Adam Mosseri, the head of Meta’s Instagram, testified Wednesday during a landmark social media trial in Los Angeles that he disagrees with the idea that people can be clinically addicted to social media platforms.The question of addiction is a key pillar of the case, where plaintiffs seek to hold social media companies responsible for harms to children who use their platforms. Meta Platforms and Google’s YouTube are the two remaining defendants in the case, which TikTok and Snap have settled.At the core of the Los Angeles case is a 20-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose lawsuit could determine how thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies would play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury.Mosseri, who’s headed Instagram since 2018 said it’s important to differentiate between clinical addiction and what he called problematic use. The plaintiff’s lawyer, however, presented quotes directly from Mosseri in a podcast interview a few years ago where he used the term addiction in relation to social media use, but he clarified that he was probably using the term “too casually,” as people tend to do.Mosseri said he was not claiming to be a medical expert when questioned about his qualifications to comment on the legitimacy of social media addiction, but said someone “very close” to him has experienced serious clinical addiction, which is why he said he was “being careful with my words.”He said he and his colleagues use the term “problematic use” to refer to “someone spending more time on Instagram than they feel good about, and that definitely happens.”It’s “not good for the company, over the long run, to make decisions that profit for us but are poor for people’s well-being,” Mosseri said.Mosseri and the plaintiff’s lawyer, Mark Lanier, engaged in a lengthy back-and-forth about cosmetic filters on Instagram that changed people’s appearance in a way that seemed to promote plastic surgery.“We are trying to be as safe as possible but also censor as little as possible,” Mosseri said.In the courtroom, bereaved parents of children who have had social media struggles seemed visibly upset during a discussion around body dysmorphia and cosmetic filters. Meta shut down all third-party augmented reality filters in January 2025. The judge made an announcement to members of the public on Wednesday after the displays of emotion, reminding them not to make any indication of agreement or disagreement with testimony, saying that it would be “improper to indicate some position.”During cross examination, Mosseri and Meta lawyer Phyllis Jones tried to reframe the idea that Lanier was suggesting in his questioning that the company is looking to profit off of teens specifically.Mosseri said Instagram makes “less money from teens than from any other demographic on the app,” noting that teens don’t tend to click on ads and many don’t have disposable income that they spend on products from ads they receive. During his opportunity to question Mosseri for a second time, Lanier was quick to point to research that shows people who join social media platforms at a young age are more likely to stay on the platforms longer, which he said makes teen users prime for meaningful long-term profit.“Often people try to frame things as you either prioritize safety or you prioritize revenue,” Mosseri said. “It’s really hard to imagine any instance where prioritizing safety isn’t good for revenue.”Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is expected to take the stand next week.In recent years, Instagram has added a slew of features and tools it says have made the platform safer for young people. But this does not always work. A report last year, for instance, found that teen accounts researchers created were recommended age-inappropriate sexual content, including “graphic sexual descriptions, the use of cartoons to describe demeaning sexual acts, and brief displays of nudity.”In addition, Instagram also recommended a “range of self-harm, self-injury, and body image content” on teen accounts that the report says “would be reasonably likely to result in adverse impacts for young people, including teenagers experiencing poor mental health, or self-harm and suicidal ideation and behaviors.” Meta called the report “misleading, dangerously speculative” and said it misrepresents its efforts on teen safety.Meta is also facing a separate trial in New Mexico that began this week.
By Kaitlyn Huamani and Barbara Ortutay, AP Technology Writers
Welcome to AI Decoded, Fast Companys weekly newsletter that breaks down the most important news in the world of AI. You can sign up to receive this newsletter every week via email here.
Is AI slop code here to stay?
A few months ago I wrote about the dark side of vibe coding tools: they often generate code that introduces bugs or security vulnerabilities that surface later. They can solve an immediate problem while making a codebase harder to maintain over time. Its true that more developers are using AI coding assistants, and using them more frequently and for more tasks. But many seem to be weighing the time saved today against the cleanup they may face tomorrow.
When human engineers build projects with lots of moving parts and dependencies, they have to hold a vast amount of information in their heads and then find the simplest, most elegant way to execute their plan. AI models face a similar challenge. Developers have told me candidly that AI coding tools, including Claude Code and Codex, still struggle when they need to account for large amounts of context in complex projects. The models can lose track of key details, misinterpret the meaning or implications of project data, or make planning mistakes that lead to inconsistencies in the codeall things that an experienced software engineer would catch.
The most advanced AI coding tools are only now beginning to add testing and validation features that can proactively surface problematic code. When I asked OpenAI CEO Sam Altman during a recent press call whether Codex is improving at testing and validating generated code, he became visibly excited. Altman said OpenAI likes the idea of deploying agents to work behind developers, validating code and sniffing out potential problems.
Indeed, Codex can run tests on code it generates or modifies, executing test suites in a sandboxed environment and iterating until the code passes or meets acceptance criteria defined by the developer. Claude Code, meanwhile, has its own set of validation and security features. Anthropic has built testing and validation routines into its Claude Code product, too. Some developers say Claude is stronger at higher-level planning and understanding intent, while Codex is better at following specific instructions and matching an existing codebase.
The real question may be what developers should expect from these AI coding tools. Should they be held to the standard of a junior engineer whose work may contain errors and requires careful review? Or should the bar be higher? Perhaps the goal should be not only to avoid generating slop code but also to act as a kind of internal auditor, catching and fixing bad code written by humans.
Altman likes that idea. But judging by comments from another OpenAI executive, Greg Brockman, its not clear the company believes that standard is fully attainable. Brockman, OpenAIs president, suggests in a recently posted set of AI coding guidelines that AI slop code isnt something to eliminate so much as a reality to manage. Managing AI generated code at scale is an emerging problem, and will require new processes and conventions to keep code quality high, Brockman wrote on X.
Saas stocks still smarting from last weeks SaaSpocalypse
Last week, shares of several major software companies tumbled amid growing anxiety about AI. The share prices of ServiceNow, Oracle, Salesforce, AppLovin, Workday, Intuit, CrowdStrike, Factset Research, and Thompson Reuters fell so sharply that Wall Street types began to refer to the event as the SaaSpocalypse. The stocks fell sharply on two pieces of news. First, late in the day on Friday, January 30, Anthropic announced a slate of new AI plugins for its Cowork AI tool aimed at information workers, including capabilities for legal, product management, marketing, and other functions. Then, on February 4, the company unveiled its most powerful model yet, Claude Opus 4.6, which now powers the Claude chatbot, Claude Code, and Cowork.
For investors, Anthropics releases raised a scary question: How will old-school SaaS companies survive when their products are already being challenged by AI-native tools?
Although software shares rebounded somewhat later in the week, as analysts circulated reassurances that many of these companies are integrating new AI capabilities into their products, the unease lingers. In fact, many of the stocks mentioned above have yet to recover to their late-January levels. (Some SaaS players, like ServiceNow, are now even using Anthropics models to power their AI features.)
But its a sign of the times, and investors will continue to watch carefully for signs that enterprises are moving on from traditional SaaS solutions to newer AI apps or autonomous agents.
China is flexing its video models
This week, some new entrants in the race for best model are very hard to miss. X is awash with posts showcasing video generated by new Chinese video generation modelsSeedance 2.0 from ByteDance and Kling 3.0 from Kuaishou. The video is impressive. Many of the clips are difficult to distinguish from traditionally shot footage, and both tools make it easier to edit and steer the look and feel of a scene. AI-generated video is getting scary-good, its main limitation being that the generated videos are still pretty short.
Sample videos from Kling 3.0, which range from 3 seconds to 15 seconds, feature smooth scene transitions and a variety of camera angles. The characters and objects look consistent from scene to scene, a quality that video models have struggled with. The improvements are owed in part to the models ability to glean the creators intent from the prompts, which can include reference images and videos. Kling also includes native audio generation, meaning it can generate speech, sound effects, ambient audio, lip-sync, and multi-character dialogue in a number of languages, dialects, and accents.
ByteDances Seedance 2.0, like Kling 3.0, generates video with multiple scenes and multiple camera angles, even from a single prompt. One video featured a shot from within a Learjet in flight to a shot from outside the aircraft. The video motion looks smooth and realistic, with good character consistency across frames and scenes, so that it can handle complex high-motion scenes like fights, dances, and action sequences. Seedance can be prompted with text, images, reference videos, and audio. And like Kling, Seedance can generate synchronized audio including voices, sound effects, and lip-sync in multiple languages.
More AI coverage from Fast Company:
Were entering the era of AI unless proven otherwise
A Palantir cofounder is backing a group attacking Alex Bores over his work with . . . Palantir
Why a Korean film exec is betting big on AI
Mozillas new AI strategy marks a return to its rebel alliance roots
Want exclusive reporting and trend analysis on technology, business innovation, future of work, and design? Sign up for Fast Company Premium.
Russia has attempted to fully block WhatsApp in the country, the company said, the latest move in an ongoing government effort to tighten control over the internet.A WhatsApp spokesperson said late Wednesday that the Russian authorities’ action was intended to “drive users to a state-owned surveillance app,” a reference to Russia’s own state-supported MAX messaging app that’s seen by critics as a surveillance tool.“Trying to isolate over 100 million people from private and secure communication is a backwards step and can only lead to less safety for people in Russia,” the WhatsApp spokesperson said. “We continue to do everything we can to keep people connected.”Russia’s government has already blocked major social media like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, and ramped up other online restrictions since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said WhatsApp owner Meta Platforms should comply with Russian law to see it unblocked, according to the state Tass news agency.Earlier this week, Russian communications watchdog Roskomnadzor said it will introduce new restrictions on the Telegram messaging app after accusing it of refusing to abide by the law. The move triggered widespread criticism from military bloggers, who warned that Telegram was widely used by Russian troops fighting in Ukraine and its throttling would derail military communications.Despite the announcement, Telegram has largely been working normally. Some experts say it’s a more difficult target, compared with WhatsApp. Some Russian experts said that blocking WhatsApp would free up technological resources and allow authorities to fully focus on Telegram, their priority target.Authorities had previously restricted access to WhatsApp before moving to finally ban it Wednesday.Under President Vladimir Putin, authorities have engaged in deliberate and multipronged efforts to rein in the internet. They have adopted restrictive laws and banned websites and platforms that don’t comply, and focused on improving technology to monitor and manipulate online traffic.Russian authorities have throttled YouTube and methodically ramped up restrictions against popular messaging platforms, blocking Signal and Viber and banning online calls on WhatsApp and Telegram. In December, they imposed restrictions on Apple’s video calling service FaceTime.While it’s still possible to circumvent some of the restrictions by using virtual private network services, many of them are routinely blocked, too.At the same time, authorities actively promoted the “national” messaging app called MAX, which critics say could be used for surveillance. The platform, touted by developers and officials as a one-stop shop for messaging, online government services, making payments and more, openly declares it will share user data with authorities upon request. Experts also say it doesn’t use end-to-end encryption.
Associated Press
Daniel Kokotajlo predicted the end of the world would happen in April 2027. In AI 2027 a document outlining the impending impacts of AI, published in April 2025 the former OpenAI employee and several peers announced that by April 2027, unchecked AI development would lead to superintelligence and consequently destroy humanity.
The authors, however are going back on their predictions. Now, Kokotajlo forecasts superintelligence will land in 2034, but he doesnt know if and when AI will destroy humanity.
In AI 2027, Kokotajlo argued that superintelligence will emerge through fully autonomous coding, enabling AI systems to drive their own development. The release of ChatGPT in 2022 accelerated predictions around artificial general intelligence, with some forecasting its arrival within years rather than decades.
These predictions accrued widespread attention. Notably, JD Vance, U.S. vice president, reportedly read AI 2027 and later urged Pope Leo XIV who underscored AI as a main challenge facing humanity to provide international leadership to avoid outcomes listed in the document. On the other hand, people like Gary Marcus, emeritus professor of neuroscience at New York University, disregarded AI 2027 as a work of fiction, even calling various predictions pure science fiction mumbo jumbo.
As researchers and the public alike begin to reckon with how jagged AI performance is, AGI timelines are starting to stretch again, according to Malcolm Murray, an AI risk management expert and one of the authors of the International AI Safety Report. For a scenario like AI 2027 to happen, [AI] would need a lot of more practical skills that are useful in real-world complexities, Murray said.
Still, developing AI models that can train themselves remains a steady goal for leading AI companies. Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO, set internal goals for a true automated AI researcher by March of 2028.
However, hes not entirely confident in the companys capabilities to develop superintelligence. We may totally fail at this goal, he admitted on X, but given the extraordinary potential impacts we think it is in the public interest to be transparent about this.
And so, superintelligence may still be possible, but when it arrives and what it will be capable of remains far murkier than AI 2027 once suggested.
Leila Sheridan
This article originally appeared on Fast Company‘s sister publication, Inc.
Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
For most of modern finance, one number has quietly dictated who gets ahead and who gets left out: the credit score. It was a breakthrough when it arrived in the 1950s, becoming an elegant shortcut for a complex decision. But shortcuts age. And in a world driven by data, digital behavior, and real-time signals, the score is increasingly misaligned with how people actually live and manage money.
Were now at a turning point. A foundational system, long considered untouchable, is finally being reconstructed by using AIspecifically, advanced machine learning models built for risk predictionto extract more intelligence from existing data. These are rigorously tested, well-governed systems that help lenders see risk with greater nuance and clarity. And the results are reshaping core economics for lenders.
THE CREDIT SCORE WASNT BUILT FOR MODERN CONSUMERS
Legacy credit scores rely on a narrow slice of information updated at a pace that reflects the black-and-white television era. A single late payment can overshadow years of financial discipline. Data updates lag behind real behavior. And lenders are forced to make million-dollar decisions using a tool that cant see volatility, nuance, or context.
A single, generic credit score is a compromise by design. National credit scores are designed to work reasonably well across thousands of institutions, but not optimally for any specific one. That becomes clear when you compare regional differences. A lender in an agricultural region may see very different income seasonality and cash-flow patterns than a lender in a major metro areadifferences that a universal score was never designed to capture. Financial institutions need models built around their actual membership that can adjust to different financial histories and behaviors.
That rigidity has created the gap were now seeing across the economy. Consumers feel squeezed, lenders feel exposed, and businesses struggle to grow in a risk environment that looks nothing like the one their scoring tools were built for.
Modern machine-learning models give lenders something the score never coulda panoramic view instead of a narrow window.
HOW AI CHANGES THE GAME
The data in credit files has long been there. Whats changed is the modelingmodern machine learning systems that can finally make full use of those signals. These models can evaluate thousands of factors inside bureau files, not just the static inputs, but the patterns behind them:
How payment behavior changes over time
Which fluctuations are warning signs versus temporary noise
How multiple variables interact in ways a traditional score cant measure
This lets lenders differentiate between someone who is truly risky and someone who is momentarily out of rhythm. The impact is profound: more approvals without more losses, stronger compliance without more overhead, and decisions that align with how people actually manage their finances today.
For leadership teams, this also means making intentional choices about who to serve and how to allocate capital. Tailored models let institutions focus their resources on the customers they actually want to reach, rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all score.
AI FIXES SOMETHING WE DONT TALK ABOUT ENOUGH
There’s widespread concern about AI bias, and rightly so. When algorithms aren’t trained on a representative set of data or arent monitored after deployment, this can create biased results. In lending, these models arent deployed on faith; theyre validated, back-tested, and monitored over time, with clear documentation of the factors driving each decision. Modern explainability techniques, now well-established in credit risk, can give regulators and consumers a clearer view into how and why decisions are made.
Business leaders should also consider that there is bias embedded in manual underwriting. Human decisionsespecially in high-volume, time-pressured environmentsvary from reviewer to reviewer, case to case, hour to hour.
Machine learning models that use representative data, are regularly monitored, and make explainable, transparent decisions, giving humans a dependable baseline. This allows them to focus on exceptions, tough cases, and strategy.
THE NEW ADVANTAGE FOR BUSINESS LEADERS
The next era of lending will be defined by companies that operationalize AI with discipline, building in strong governance, clear guardrails, and transparency. Those who do will see higher approval rates, lower losses, faster decisions with fewer manual bottlenecks, and fairer outcomes that reflect real behavior, not outdated shortcuts.
For the first time in 70 years, were able to bring real, impactful change to one of the most influential drivers in the economy.
THE FUTURE ISNT A SCORE, ITS UNDERSTANDING
If the last century of lending was defined by a single, blunt number, the next century will be defined by intelligence. By the ability to interpret risk with nuance, adapt to fast-moving economic signals, and extend opportunity to people who have long been underestimated by the system.
AI wont make lending flawless. But it gives us the clearest path weve ever had toward a credit ecosystem that is more accurate, more resilient, and far fairer than the one we inherited.
And for leaders focused on growth, innovation, and long-term competitiveness, that shift is transformational.
Sean Kamkar is CTO of Zest AI.
Perusing the grocery aisle in the Westside Market on 23rd Street in Manhattan, you might not even notice the screens. They look just like paper price labels and, alongside a bar code, use a handwriting-style font weve come to associate with a certain merchant folksiness. Theyre not particularly bright or showy. The only clues that theyre not ordinary sticky shelf labels are a barely distinguishable light bulb and, on some, a small QR code.
These are electronic shelf labels, chip-enabled screens that some stores are now using to display product prices. Unlike their paper predecessors, the prices arent printed in ink but rendered in pixels, and they can change instantaneously, at any time. The labels also come with additional features. An LED light can switch on to flag something, perhaps a product that needs restocking, explains Vusion, the company that made the labels Westside Market is now using. The QR codes are designed to help customers find more information about a product, or integrate with a personalized shopping list someone might have.
Of course, these labels arent just labels, but end-points of a much larger effort to digitize every way we now interface with products. You have a network in the store. You send the information that you want to transmit to the labels, and there you go, says Finn Wikander, the chief product officer at Pricer, another company thats manufacturing ESLs with the hope of making them a fixture of 21st century shopping.
Unsurprisingly, electronic shelf labels have become a flashpoint for consumer anxiety. The companies selling the devices, and the stores buying them, say the technology isnt about screwing people over but about making their businesses easier to run. Automating price changes eliminates hours spent replacing labels. It also makes it simpler to respond to new tariffs or account for rising inflation.
But in a world spooked by dynamic pricing, electronic shelf labels can look to some like a goblin of digitizationa symptom of late-stage Silicon Valley campaigns to streamline and optimize seemingly all elements of commerce. Even members of Congress have raised suspicions about the technology, arguing that it enables price gouging and discrimination, particularly as it becomes more common in the United States.
“Historically, when we thought about brick and mortar stores, prices were relatively stable,” Vicki Morwitz, a Columbia Business School professor who focuses on marketing and consumer behavior, tells Fast Company. “These electronic shelf tags break that assumption which makes pricing feel less stable. Even if average prices aren’t necessarily going up, that shelf instability can become a psychological flash point.”
Screenified everything
A handful of companies sell this technology as part of broader enterprise software packages. Theres Pricer, a Swedish firm, and Vusion, headquartered in France. Solum operates out of South Korea, and Opticon, known for barcode scanners, is also in the mix. Electronic shelf labels can also be bought, ahem, off the shelf and integrated into a stores Bluetooth networkno enterprise startup required.
The pitch for these devices is exactly what unsettles so many shoppers: Electronic shelf labels make it much easier for stores to change prices dynamically and more frequently. The companies that manufacture and deploy these tools say there are legitimate reasons to do so. For example, a store might raise prices if suppliers increase costs, or cut them quickly when a product is nearing its expiration date.
ESLs also allow chains to keep prices consistent across locations and respond more quickly to competitors (especially valuable at a time when shoppers are already carrying smartphones to compare prices between stores). Most consumers today are used to either doing their own scanning or use ChatGPT or Gemini to find the best offer or use price comparison sites, says Pricer’s Wikander.
Then theres labor. Employees might spend hours replacing labels for a price surge or sale. The idea is to liberate people from very tedious tasks in a store. Changing prices could be one. Launching promotions could be one, argues Loc Oumier, a marketing executive with Vusion. There are also regulatory considerations: France, for instance, passed a law mandating that prices at checkout match advertised prices on aisles, which pushed stores in that country to adopt the technology, says Wikander.
They are now rolling out more broadly in the United States, especially at large chains. Vusion says its labels are in use at Fresh Market, Mattress Firm, and Leons in Canada. Walmart, which declined to comment for this story, announced in 2024 that it would begin installing electronic shelf labels, with plans to bring Vusions technology to more than 2,000 stores by the end of 2026. Tests or deployments have appeared in Whole Foods, Schnucks, and even smaller retailers like Westside Market.
The reception can be frosty. While there are some scenarios, like from Uber rides and airline tickets, where consumers have come to accept rapidly changing costs, the practice often feels jarring. That tension was evident in 2024, when Wendys faced backlash after announcing plans to install digital menu boards and later promised it wouldn’t introduce surge pricing for burgers. Shoppers also worry about price gouging, where retailers spike prices during emergencies. Exploiting consumers when they have no real alternatives or limited alternatives, says Columbia’s Morwitz. The problem is consumers may feel exploited long before an economist would say they are.
There is also the understandable anxiety that the technology is designed to cut jobs. Some workers, as reported in The Nation, say the labels do not simplify their work but replace one kind of labor with another form of algorithmic babysitting. Unlike paper tags, screens can break, and computer programs fall victim to bugs and internet outages. Employees at one chain store operated by Kroger, which has also deployed the tech, have apparently complained that the labels heat up stores. (Kroger did not respond to Fast Company‘s request for comment.)
Concerns reach D.C.
Lawmakers have taken notice. Democratic Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania wrote to Kroger after the company announced it would introduce the technology, amid accusations that it was using facial recognition to show different customers different prices. In a letter of response obtained by Fast Company, Kroger defended the rollout, saying ESLs helped it manage the 1.3 billion price changes it implements each year and freed up associates to assist customers. Paula Walsh,Krogers director of retail operations, denied in the letter that the company was using facial recognition or collecting personal information from customers through the tags.
Kroger dodged my questions but confirmed my key concerns: Its using electronic shelf labels to change grocery prices in real-time and collect data that could be used to jack up grocery prices for Americans, Warren tells Fast Company. Ill keep pushing to make sure consumers arent being exploited while they work hard to put food on the table.
Wikander, for his part, dismisses the idea that retailers would use the technology that way. Just because you have the possibility of screwing your customers doesn’t mean that retailers will do that,” he says. “I don’t think retailers would typically do it, because the consumers are smarter than that. Wikander says it takes a typical business around a year or two and that, while the investment upfront is big, the labels last for many years.
Indeed, for all the eeriness surrounding the labels, research shows that it might not be much of a change, price wise, for either consumers or businesses. Ioannis Stamatopoulos, a business professor at the University of Texas at Austin, says there is little evidence that digital shelf labels lead to significant price swings. He pointed to a 2025 study involving an American grocery store that found no evidence of the practice, and another involving an international grocery store that showed that prices tended to decline, particularly for items with short shelf lives.
Much of his research, at least, suggests that the labels are most effective at stopping food waste, since it makes it easier for stores to offer sales on products like bananas and strawberries when theyre about to go bad.
For now, the future of grocery shopping may look almost exactly like the pastexcept the price tag is oh-so-faintly glowing.
Meta announced on February 10 that it’s introducing a new AI animation feature that lets users turn their still profile photos into AI-generated looping videos. It reads like an uncanny valley version of yesteryear’s Boomerang.
The option to animate appears when users click “Animate profile picture” on their Facebook avatars, and the feature gives a limited set of animation options, including party hat, confetti, wave, and heart, in which a photo’s subject makes a heart shape with their hands. Meta says there will be additional options in the future for “seasonal moments and special events.”
[Image: Meta]
The tech is imperfect and can only work with what it’s got. Meta says for best results, photos should show a single person with their face clearly visible and holding no other objects. Some users may find it too uncanny valley to see a fake video of themselves, but there are other options, too.
The company also launched the ability to restyle photos with Meta AI by filtering posts with aesthetics like “anime,” “illustrated,” or “glowy,” or by generating artificial backdrops on pictures. Text posts can also receive animated backdrops under the new updates.
[Image: Meta]
Response online to the idea of AI-animated Facebook avatars ranged from indifference to eye rolls over more AI content no one asked for. Some listeners have responded similarly to AI-generated animations applied to album artwork on Apple Music. For apps looking to integrate AI into their products, animating pre-existing content is low-hanging fruit, but whether or not it takes off remains in question.
[Image: Meta]
The new AI features, however, do fit in with CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s vision for AI as laid out on last month’s earnings call. In short, he wants more of it.
“Today our apps feel like algorithms that recommend content,” Zuckerberg said. “Soon, you’ll open our apps and you’ll have an AI that understands you, and also happens to be able to show you great content or even generate great personalized content for you.”
Meta, which is now along with Google’s YouTube in a landmark trial over accusations their apps are engineered to be addictive for children, has integrated Meta AI into its apps through AI search bars and chatbots. Last year it launched a stand-alone app called Vibes that’s designed with an all-AI content feed.
By adding an easy preset way to animate profile photos with AI, it’s bringing the technology to one of the most public-facing personal spaces for users on the platform.
James Van Der Beek was one of the biggest stars of the late 1990s and early 2000s. His family still couldn’t afford the cost of cancer.
The actor, 48, best known for his portrayal of Dawson Leery in the 90s hit Dawson’s Creek, died Wednesday.
Van Der Beek’s passing comes a little more than a year after he announced on social media that he was battling colorectal cancer, which he was diagnosed with in 2023. And while the actor and father’s untimely death is undeniably tragic, there’s another heartbreaking piece of the story to be told. His family was desperately struggling to afford the cost of his cancer treatment.
Despite having enjoyed a successful careerwhich included hits like Varsity Blues (1999) and The Rules of Attraction (2002), as well as playing the lead role in a popular TV drama for six seasonsthe actor still spent the final years of his life struggling financially.
Last year, Van Der Beek teamed up with the auction house Propstore to sell his personal collection of memorabilia, wardrobe items, and set pieces from Dawson’s Creek and his most notable films to raise money for his treatment.
“I’ve been storing these treasures for years, waiting for the right time to do something with them. And with all of the recent unexpected twists and turns life has presented recently, it’s clear that the time is now,” Van Der Beek told People magazine at the time. According to The Hollywood Reporter, the auction raised around $47,000.
His plight begs the question: If one of the most successful actors of the late 1990s and early 2000s can’t afford cancer treatment in the United States, who can? According to a 2022 survey from the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN), not many. Per the survey, more than 70% of respondents said they made significant lifestyle changes in order to afford their care. And more than half (51%) went into medical debt due to treatment.
The statistics were worse for certain groups, with women more likely to report medical debt than men (57% versus 36%), and Black Americans more likely to go into debt than white Americans (62% versus 52%). Likewise, states with fewer people enrolled in Medicaid had higher rates of medical debt due to cancer (58% compared with 49% in states with expanded Medicaid offerings). But overall, almost three-quarters of the cancer patients surveyed were worried about being able to afford the cost of their current care, as well as costs that may stack up in the future (73%).
On Wednesday, amid the tributes and heartfelt words, a GoFundMe page dedicated to the actor’s family also showed up online. The page, which GoFundMe told Fast Company has been verified, explained that the family has been under “significant financial strain” due to Van Der Beek’s medical expenses.
“In the wake of this loss, Kimberly and the children are facing an uncertain future,” it said. “The costs of Jamess medical care and the extended fight against cancer have left the family out of funds. They are working hard to stay in their home and to ensure the children can continue their education and maintain some stability during this incredibly difficult time.”
At present, the page has raised over $1.4 million for his wife and six kids.
The efforts being made for the actor’s family may be touching. They are happening, in part, because the actor was well loved. Shortly after his death was made public, the tributes from friends and colleagues began pouring in. One belief, which seemed to be shared by those who knew him, was how deeply genuine and kind he was, with many describing him as the antithesis of everything Hollywood actors are known to be.
“There are people in this industry who are talented. Some who are charismatic. A few who are generous,” wrote actress Alyssa Milano. “And then there were the rare onesthe truly kind and thoughtful. James was the rare kind. He showed up for his people. He listened. He cared.” She went on to call him a “unicorn of a man.” The sentiments were echoed by many other actors he grew up alongside, including Katie Holmes and Melissa Joan Hart.
In the end, the outpouring of love for Van Der Beek underscores both how deeply he was valued and how precarious illness remains in the United States, even for those who seem outwardly successful. That his family needed to rely on auctions and crowdfunding to survive a cancer diagnosis is not an anomaly, but a reflection of a system where serious illness often comes with financial ruin attached.
January filled our inboxes with productivity advice. Set stretch goals! Think bigger! Dream audaciously! What was conspicuously absent from all that exhortation was any practical guidance on how to move from grand vision to daily action without becoming paralyzed by the enormity of what we’ve committed to.
And now, its February.
Here’s a counterintuitive truth I’ve learned from decades of navigating complex creative challenges: The secret to tackling big, hairy, audacious goals (BHAG) isn’t summoning more willpower or grinding harder. It’s learning to approach complexity the way babies learn to eat solid food: one tiny, digestible bite at a time.
I call it the Baby Food Method.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/i-16x9-figure-thinking.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/i-16x9-figure-thinking_0b545c.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cem\u003EWonderRigor Newsletter\u003C\/em\u003E","dek":"Want more insights, tools, and invitations from Dr. Natalie Nixon about applying creativity for meaningful business results and the future of work? Subscribe \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/urldefense.proofpoint.com\/v2\/url?u=https-3A__figure-2D8-2Dthinking-2Dllc.kit.com_sign-2Dup\u0026amp;d=DwMFaQ\u0026amp;c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM\u0026amp;r=xHenyQfyc6YcuCNMBsOvfYGQILM1d1ruredVZikn4HE\u0026amp;m=F383gnrChFhYKPhcpNHI1hY3o58IHIn_LkB5QJDrs3G5Wfft-DcucUO4UEmGO7GZ\u0026amp;s=JlJm7GyKCJvPW0jyrsfTFtinteKDitN13vfPZiuJnP8\u0026amp;e=\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 rel=\u0022noreferrer noopener\u0022\u003Ehere\u003C\/a\u003E for the free WonderRigor newsletter at Figure8Thinking.com","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"http:\/\/Figure8Thinking.com","theme":{"bg":"#3b3f46","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#6e8ba6","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91470060,"imageMobileId":91470061,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Why your brain rebels against big goals
When you declare a massive objective- launch a company, write a book, transform your organization’s culture- your brain doesn’t throw a parade. It throws up barriers! Neuroscience tells us that ambiguity and uncertainty trigger the same stress responses as physical threat. Your amygdala can’t distinguish between “I need to escape this predator” and “I have no idea how to execute this strategic pivot.”
This is why so many January resolutions collapse by February. The goal itself becomes a source of anxiety rather than motivation. The solution isn’t to dream smaller. It’s to digest smarter.
The Baby Food Principle
Think about how infants transition from liquid to solid food. No parent hands a six-month-old a steak and says, “Figure it out.” Instead, they puree single ingredients into smooth, manageable portions. Carrots become orange mush. Peas become green paste. One new taste at a time, until gradually the palate, and the digestive system, can handle increasing complexity.
Your audacious goals deserve the same graduated approach.
The Baby Food Method works in three stages: puree, introduce, and integrate.
Stage one: puree the complexity
Before you can act on a big goal, you need to break it down into its most fundamental components, the equivalent of pureeing that carrot. This isn’t the same as creating a project plan or building a Gantt chart. It’s more elemental than that.
Ask yourself: What are the irreducible units of this ambition? If your goal is to write a book, the puree might be: capture one idea worth exploring. Not “write Chapter One.” Not even “outline the book.” Just: find one compelling thought and get it out of your head.
When I left a 16-year academic career to become an entrepreneur, I didn’t start by building a business plan. I started by having one conversation with someone who’d made a similar leap. One conversation. That was my puree.
Stage two: introduce new elements gradually
Babies don’t eat pureed carrots forever. Once they’ve mastered one food, theyre introduced to another. Then you start combining- carrots with sweet potato, apple with banana. The complexity builds incrementally, and each successful integration expands capacity for the next.
Apply this to your BHAG. Once you’ve captured that one idea, introduce the next element: share it with someone whose perspective you trust. Then another: test it against a real-world problem. Each small introduction builds your tolerance for the ambiguity that initially triggered resistance.
This is where I see leaders stumble most often. They puree beautifully, break their goal into components, and then they try to swallow everything at once! They mistake “understanding the pieces” for “being ready to execute them simultaneously.” Your nervous system doesn’t work that way. Neither does sustainable progress.
Stage three: integrate toward solid food
Eventually, a child graduates to actual table food. They’ve developed the motor skills, the digestive capacity, and the palate sophistication to handle complexity. The same progression applies to creative execution.
Integration means combining your mastered elements into increasingly ambitious iterations. That one conversation becomes five conversations, which reveal patterns, which suggest a framework, which informs a proposal, which shapes a pilot project. At no point do you face the full weight of “build a business.” You face only the next natural increment of what you’ve already proven you can handle.
A practical application
Here’s how the Baby Food Method might work for a common goal: transforming your team’s approach to innovation.
Puree: Host one 15-minute “what if” session with your team. No agenda beyond exploring one assumption you’ve never questioned.
Introduce: Add a second element, perhaps a “So what?” follow-up the next week, where you examine whether any of those “what ifs” have practical relevance.
Integrate: Combine the pattern into a monthly rhythm. Then invite a cross-functional colleague to join. Then pilot one small experiment that emerged from the discussions.
Twelve months from now, you may find you’ve built an innovation culture. And not because you announced “We’re becoming innovative!” but because you fed your organization one digestible bite at a time.
The gift of graduated ambition
Th Baby Food Method isn’t about lowering your sights. It’s about respecting the neuroscience of how humans actually change. We don’t transform through declarations. We transform through accumulated micro-actions that gradually rewire what we believe we’re capable of.
Those early bites build what I call your inventory of courage. Each small success deposits evidence that you can handle complexity. When you eventually face the full weight of your audacious goal, you’re not starting from scratch. You’re drawing on months of proven capability.
So remember, don’t just set the big goal. Puree it. What’s the smallest, most digestible first bite you could take this week? Start there.
The steak can wait. The puree is where transformation begins.
{"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/i-16x9-figure-thinking.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2026\/01\/i-16x9-figure-thinking_0b545c.jpg","eyebrow":"","headline":"\u003Cem\u003EWonderRigor Newsletter\u003C\/em\u003E","dek":"Want more insights, tools, and invitations from Dr. Natalie Nixon about applying creativity for meaningful business results and the future of work? Subscribe \u003Ca href=\u0022https:\/\/urldefense.proofpoint.com\/v2\/url?u=https-3A__figure-2D8-2Dthinking-2Dllc.kit.com_sign-2Dup\u0026amp;d=DwMFaQ\u0026amp;c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM\u0026amp;r=xHenyQfyc6YcuCNMBsOvfYGQILM1d1ruredVZikn4HE\u0026amp;m=F383gnrChFhYKPhcpNHI1hY3o58IHIn_LkB5QJDrs3G5Wfft-DcucUO4UEmGO7GZ\u0026amp;s=JlJm7GyKCJvPW0jyrsfTFtinteKDitN13vfPZiuJnP8\u0026amp;e=\u0022 target=\u0022_blank\u0022 rel=\u0022noreferrer noopener\u0022\u003Ehere\u003C\/a\u003E for the free WonderRigor newsletter at Figure8Thinking.com","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Learn More","ctaUrl":"http:\/\/Figure8Thinking.com","theme":{"bg":"#3b3f46","text":"#ffffff","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#6e8ba6","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91470060,"imageMobileId":91470061,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
As the Trump administration prepares to close the Kennedy Center for a two-year renovation, the head of Washington’s performing arts center has warned its staff about impending cuts that will leave “skeletal teams.”In a Tuesday memo obtained by the Associated Press, Kennedy Center President Richard Grenell told staff that “departments will obviously function on a much smaller scale with some units totally reduced or on hold until we begin preparations to reopen in 2028,” promising “permanent or temporary adjustments for most everyone.”Over the next few months, he wrote, department heads would be “evaluating the needs and making the decisions as to what these skeletal teams left in place during the facility and closure and construction phase will look like.” Grenell said leadership would “provide as much clarity and advance notice as possible.”The Kennedy Center is slated to close in early July. Few details about what the renovations will look like have been released since President Donald Trump announced his plan at the beginning of February. Neither Trump nor Grenell have provided evidence to support claims about the building being in disrepair, and last October, Trump had pledged it would remain open during renovations.“Upon the completion of these upgrades, Americans and visitors from all over the world, for generations to come, will enjoy the Center and marvel at its spectacular features and design,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement Wednesday.It’s unclear exactly how many employees the center currently has, but a 2025 tax filing said nearly 2,500 people were employed during the 2023 calendar year. A request for comment sent to Kennedy Center Arts Workers United, which represents artists and arts professionals affiliated with the center, wasn’t immediately returned.Leading performers and groups have left or canceled appearances since Trump ousted the center’s leadership a year ago and added his own name to the building in December. The Washington Post, which first reported about Grenell’s memo, has also cited significant drops in ticket revenue, whichalong with private philanthropycomprises the center’s operating budget. Officials have yet to say whether such long-running traditions as the Mark Twain Award for comedy or the honors ceremony for lifetime contributions to the arts will continue while the center is closed.The Kennedy Center was first conceived as a national cultural facility during the Eisenhower administration in the 1950s. President John F. Kennedy led a fundraising initiative, and the yet-to-be-built center was named in his honor following his assassination. It opened in 1971 and has become a preeminent showcase for theater, music, and dramatic performances, enjoying bipartisan backing until Trump’s return to office last year.“This renovation represents a generational investment in our future,” Grenell wrote. “When we reopen, we will do so as a stronger organizationone that honors our legacy while expanding our impact.”
Hillel Italie, AP National Writer
