Starbucks Q2 2025 results below expectations
In January of this year, Starbucks announced its Q1 2025 earnings, in which it beat Wall Street expectationsa small win for the company and for Niccol, who joined as CEO from Chipotle Mexican Grill in the summer of 2024. But its not a win that was repeated in the companys second quarter.
Yesterday, Starbucks reported earnings for its Q2 of fiscal 2025. That quarter had 13 weeks in it and ended on March 30. Unlike the previous quarter, Starbucks did not beat Wall Street expectations. Wall Street analysts had expected revenue of $8.83 billion and an adjusted earnings per share (EPS) of 49 cents, according to Yahoo Finance. Instead, Starbucks posted the following:
Revenue: $8.76 billion
Adjusted EPS: 41 cents
But the revenue and EPS miss isnt what seems to be rattling investors most. That would be Starbuckss disappointing comparable sales results.
Comparable sales are a metric that looks at the sales of the same stores that have been open for at least a year. If comparable sales are increasing, thats a good sign as it means the same stores are bringing in more customers, larger orders, or both. But if comparable sales are down, it suggests lower foot traffic or that customers are reducing the amount of money they spend at the store.
Unfortunately for Starbucks, comparable sales in U.S. stores that have been open for at least a year fell during Q2and it was the fifth straight quarterly fall of U.S. comparable sales.
Starbucks says that U.S. comparable store sales declined 2% during the quarter, and U.S. comparable transactions were down 4%. It was a little better in China, however, which is the companys second-largest market after the United States. In China, comparable sales were at least flat quarter-over-quarter.
But you would be right to wonder if flat comparable sales in China could get worse, as consumer sentiment across the globe is increasingly becoming anti-American due to President Trumps trade wars, which are leading to economic strife with America’s largest trading partners.
Niccol seemed keen to paint a rosy picture of Starbucks’s operations and future in the country. As noted by Yahoo Finance, the Starbucks CEO said on the companys earnings call yesterday, I want to be clear that we remain committed to China for the long term. We see great potential for our business there in the years ahead, and remain open to how we achieve that growth.”
Back to Starbucks”. . . or not
Late last summer, Niccol was brought on board at Starbucks as its new CEO in order to turn the struggling chain around. As part of that turnaround, Niccol unveiled the Back to Starbucks plan in which he implemented a number of changes, including a simplified menu and a controversial no-loitering policy.
However, Starbuckss latest Q2 results and the companys continued decline in comparable U.S. sales will leave many industry watchers wondering just how well that Back to Starbucks plan is working.
Niccol himself acknowledged that Starbuckss Q2 results are disappointing, but quickly noted that “behind the scenes we made a lot of progress and have real momentum with our ‘Back to Starbucks’ plan, according to Yahoo Finance.
Niccol also addressed the plan directly in the companys official earnings release, saying, My optimism has turned into confidence that our ‘Back to Starbucks’ plan is the right strategy to turn the business around and to unlock opportunities ahead.
He added: “Improving transaction comp in a tough consumer environment at our scale is a testament to the power of our brand and partners getting ‘Back to Starbucks.’ We are on track and if anything, I see more opportunity than I imagined.
SBUX stock sinks
However, while Niccol might see more opportunity, investorsfor today at leastseem to have a hard time imagining the same.
As of the time of this writing, Starbucks stock is now down over 8% in premarket trading to $78 per share. SBUX shares had closed yesterday up about 1.1% to $84.85 before the company announced its Q2 results.
Year to date, Starbucks shares were already down over 7% as of yesterdays closebefore todays further 8% premarket drop. As of yesterdays close, shares were also down nearly 4% over the past 12 months.
The NFT market crash has a long tail.
In the late 2010s, crypto enthusiasts and web3 advocates celebrated the arrival of digital art. Non-Fungible Tokens, they argued, could offer the permanence and investment value of a traditional painting. Not anymore: even amid President Trumps memecoin surge, NFT valuations continue to hit new lows. The market has been in free fall for nearly two years, with no bottom in sight.
While NFTs may be dead, NFT lawsuits are alive and well. Corporate suppliers are beginning to regret their blockchain experiments.
The NFT lawsuit boom
Most recently, buyers of Nikes NFTs sued the retailer for $5 million. Nike had acquired the virtual sneaker shop RTFKT in 2021, generating nearly $200 million in NFT sales. But in 2024, Nike began winding the operation down. The lawsuit alleges that the shutdown destroyed demand for RTFKTs NFTs, effectively causing “the rug to be pulled out from under” buyers, according to Reuters. Some RTFKT NFTs even briefly displayed error messages during the turmoil.
The online sportsbook DraftKings also ventured into the NFT space, only to shut down its Reignmakers NFT marketplace in July 2024. Meanwhile, a 2023 lawsuit alleged that DraftKings sold NFTs as unlicensed securities, reaping the full benefit of initial sales and a 5% commission on secondary sales. That case has since been settled, with DraftKings agreeing to pay out $10 million in February to those who purchased NFTs between 2021 and the shutdown.
NFT buyers have also gone after the celebrities who hawked their fast-declining digital assets. Shaquille ONeals 2023 lawsuit recently concluded, with the former NBA player agreeing to pay out $11 million (plus $2.9 million in attorneys fees) to buyers of his Astrals Project NFTs. Meanwhile, the MAGA-friendly Nelk Boys are still battling their own lawsuit, which claims the YouTubers promised additional perks with their NFT sales that were never fulfilled.
For corporations and celebrities, NFTs were a side business. But for companies dedicated solely to producing digital assets, these lawsuits are far more threatening. Dapper Labswhich partners with companies like Disney and the NFL to build branded NFTsrecently settled for $4 million over claims that its NBA Top Shot moments were unregistered securities. Yuga Labs, meanwhile, has been stuck in court for years fighting copyright battles over its Bored Ape Yacht Club. Recently, it even petitioned for access to a copying artists crypto wallet.
How NFTs became a bad corporate bet
Just a few years ago, major companies from Nike to Coca-Cola were racing to launch web3 ventures. Some are still ongoing; many have flamed out. And with the barrage of lawsuits now hitting NFT suppliers, these blockchain bets are looking increasingly risky.
They may also fail to deliver value. NFTs were meant to serve as brand extensionsespecially for luxury companies, which sold highly expensive goods in digital form. But according to a recent study in the Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, NFT availability may actually have a negative effect on consumer sentiment. The researchers found that for goods with web3 iterations, the physical counterparts were perceived as less luxuriousand thus less worth spending on.
NFTs have lost their value to major companies. Theyre not effective brand extensions, theyre not sustainable investments, and theyre barely even good cash grabs anymore. All theyre left with is a mess of lawsuits.
Billionaire entrepreneur, NBA owner, and CEO of Wonder Marc Lore reveals that he plans all his meals with AIand he loves it. Its just one part of his vision for transforming peoples relationship to food and health. His startup, Wonder, has already acquired Blue Apron, Grubhub, and the media brand Tastemade. Lore shares how these acquisitions and embrace of personalized AI-driven dining are all laddering up to a superapp for mealtime.
This is an abridged transcript of an interview from Rapid Response, hosted by Robert Safian, former editor-in-chief of Fast Company. From the team behind the Masters of Scale podcast, Rapid Response features candid conversations with todays top business leaders navigating real-time challenges. Subscribe to Rapid Response wherever you get your podcasts to ensure you never miss an episode.
How do you describe what Wonder is?
At the core, Wonder is a vertically integrated food-delivery platform. So think Grubhub, but we actually own the restaurants. So we both do the delivery, we own the restaurants, and we cook the food. That enables us to have a superior delivery experience. So out of a single, 2,800-square-foot kitchen, we can cook 30 different restaurants across 30 different cuisines, so everything from a high-end steakhouse, Bobby Flay Steak, José Andrés, Spanish tapas, burgers, barbecue, Chinese, Mexican, Italian, Middle Eastern, Thai, 30 different cuisines with only two pieces of electric cooking equipment. It’s set up more like a micro-fulfillment center. All the food is fresh and it’s cooked to order.
How does one kitchen offer hundreds of menu items and operate with as few as two staffers? You’re not reheating frozen food. So are you using different kind of equipment, different kind of processes, all of that?
Yeah, it’s different equipment, different processes. The proteins are sous vide, so they’re par-cooked. They sit in a tank of hot water. Restaurants do something similar, but we do that ahead of time so we’re able to finish a steak in six minutes to perfect temp every time. We’re able to cook a pizza in 90 seconds. We can cook pasta without water. We’ve invented new ways of cooking food where we can replicate the quality, but also do it with a lot less labor. And the benefit for consumers is being able to order from multiple restaurants in a single delivery so you can order from five different restaurants and get it all delivered hot in under 30 minutes.
When I asked you how you describe what Wonder is, I was curious which direction you were going to go in because your history and part of Wonder is sort of the tech side, and there’s been talk about being a superapp, which is kind of a buzzy term these days. So can you square those things for me?
The bigger vision is a superapp for mealtime, meaning all the ways in which a consumer might want to consume food. It could be first-party through Wonder, it could be from your local restaurant delivered via Grubhub, it could be a meal kit from Blue Apron, it could be groceries, it could be even restaurant reservations, so all the ways in which you eat. The reason why we want to capture all those occasions is because we’re building this AI-based platform wrapper around it that’s going to, in the future, be able to autonomously feed you according to your budget and health goals.
Autonomously feed you. So I’m not going to decide what it is I want to eat. The AI is going to tell me what I want to eat or what I should eat?
AI will learn your food preferences better than you do yourself and that you’ll be happy to rely on AI. So personally, now about 90% of my meals are all AI derived. So AI tells me what to eat for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. That’s the oatmeal that I was explaining to you this morning.
I should ask you to tell everybody what you had for breakfast this morning. You told me this story before I started recording, and I was compelled by the specificity of it.
It was steel-cut oatmeal with fivenot four, not sixfive raw walnuts, two tablespoons of flaxseed, two tablespoons of chia seed, half a banana, and half a teaspoon of cinnamon.
It’s your custom recipe. But just because that’s what you had today doesn’t mean that that’s what AI’s going to tell you to have tomorrow.
No, but I rate it very highly, so AI does know I do like to eat that, so I do get that quite often. I basically get my blood work done. I have my Oura ring, my blood glucose monitoring, all the blood results, all the biomarkers, all the data gets fed to AI. I set health goals, and based on the health goals and based on the foods I love, it basically tells me, Okay, well then eat this for breakfast, eat this for lunch, eat this for dinner. In the future, if I go out to a restaurant for dinner, AI will be able to tell me what to order off the menu because now we have 375,000 menus via Grubhub. So that’s the future.
It’s pretty technocratic though, right? A lot of people take joy in sort of choosing what to eat, or being . . . I don’t know, trying something different that maybe they didn’t know they liked.
I mean, based on my own personal experience, I love it. I can’t imagine having to think about what I want to eat because it knows the ingredients you like and so it comes up with different meals that are new and you’re like, “Wow, I never even thought about eating this,” and then you wind up liking it, so the variety’s there. It remembers every great meal you’ve ever had. So if I rated something 9.5 six months ago, I forgot it two weeks later. AI doesn’t forget. And so these great dishes get rotated. If you leave it up to me, I’m thinking of the same three things, probably what I had yesterday or the day before, and maybe a couple other things. The brain, it’s not good at remembering all the great meals you’ve ever had, but AI doesn’t forget. So think about it not as a computer telling you what to do, but it’s really a better version of yourself. It’s sort of like if you could capture the best of your brain’s abilities to think about food, that’s AI.
And when you talk to the celebrity chefs you deal with, José Andrés or Bobby Flay or Marcus Samuelsson, and you tell them this story, are they like, “Oh, that’s great,” or are they like, “Well, wait a minute, that’s what we bring to it?
No. I mean, it doesn’t change. hink about it. You could as an artist, as a creative, as a chef, create a bunch of dishes that you hope resonate with people, and then each individual person’s AI is going to have different preferences, and it’s going to prefer certain meals over others. So nothing changes. The creative canvas is still necessary. It’s still valuable. It doesn’t change that at all.
What it does change is having to go to a restaurant and having to spend time, look at the menu, look at everything. I mean, it’s just, boom, there it is, get this. AI knows you better than your partner or better than your best friend. You might have biomarkers that have issues. I had low iodine, I had high mercury. I don’t have to think about it. AI is giving me kelp to fix my iodine. I’m not getting tuna because I have high mercury. It’s taking care of all these health issues in the background without having to think about it.
So it’s like my personal food critic and my personal doctor working together to give me what’s ideal.
It’s really fascinating because it’s able to fix your health issues but still get good scores. So number one, you have to love the food. Okay. Now, given the foods you love, AI, you have to now make Marc healthy. And so AI does these little things, and I see it trying things that are a little bit more healthy, and I give it a bad rating. It’s like, “Okay, he doesn’t want to. . . . That’s too healthy for him,” right? And so it’s found a really nice happy medium now where I love every meal, and I’ve never been healthier, and I’m not having to think about what I want to eat. I don’t spend any time on it. I sit down. It’s a great meal. I mean, this is the future.
As Americans are having fewer babies, the White House has been gathering ideas on what can be done to increase the birth rate. The New York Times reported that one of the ideas is a $5,000 baby bonus to entice women to have more babies, received after delivery. Other ideas being entertained to start a baby boom include: reserving 30% of scholarships for the Fulbright program, the prestigious, government-backed international fellowship, for applicants who are married or have children; government-funded programs that educate women on their menstrual cycles, so we understand when we ovulate and conceive; and a National Medal of Motherhood awarded to mothers with six or more children.
While President Trump and his administration want a baby boom, none of these ideas address the root causes of why Americans arent having babies and why the annual birth rate is at a record low. Mothers don’t need a medal, they need meaningful family policies. If Trump truly wants a baby boom in his administration, heres what the government can focus on delivering for all Americans: better maternal healthcare, national paid leave, affordable childcare including not ending Head Start, better public education including not closing the Department of Education, safer schools,and a better cost of living for all.
And sure, the government alone cant solve this problem. As the Edelman Trust Barometer survey reminds us that trust in government continues to decline, business continues to be the default solution for societal issues because it is seen as outperforming government on competence. The pressure on business leaders to step upincluding from their own employeesshows no sign of disappearing, particularly when it comes to how to best support employees and their families. Private-company based solutions to public policy shortcomings will leave millions of Americans out, but its still in business owners’ interests to support the working parents they employ (both moms and dads).
In our workplaces, heres a reminder of what leaders can begin to do to help all parents start and expand their families:
Support employees with buying their first home
One factor in the decline of U.S. birth rates is lack of affordable housing. According to a Clever Real Estate study, 70% of Americans are afraid of an impending housing market crash. And 32% of Americans are afraid they won’t be able to make housing payments as a result of todays economy. Middle-class families in half in less than half of the U.S. can afford an average priced home. And If you cant afford a home, you may be less likely to want to start a family.
Heres where leaders can step in: Offer resources and support your employees ability to purchase their first home. Partner with companies like Multiply Mortgage, a Denver based-company that offers employees one-on-one sessions with mortgage advisers, employee education sessions around the home purchase and financing process, and mortgage interest rate discounts of up to .75%. The company partners with a network of 15 to 20 lenders to access discounted interest rates.
Homeownership has become increasingly out of reach for many Americans, and we dont expect interest rates to fall to the levels we saw in 2020 ever again, shares Michael White, cofounder and CEO of Multiply Mortgage. White says companies work with them with zero cost to the employer, other than low administrative cost to promote the benefit internally to employees. For leaders, this can be a win-win. Employees who own their home and put down roots into a community are far less likely to leave your company and relocate somewhere else.
Partner with other companies to solve the childcare crisis
A recent Lendingtree study showed that it costs close to $300,000 to raise a child in the U.S. today, from the time they are born until they turn 18 years old. Costs have jumped 35.7% versus when the study was conducted in 2023. One of the biggest drivers of costs continues to be childcare, which is close to $18,000 a year. In places like the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, and Hawaii, the cost is closer to $25,000 a year. A $5,000 baby bonus (which may also be taxed) would hardly make a dent in that cost.
According to a recent HiBob report, only 15% of companies surveyed provide childcare-related benefits. Leaders can step into help solve another root cause then it comes to why Americans are having less babies: the childcare crisis. Employees need to be able to afford childcare, and have access to reliable, safe options so they can be fully present to contribute at work. Companies can partner with local childcare providers and negotiate a group discounted rate for their employees. They can also partner with Bright Horizons and bring a corporate day care to their location, and help fund the costs. If you cant afford the cost on your own, and are worried about low utilization rates, find other companies to partner with you to build a daycare center in a location that all employees can access. Finally, you can provide a caregiver stipend to employees so that they can use that to pay family members or friends to help take care of their children.
For leaders, this can be another win-win. Employees who can be fully present at work, and not worry about whether their children are being well taken care of, are able to make an impact. And we know there are limits to linking childcare coverage to a job. The most important thing an employer can do is to let their employees know they support their roles as parents, by offering support with childcare, and other related benefits, and most importantly, providing them flexibility to be there for their children as needed.
Remember to focus on parental leave, not maternity leave
The U.S. still remains one of only seven countries that doesnt guarantee any paid family leave. If companies are busy lobbying the U.S. government about lowering tax rates, preventing regulations, drug pricing, fossil fuel incentives, data privacy, and more, they should add paid family leave to that list. Until then, the burden remains on companies to offer leave to parents and help fill this societal gap.
As I discuss in my book, Reimagine Inclusion: Debunking 13 Myths to Transform Your Workplace, when we dont offer parental leave, and focus only on maternity leave, we put the burden on mothers to constantly be the primary caregiver. Ill never forget working for a leader who didnt want to create a parental leave policy. His response to me was, Why do we need to give dads time off when they have a kid? Its the mom doing all the work, and the dad is on the golf course using this as vacation time. He needs to be back in the office.
According to research from the brand Dove Men + Care, giving fathers time to bond with their child not only helps the other parent, but also later on, can lead to better behavioral outcomes when the child is in school. Fathers who are close to their children are healthier, and have stronger and happier marriages with their partners. In Sweden, the data shows that for each additional month of paid parental leave taken by the father increases the mothers earnings by 6.7%. Imagine the positive ripple effect this can have on our society.
Finally, the stereotypes about fathers not helping when a child is born and playing golf, or not being lazy or useless or not good at parenting is not only damaging to fathers, but also to mothers. Its up to all of us to shatter these stereotypes. Leaders need to support more men in taking parental leave, leaving work early to take their kid to doctors appointment to attend that school play, and being a public role model when it comes to all things parenting. And men who are leaders should be doing it themselves. If we want more women to become mothers, we cant leave fathers out of the equation.
If the government refuses to address the declining U.S. birth rates with solutions that address the root cause, businesses will need to step up to support parents. Creating a society where we can start and expand our families and support both children and parents is best for everyone.
The year is 2014, and Im stuck in Ukraine. I have a particularly antsy mother who wasnt keen on me visiting the country just weeks into Russias attempted invasion, and she is expecting me back home.
In Odessahundreds of miles away from the Maidan and the nascent conflictthe worst example of war Id seen was a heated snowball battle between those who wanted to remain Ukrainian and those who wanted to be Russian. The reason Im stuck has nothing to do with Russia: Its bad fog grounding flights at the tin hut airport Im due to fly out of. But with no reliable phone communication back home, I know my family will put two and two together and make five.
The problem is allayed when I return to the plush hotel Id been staying at, which was happy to have us pay for another nights lodging, and get on Skype. Im able to call home, explain what happened, and keep them from panicking when I dont step off the plane back in the U.K. as expected.
International calls remain prohibitively expensive. And for a generation that doesnt own smartphoneslike my parentsor a country that steadfastly refuses to join the rest of the world on WhatsApp (hello, United States), Skype has proven a lifeline.
My use of the platformto call home when stuck in war-torn Ukraine for an extra day, or to check on the status of my sick grandfather in hospital on the sidelines of a conference in the U.S. earlier this yearis very much a first-world problem. But the reality is that the imminent closure of Microsofts digital calling service (which the company attributes to dwindling user numbers and its belief that the same service can be offered through Microsoft Teams) will leave a significant gap for many who depend on it.
Im not a Skype power user, but by my own estimation, Ive used the platform at least once a week for the last decade or more. My job as a tech journalist means I frequently call American contacts and sources. The countrys intransigence and refusal, with very few exceptions, to download and install WhatsApp on their cellphones means that unless I want to be hit with eye-watering minute-by-minute charges for calling them for interviews, I need to find an alternative. Since the early 2010s, that alternative has been a rolling Skype subscription to call the U.S.400 minutes per month, landline and cellphones, has proved plenty for me. Shortly, it wont be.
Our lives, and our families, are increasingly scattered to the four winds. And in the two decades since its 2003 founding, Skype has helped those families stay connected. Its also helped a good number of people whose jobs involve international interactions do so at a manageable cost.
Its notable that mentioning the closure of Skype on a regular roundup of tech news stories I do for a U.K. radio station received the most personal correspondence from listeners. They told me they too were worried about the closure of the service and were seeking out alternatives.
Skype has long been unloved, long surpassed by the likes of Zoom andwhisper it quietly, and by tamping down your gag reflexMicrosoft Teams. Indeed, its Teams that Skype is recommending people move to, without realizing it doesnt offer exactly the same experience. But Skype was our little app that could. And its disappearance will be a loss for many beyond just me.
