As national Democrats search for a unifying theme ahead of the fall’s midterm elections, a California proposal to levy a hefty tax on billionaires is turning some of the party’s leading figures into adversaries just when Democrats can least afford division from within.Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders traveled to Los Angeles on Wednesday to campaign for the tax proposal, which has Silicon Valley in an uproar, with tech titans threatening to leave the state. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is among its outspoken opponents, warning that it could leave government finances in crisis and put the state at a competitive disadvantage nationally.At an evening rally near downtown, Sanders told cheering supporters that the nation has reached a crisis point in which “massive income and wealth inequality” has concentrated power over business, technology, government and the media within the “billionaire class,” while millions of working-class Americans struggle to pay household bills.He said enactment of the proposed tax would show “we are still living in a democratic society where the people have some power.”“Enough is enough,” Sanders said to a pulse of applause. “The billionaire class cannot have it all. This nation belongs to all of us.”The senator, a democratic socialist, is popular in California he won the 2020 Democratic presidential primary in the state in a runaway. He’s been railing for decades against what he characterizes as wealthy elites and the growing gap between rich and poor.
Health care union is pushing proposed tax to fund services
A large health care union is attempting to place a proposal before voters in November that would impose a one-time 5% tax on the assets of billionaires including stocks, art, businesses, collectibles and intellectual property to backfill federal funding cuts to health services for lower-income people that were signed by President Donald Trump last year.Debate on the proposal is unfolding at a time when voters in both parties express unease with economic conditions and what the future will bring in a politically divided nation. Distrust of government and its ability to get things done is widespread.The proposal has created a rift between Newsom and prominent members of his party’s progressive wing, including Sanders, who has said the tax should be a template for other states.“The issues that are really going to be motivating Democrats this year, affordability and the cost of health care and cuts to schools, none of these would be fixed by this proposal. If fact, they would be made worse,” said Brian Brokaw, a longtime Newsom adviser who is leading a political committee opposing the tax.
Split among Democrats comes as midterm elections loom
Midterm elections typically punish the party in control of the White House, and Democrats are hoping to gain enough U.S. House seats to overturn the chamber’s slim Republican majority. In California, rejiggered House districts approved by voters last year are expected to help the party pick up as many as five additional seats, which would leave Republicans in control of just a handful of districts.“It is always better for a party to have the political debate focused on issues where you are united and the other party is divided,” said Eric Schickler, a professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley. “Having an issue like this where Newsom and Sanders among others are on different sides is not ideal.”With the idea of taxing billionaires popular among many voters “this can be a good way for Democratic candidates to rally that side and break through from the pack,” Schickler added in an email.It’s already trickled into the race for governor and contests down the ballot. Republicans Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton, both candidates for governor, have warned the tax would erase jobs. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, a Democratic candidate for governor, has said inequality starts at the federal level, where the tax code is riddled with loopholes.Sanders did not mention Newsom in his nearly 30-minute speech but name-checked a handful of billionaires, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Google co-founder Sergey Brin, as examples of a wealthy elite that in many respects “no longer sees itself as part of American society.”
Sanders urges support for billionaires tax
Citing protests against federal immigration raids in Minnesota, he urged the crowd to support the tax, saying Californians can show that “when we stand together, we can take on the oligarchs and the billionaires.”Coinciding with the Sanders visit and an upcoming state Democratic convention this weekend, opponents are sending out targeted emails and social media ads intended to sway party insiders.It’s not clear if the proposal will make the ballot supporters must gather more than 870,000 petition signatures to place it before voters.The nascent contest already has drawn out a tangle of competing interests, with millions of dollars flowing into political committees.Newsom has long opposed state-level wealth taxes, believing such levies would be disadvantageous for the world’s fourth-largest economy. At a time when California is strapped for cash and he is considering a 2028 presidential run, he is trying to block the proposal before it reaches the ballot.Analysts say an exodus of billionaires could mean a loss of hundreds of millions of tax dollars for the nation’s most populous state. But supporters say the funding is needed to offset federal cuts that could leave many Californians without vital services.
Michael R. Blood, AP Political Writer
Baby care brand Frida is facing online backlash after screenshots of sexual innuendos in its marketing materials began circulating on social media.
Frida, which describes itself as the brand that gets parents, sells a range of baby care, fertility, and postpartum products through major retailers, including Target.
Last week, an X user shared images of several products packaging, writing: sexual jokes to market baby products is actually sick and twisted @fridababy this is absolutely appalling and disgusting. The post has since gained almost five million views on X.
Among the examples highlighted is a social media graphic promoting the companys 3-in-1 True Temp thermometer. The image shows the device next to a babys bottom, accompanied by the caption: This is the closest your husbands gonna get to a threesome.
sexual jokes to market baby products is actually sick and twisted @fridababy this is absolutely appalling and disgusting pic.twitter.com/cXhiksoaY8— stace (@staystaystace) February 12, 2026
Other screenshots highlighted by critics include phrases such as How about a quickie? printed on a thermometer box. An apparent Instagram post from 2020 that has since resurfaced also features a baby with what seems to be snot on its face. The caption reads: What happens when you pull out too early.
@pink3424 What do yall think? #fridababy #marketing #babyproducts White blank page Mumford and sons – m a r e k s
Parents and critics online have accused the company of sexualizing children in its marketing choices, with posts on parenting forums calling for boycotts of the companys products. A Change.org petition to hold Frida Baby accountable has more than 4,000 verified signatures at the time of writing.
Not everyone agrees with the criticism. IMO, this is akin to Disney putting in jokes that only parents will get, one Reddit user wrote. They know who the decision-makers are. Frida is marketing to the parents. Others argue the tone crosses a clear line.
A statement from Frida emailed to multiple publications reads in part: Our products are designed for babies, but our voice has always been written for the adults caring for them. Our intention has consistently been to make awkward and difficult experiences feel lighter, more honest, and less isolating for parents.
It continued: That said, humor is personal. Whats funny to one parent can feel like too much to another. Fast Company has reached out to Frida Baby for comment.
A scroll through Fridas social media shows the brand has long leaned into a deliberately risqué tone, often relying on double entendres and innuendo to target parents. In April, it teased a new product on Instagram with the line, Take your top off. Its current Show us what your boobs can do campaign aims to destigmatize breastfeeding by spotlighting what it calls milk-making boobs.
View this post on Instagram
As more brands adopt informal, attention-grabbing voices online, the lesson here is clear: context matters.
When Sergey Brin spoke at Stanford Universitys school of engineering centennial celebration recently, the Google co-founder was open about his career mistakes.
When you have your cool new wearable device idea, really fully bake it before you have a cool stunt involving skydiving and airships, he joked, referring to the infamous Google Glass flop. But one misstep he admitted to might surprise a lot of people who dream of the day they can quit their 9-to-5.
I actually retired like a month before COVID hit, and it was the worst decision, Brin said. He was such a failure at retirement that he has since returned to everyday work at Google, spearheading its efforts to catch up in the AI race.
Going back to work just for fun might sound like a uniquely billionaire move. But a stack of research suggests that Brins dissatisfaction in retirement and subsequent decision to return to work isnt that uncommon. His story contains an essential but often overlooked lesson that can help anyone better plan their retirement.
Why Sergey Brin unretired
Like many people, Brin had a relaxing vision for his post-working life. I was gonna sit in cafés and study physics, which was my passion at the time, he told the Stanford audience. Fate intervened in the form of Covid. But Brin wasnt dissatisfied with his retirement just because he was locked in his house all day.
I was just kind of stewing and felt myself spiraling, not being sharp, he recalled. After the Google offices partially reopened, he started going in occasionally.
Eventually, he started spending more and more time on what later became called Gemini, which is super-exciting. To be able to have that technical creative outlet, I think thats very rewarding, as opposed to if Id stayed retired. I think that wouldve been a big mistake, he added.
Retirement struggles arent just for billionaires
Brins issues with retirement are his own. More people dream of days on the golf course than pouring over physics textbooks. But Brins feelings of listlessness and intellectual decline are not at all exclusive to billionaires.
When researchers from European business school Insead surveyed entrepreneurs who had gone through a big exit and become financially independent, they discovered many decided to retire. And many soon regretted it.
It is perfectly normal to discover that life post-financial freedom isnt as happy as one might have expected it to be, the researchers summed up.
Its not just restless entrepreneurs. Another recent study of retired Japanese salarymen revealed similar patterns. Having given so much of themselves to their careers, they often felt unmoored and purposeless when they left their jobs.
Their retirement was characterized by boredomhaving nowhere to go to or having nothing to do. The sense of boredom led to a sense of isolation and low confidence in old age, explained study author Shiori Shakuto.
Adherents of the popular financial independence, retire early (FIRE) movement scrimp and sacrifice to retire early. Only for many of them to discover their dream of post-work life does not match reality. Several have written about the experience.
If youve spent decades in a career working 40 hours a week, its hard to suddenly stop working. Many early retirees feel uncomfortable feeling unproductive. As a result, they unretire to work on something meaningful. Its easy to get bored with 40 hours of extra free time a week, wrote ex-FIRE early retiree Sam Dogen in one such blog post.
A good retirement isnt all about money
All of this evidence, as well as Sergey Brins experience, point in the same direction. We tend to think of a successful retirement as a numbers game. If you save enough to be comfortable and indulge in whatever activities you enjoy, the end of working life should represent the start of the golden years.
But all the people involved in these studies were set financially. Brin has a net worth north of $200 billion. Clearly, money is not the issue. The problem is purpose.
As Brins fellow billionaire Bill Gates recently wrote: As life expectancies go up, many people are living for years and even decades after they stop working. That sounds like a luxury, and it is in a lot of waysbut it is also a lot of time to fill.
Gates fills his time with philanthropy. Brin is back to building AI. The rest of us will probably not spend our post-work years doing anything as grand. But the same truth applies. If you think only about finances and not enough about how to meaningfully fill your days in retirement, youre probably not going to enjoy yourself much.
You also might, in Brins words, feel less sharp. Science has shown having purpose helps stave off dementia as well as boosts happiness.
Sergey Brins lesson for te rest of us
This doesnt mean we should all work until we drop, of course. Instead, experts insist the essential takeaway is the need to plan for meaning as well as money.
Its never too early, or too late, to start thinking about what you would want to do after achieving financial freedom. What would you do with your money and time? the Insead researchers ask.
So the next time you check the balance of your retirement savings account, take a moment to think not just about how much you will save, but also how you will spend your time. As Sergey Brins unretirement reminds us, even billions of dollars cant guarantee you a good retirement if you dont plan for purpose in your post-work life, too.
Inc.
This article originally appeared on Fast Companys sister website, Inc.com.
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.
They say job hunting is just like dating. Some are taking that advice literally.
Job market so bad Im using Hinge to find work, one job seeker posted on TikTok in December.
Sharing a look at her dating app profile, in place of a photo of her best angle, she instead uploaded a snapshot of her résumé. Answering the prompt a life goal of mine, she wrote to find work in the creative industries. Since it was posted in December, the video has gained almost a quarter of a million views.
In a recent update, the TikTok user shared that Hinge has since taken down her profile for breaking their policies. But she is not the only one.
Others are also using this unconventional method to get their profiles in front of hiring managers. One claimed to land a six-figure job from a match on Bumble.
Sometimes I use hinge to match with people in my career field and ask if theyre hiring, another posted.
Its called being resourceful, innovative and bold, they wrote in the caption.
As sites like LinkedIn are overwhelmed with applications and employers rely on AI résumé screeners, applicants are finding creative ways to get their foot in the door. In a recent Glassdoor community pool, 29% of respondents said that they were using or considered using dating apps for career purposes.
While networking on dating apps isnt new, it appears to be a growing trend. A ResumeBuilder.com survey of about 2,200 U.S. dating site customers in October also found a third of dating app users had used the platforms for job or career-related purposes in the past year. Nearly one in 10 say it was the primary reason they used dating apps, with the most common platforms being Tinder, Bumble, and Facebook Dating.
Its not just those hoping to break into entry-level positions. Almost half of those using dating apps for job-related purposes reported incomes of more than $200,000.
For many, the strategy has paid off43% say they gained mentorship or career advice from networking on the apps, while 39% landed an interview, 37% received a referral or lead, and 37% received a job offer.
One survey participant called the new job-hunting practice weird but effective, while another said, It worked, but you need the audacity to ask.
Of course, the lines quickly become blurred when seeking employment in an environment designed for hookups and romantic pursuits. Especially if theres a power balance at play.
But desperate times call for desperate measures.
It now takes more than 23 weeks on average for an unemployed person in the U.S. to find a new job. For one in four unemployed people, or 1.8 million Americans, they are still job hunting six months later.
Long-term unemployment is now at its highest level in three years. Under these circumstances, its no surprise job seekers are turning to any means necessary to find new connections.
And hey, its better than the inverse: anyone using LinkedIn as a personal dating pool.
The annual NFL tradition of firing the head coach as the season ends continues. This year, 10 top coaches got the axe, a staggering 31% of all NFL coaches. And they include football legends like John Harbaugh, after 18 seasons with the Baltimore Ravens, and Sean McDermott, who took the Buffalo Bills to the playoffs in eight out of nine seasons.
Firing the head coachjust like firing the CEO in the business worldis the easy answer, and it looks good in the media: decisive, forward-looking, taking action. But, most times, this act alone falls short of fixing the problems that contributed to an organizations failures.
PART OF A SYSTEM
In reality, the CEO is part of a system, and its the system that matters. You can have a B player CEO with a great team and board and deliver significant performance and culture gains. Alternatively, you can have an A player CEO with a weak board and team and fail spectacularly. If you only focus on fixing the CEO, youre not focused on the right problem and cant get to the right solution.
Yet CEO turnover is at its highest level in more than a decade, according to a 2026 Spencer Stuart study reported in The Wall Street Journal. In fact, approximately one in nine CEOs were replaced in 1,500 large companies in 2025, including the CEOs of Disney, HP, Lululemon, PayPal and Procter & Gamble.
Disney illustrates the downside of this. Just ask Bob Chapek. Sure, he had a rough three years as CEO of Walt Disney Co. before the board summarily fired him and brought back his predecessor, Bob Iger. Disney stock, at $125 a share when Chapek took over in February 2020, had fallen almost 40% to $90 by the time he got the axe on November 20, 2022. Iger arguably is one of the best CEOs in decades, and he rebuilt the company with incredibly successful acquisitions (Pixar, Marvel Entertainment, Star Wars, the Muppets). But his two years back at the top were less than stellar: Disney shares are up 17% since he took over, while the S&P media and entertainment index rose 99% in the same period.
Obviously, Chapek alone wasnt the problem, just as Iger alone wasnt the solution. Rarely is the executive at the very top solely responsible for what went wrong. It owes to a multitude of weaknesses: illogical organization models, conflicting agendas, turf battles, reporting structures that dont align with the company strategy, and communication lapses.
There is rarely an objective assessment done ensuring the board is aligned with a new CEO or a new market entry for what success looks like, and the structures and talent required to achieve that success. This is especially true in the unforgiving and bottom-line-obsessed world of private equity (PE). The biggest myth in PE (and pro football) is that if you get the CEO right, and you get the strategy right, you will get the numbers you want on the scoreboard.
Every CEO is encumbered by their surroundings. A PE board is possibly 50% of the CEOs success or failure, and in my experience, a lack of alignment between how each part defines success is a root issue. Leaders of PE-funded businesses must also operate under very compressed timeframes that leave little room for exiling and replacing a CEO. By the time the CEO has been exiled, it can be even harderor too lateto drive a successful outcome.
A TEAM APPROACH
This is why, again, even B player CEOs with strong teams and supportive boards find success, while A-rated commanders often falter with the wrong organization structure and fractured boards. The CEO is but one part of a whole system that must play well together, including the board, key team members, business partners, core customers, and suppliers.
Yet highly intelligent and competitive people often miss their biggest and most controllable opportunity to ensure their CEO is positioned for success. That is to better manage their own decision-making, accountability, and communication as board members and teammates and ensure the organization is designed for success.
Alice Mann is founder and CEO of Mann Partners.
AI is helping teams build software and tools faster than everbut that doesn’t mean we’re building smarter. I’ve seen entire prototypes spin up in a day, thanks to AI coding assistants. But when you ask how they were built, or whether they’re secure, you get a lot of blank stares.
That’s the gap emerging now, between what’s possible with AI, and what’s actually ready to scale.
What looks like progress can quickly become a liability. Especially when no one’s quite sure how the thing was built in the first place.
Before you go all-in on AI-assisted coding, check these five fault lines:
1. You can’t govern what you can’t see.
Perhaps the most overlooked risk of AI-assisted coding isn’t technical, its operational. In the rush to deploy AI tools, many companies have unintentionally created a layer of “shadow engineering.” Developers use these tools without official policies or visibility, leaving leaders in the dark about what’s being built and how.
As Mark Curphey, cofounder of Crash Override, told me: “AI is accelerating everything. But without insight into what’s being built, by whom, or where it’s going, you’re scaling chaos with no controls.”
Thats why visibility cant be an afterthought; its what makes both governance and acceleration possible. Platforms like Crash Override are designed to surface how AI is being used across the engineering org, offering a real-time view into whats being generated, where its going, and whether its introducing risk or value.
And that visibility doesnt exist in isolation. Tools like Jellyfish help connect development work to business goals, while Codacy monitors code quality. But none of these tools can do their job well if you dont know whats happening under the hood.
Visibility isnt about surveillance, it’s about building on a solid foundation.
2. Productivity is up. So is your risk exposure.
A 2025 study Apiiro, an application security firm, found that AI-assisted developers are shipping 3 to 4 times more code with GenAI tools. But they’re also generating 10 times more security risks.
These weren’t just syntax errors. The increase included hidden access risks, insecure code patterns, exposed credentials, and deep architectural flawsissues far more complex and costly to resolve over time.
3. AI-generated code is a potential legal risk.
Because AI coding tools are trained on vast libraries of public code, they can generate snippets governed by restrictive open-source licenses. That raises important compliance questions, especially with licenses like GPL or AGPL, which could, in theory, require companies to open-source any software built on top of that output.
But its worth clarifying: No company has been sued (yet) for using AI-generated code. The lawsuits weve seen (like the GitHub Copilot class action) have targeted the AI toolmakers, not the teams using their output. And the majority of GitHubs claims were ultimately thrown out.
Still, this is a fast-evolving area with real implications. Auditboards 2025 study found that 82% of enterprise organizations were already deploying AI tools, but only 25% report having any sort of official governance in place.
That disconnect may not be a courtroom issue today, but its a visibility and audit issue that leaders cant afford to ignore.
4. Speed is great, until only one person knows how it works.
The “bus factor” has long described a worst-case scenario: What happens if the one person who knows how your software works suddenly disappears?
“Powered by AI, an average developer becomes 100 times more productive. A superstar becomes 1,000 times,” Curphey noted. “Now imagine two of them are pushing all of that code into production. If they disappear, the company’s in serious trouble.”
But the goal isnt zero riskits coverage. Just like test cases help ensure software is resilient, teams need to ensure knowledge and ownership are distributed. That includes understanding whos building what, where the AI is involved, and how those systems will be maintained over time.
Ironically, GenAI can help with this. It can surface patterns, identify gaps, and map ownership in ways traditional tooling cant. More than just a productivity boost, it can be a tool for reducing fragility across your team and your codebase.
5. It’s easy to end up with “software slop.”
Good, scalable AI-assisted code starts with the prompt.
AI will generate exactly what you ask for. But if you don’t fully understand the technical constraints, or the risks you’re overlooking, it might give you code that looks good but has critical flaws in security or performance under the hood.
You certainly don’t have to be a developer to use these tools well. But you do need to know what you don’t know, and how to account for it. As Curphey notes in a company blog post, If you wouldnt accept that level of vagueness from a junior engineer, why would you accept it from yourself when prompting?
Otherwise, you’re moving fast and creating a kind of digital brain rot: systems that degrade over time because no one really understands how they were built.
FROM VIBE CHECK TO REALITY CHECK
The takeaway: AI may accelerate output, but it also accelerates risk. Without rigorous review and governance, you may be shipping code that functions, but isn’t structurally sound.
So while AI is changing how software gets built, we need to be sure we’re building on a solid foundation. It’s no longer enough to move fast or ship often. As leaders, we need to understand how AI is being used inside our teams, and whether the things getting built are actually stable, scalable, and secure.
Because if you don’t know what your team is using AI to build today, you may not like what you’re shipping tomorrow.
Lisa Larson-Kelley is founder and CEO of Quantious.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thursday pitched India as a central player in the global artificial intelligence ecosystem, saying the country aims to build technology at home while deploying it worldwide.“Design and develop in India. Deliver to the world. Deliver to humanity,” Modi told a gathering of some world leaders, technology executives and policymakers at the India AI Impact Summit in New Delhi.Modi’s remarks came as India one of the fastest-growing digital markets seeks to leverage its experience in building large-scale digital public infrastructure and to present itself as a cost-effective hub for AI innovation.The summit was also addressed by French President Emmanuel Macron, Google CEO Sundar Pichai and U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, who called for a $3 billion fund to help poorer countries build basic AI capacity, including skills, data access and affordable computing power.“The future of AI cannot be decided by a handful of countries, or left to the whims of a few billionaires,” Guterres said, stressing that AI must “belong to everyone.”
India aims to ramp up its AI scale
India is using the summit to position itself as a bridge between advanced economies and the Global South. Indian officials cite the country’s digital ID and online payments systems as a model for deploying AI at low cost, particularly in developing countries.“We must democratize AI. It must become a tool for inclusion and empowerment, particularly for the Global South,” Modi said.With nearly 1 billion internet users, India has become a key market for global technology companies expanding their AI businesses.Last December, Microsoft announced a $17.5 billion investment over four years to expand cloud and AI infrastructure in India. It followed Google’s $15 billion investment over five years, including plans for its first AI hub in the country. Amazon has also pledged $35 billion by 2030, targeting AI-driven digitization.India is also seeking up to $200 billion in data center investment in the coming years.The country, however, lags in developing its own large-scale AI model like U.S.-based OpenAI or China’s DeepSeek, highlighting challenges such as limited access to advanced semiconductor chips, data centers and hundreds of local languages to learn from.
The summit has faced troubles
The summit opened Monday with organizational glitches, as attendees and exhibitors reported long lines and delays, and some complained on social media that personal belongings and display items had been stolen. Organizers later said the items were recovered.Problems resurfaced Wednesday when a private Indian university was expelled from the summit after a staff member showcased a commercially available Chinese-made robotic dog while claiming it as the institution’s own innovation.The setbacks continued Thursday when Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates withdrew from a scheduled keynote address. No reason was given, though the Gates Foundation said the move was intended “to ensure the focus remains on the AI Summit’s key priorities.”Gates is facing questions over his ties to late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Associated Press
The social media trial brought by a 20-year-old Californian plaintiff known as Kaley or KGM, putting Meta and YouTube in front of a jury, has captured the worlds attention. The bellwether trial is a test case for the liability of social media platforms and how much they could be on the hook financially if found to have caused harm to their users. KGM, for her part, alleges that she faced anxiety, depression, and body image issues after using Instagram.
The proceedings could establish the first real legal boundaries for what has been up to now largely unregulated algorithmic design, determining whether amplifying harmful content amounts to negligence. A verdict against Meta or YouTube in this bellwether case could open the door to other suits, and finally force disclosure of internal research that has so far remained confidential.
The first day that Mark Zuckerberg, Metas CEO, was on the stand on February 18 was a major momentnot necessarily for what Zuckerberg said, but for the fact the case has gotten this far.
This is a significant moment in terms of these platforms finally being seen to be held to account by their own users, says Steven Buckley, lecturer in media digital and sociology at City St Georges, University of London.
While Zuckerberg withstood rigorous questioning from Mark Lanier, the lawyer representing Kaley GM, the fact that he was there at all and the case got to trial is a significant happening.
As Fast Company has previously reported, 2026 is the year that the world is getting tough on online safety, particularly for kids. And this trial is notable because it managed to sidestep the usual way social networks swerve liability: Claiming Section 230 protections, which have been in place since the mid-1990s and insulate platforms from bearing responsibility for the actions of their users.
If jurors agree that product design, rather than user behavior, is the root cause of harm, big techs decades-long legal shield could begin to fracture. That possibility alone has Silicon Valley watching nervously, with billions in potential damages on the line.
Prior to the trial beginning, Snap and TikTok settled with the claimant without admission of liability, leaving YouTube and Meta to fight the trial.
A Meta spokesperson tells Fast Company the firm strongly disagree with these allegations and are confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people,” adding that the evidence will show she faced many significant, difficult challenges well before she ever used social media.
YouTube spokesperson José Castaneda tells Fast Company: The allegations in these complaints are simply not true.
Its not particularly surprising that these large platforms are finally facing some legal repercussions from their actual users, says Buckley. A steady drumbeat of reporting, alongside other smaller legal cases, have revealed information that suggests social media can be harmful to younger users.
This case is therefore a potential watershed because the plaintiffs argue that Instagram’s and YouTube’s underlying product designfeatures like the infinite scroll, autoplay, and recommendation algorithms that serve up progressively more engaging contentconstitutes a defective product.
But most of those other cases havent received as much attention because theyve not gotten as far as this one hasnor have been as likely to succeed in some way.
Zuckerberg did not come across as someone with children’s best interests at heart, says Tama Leaver, professor of internet studies at Curtin University in Australia. Leaver contrasts Zuckerbergs performance in court with Adam Mosseri’s a few days earlier, who the researcher says had the tenacity to argue that the term addiction is being misused.
In contrast, Zuckerberg didn’t feel like someone who’d done their homework, but rather someone who was surprised they had to turn up and answer these questions, Leaver explains. If his job was to convince the listening world that he could be a trusted figure in the lives of teens and young people, then he failed.
Despite that poor performance by Zuckerberg, and despite the strength of the case in comparison to others that have gone before, some think that a decision against the social media firmsor a general movement to recognize the issues inherent with social mediacould backfire.
One concern I have is that people will think that the simple solution to many of the issues raised in these lawsuits is to simply ban under-16s from using the platforms, says Buckley. This is a woefully misguided reaction. The scientific evidence regarding the link between social media use at a young age and addiction is still not well established.
Whether the jury agrees with that assessment or not, the trial has already achieved something that years of congressional hearings and regulatory hand-wringing havent: putting the people who designed these systems under oath and making them answer difficult questionsthen be responsible for the consequences of what they say.
One of the reasons I think we have gotten to this stage is that some people have come to the conclusion that their governments are not going to do anything meaningful to hold these companies to account and so have felt compelled to take them on themselves, says Buckley. The rest of the tech industry will be watching closely to see what comes next.
Tariffs paid by midsized U.S. businesses tripled over the course of last year, new research tied to one of America’s leading banks showed on Thursday more evidence that President Donald Trump’s push to charge higher taxes on imports is causing economic disruption.The additional taxes have meant that companies that employ a combined 48 million people in the U.S. the kinds of businesses that Trump had promised to revive have had to find ways to absorb the new expense, by passing it along to customers in the form of higher prices, employing fewer workers or accepting lower profits.“That’s a big change in their cost of doing business,” said Chi Mac, business research director of the JPMorganChase Institute, which published the analysis on Thursday. “We also see some indications that they may be shifting away from transacting with China and maybe toward some other regions in Asia.”The research doesn’t say how the additional costs are flowing through the economy, but it indicates that tariffs are being paid by U.S. firms. It’s part of a growing body of economic analyses that counter the administration’s claims that foreigners pay the tariffs.The JPMorganChase Institute report used payments data to look at businesses that might lack the pricing power of large multinational companies to offset tariffs, but may be small enough to quickly change supply chains to minimize exposure to the tax increases. The companies tended to have revenues between $10 million and $1 billion with fewer than 500 employees, a category known as “middle market.”The analysis suggests that the Trump administration’s goal of becoming less directly reliant on Chinese manufacturers has been occurring. Payments to China by these companies were 20% below their October 2024 levels, but it’s unclear whether that means China is simply routing its goods through other countries or if supply chains have moved.The authors of the analysis emphasized in an interview that companies are still adjusting to the tariffs and said they plan to continue studying the issue.The Trump administration has been adamant that the tariffs are a boon for the economy, businesses, and workers. Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, lashed out on Wednesday at research by the New York Federal Reserve showing that nearly 90% of the burden for Trump’s tariffs fell on U.S. companies and consumers.“The paper is an embarrassment,” Hassett told CNBC. “It’s, I think, the worst paper I’ve ever seen in the history of the Federal Reserve system. The people associated with this paper should presumably be disciplined.”Trump increased the average tariff rate to 13% from 2.6% last year, according to the New York Fed researchers. He declared that tariffs on some items like steel, kitchen cabinets and bathroom vanities were in the national security interest of the country and declared an economic emergency to bypass Congress and impose a baseline tax on goods from much of the world last April at an event he called “Liberation Day.”The high rates provoked a financial market panic, prompting Trump to walk back his rates and then engage in talks with multiple countries that led to a set of new trade frameworks. The Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on whether Trump surpassed his legal authority by declaring an economic emergency.Trump was elected in 2024 on his promise to tame inflation, but his tariffs have contributed to voter frustration over affordability. While inflation has not spiked during Trump’s term thus far, hiring slowed sharply and a team of academic economists estimate that consumer prices were roughly 0.8 percentage points higher than they would otherwise be.
Josh Boak, Associated Press
Can AI help neurodivergent adults connect with each other? That’s the bet of a new social network called Synchrony, which believes AI and a well-designed social network with the right safeguards can reduce social atomization and calm the overwhelming cacophony of socializing online.
Launching February 19, the social network debuts during a moment when social media, chatbots, and doomscrolling has made digital communications a hot button topic for parents. No other app for the neurodiverse is focusing primarily on reducing social anxiety and encouraging friendship, says cofounder Jamie Pastrano. I think that’s the biggest piece of it, and no other app is focusing on building an authentic community.
Synchrony also has support from Starry Foundation and Autism Speaks, two large U.S. advocacy groups, and approval from the Apple App Store.
I was really blown away about what theyre trying to do, says Bobby Vossoughi, president of the Starry Foundation. These kids are isolated and their social cues are off. Theyre creating something that could really change this community’s lives for the long term.
A parenting challenge without a solution
The idea for Synchrony came from Pastrano, a former management consultant and executive sales leader, whose son, Jesse, 21, is autistic. As Jesse experienced teenagerhood, Pastrano became frustrated with the challenges she saw her son facing around the friendship gap; she saw him as a social kid, but planning, timing, even saying the appropriate thing often tripped him up. Unlike other challenges shed faced as a mother of a neurodivergent child, this one didnt seem to have a solution.
Research shows that people with autism or neuro developmental differencesroughly 1 in 5 people according to the Neurodiversity Allianceface increasing loneliness as they transition between adolescence and adulthood. New social responsibilities and expectations for life after school, combined with the loss of support systems that may have been embedded in secondary and university education, can lead to isolation.
One of the cofounders, Brittany Moser, an autism specialist who teaches at Park University in Missouri, says that shes held crying students who, forced to operate in a world thats not built for them, are desperate for social connection. She hopes this network can foster it.
Autism doesn’t end at 18, Pastrano says. There was this huge gap in services to support social, emotional, and community needs.
Pastrano sold her company in 2024 and devoted herself to solving the issue with what would become Synchrony. Part of Pastranos inspiration came from reality television. The dating show Love on the Spectrum piqued her interest, causing her to think not about romance, but about connection, friendship, and community. She even contacted a coach on the show, who suggested she get certified at the PEERS program at UCLA, which teaches social and dating skills to young adults on the spectrum.
[Image: Synchrony]
Broadly speaking, Synchrony is built with the same digital infrastructure as a dating site, but is meant for fostering friendships amid a unique population. A big part of the design challenge was making sure it was suitable for the audience, and wasnt too distracting or loud.
Profiles focus much more on interests, Pastrano says, since interests weigh much more heavily as a reason to communicate among this population. Theres also a space to list neurodiversity classifications and communication style and preferences (“I prefer text to phone calls,” or “I take a few days to reply,” etc.) as part of the effort to front-load key details. Simplified menus and colors and no ads help reduce distractions.
Pastrano also wants to respect the community and focus on healthy experiences and not push for rapid growth; users pay a monthly fee of $44.99 after a free 30-day trial, allowing the network to avoid advertisements. Part of the registration process includes two-step verificationboth the user and a trusted person, either a teacher, doctor, or parent needs to input personal details and a photo IDto make sure bad actors outside the community arent given access.
Social Coach, or ‘Seductive Cul-de-sac’
Part of Synchronys strategy is the use of Jesse (named after Pastrano’s son), marketed as an AI-powered social support tool that goes far beyond chat assist technology. By providing real-time conversation support, the chatbot aims to overcome social anxiety and a lack of confidence around socialization. Talking with Jesse online, developers claim, will bolster user self-assurance and communication skills, eventually manifesting in real life.
When Synchrony users get stuck in an online conversation, they can tap an icon to summon Jesse, who will provide editable solutions to advance or end an interaction. The AI coach offers three main options: a tool to help express yourself, that will offer solutions to continuing the conversation; a button that can help parse through the conversation to help better understand what happened, and whether something might have been meant as flirty or friendly; and a final option to protect, and offer suggestions to set boundaries and exit a conversation quietly.
Built using the Amazon Bedrock large language model and trained by Synchrony staff, Jesse is scanning conversations constantly to provide social coaching when asked.
The use of AI among the neurodivergent population has sparked the same debates as the technologys use among the population at large. Research by a team at Stanford found that an AI chatbot they developed called Noora, designed to improve communication skills, can improve empathy among users with autism. Some members of the community have claimed AI coaches have helped them with relationships and transformed their lives. At the same time, some advocacy groups have warned that chatbots emotional manipulation can be more severe for the neurodiverse, and some researhers are concerned AI might reinforce bad communication habits.
British researcher Chris Papadopoulos sums up the state of play in a recent paper, concluding that while the technology holds the potential to democratize companionship left unchecked, AI companions could become a seductive cul-de-sac, capturing autistic people in artificial relationships that stunt their growth or even lead them into harm’s way.
Amid awareness of the sometimes destructive and even deadly consequences of chatbot use, there are significant guardrails built into Jesse, says Moser, including a long list of activities and actions to avoid, like not sharing personal addresses. Jesse is also told not to dispense medical advice. Jesse is not a therapist, and as the founders are clear to note, this isnt a clinical app.
If users start asking Jesse about off-topic concepts, Moser says it will be programmed to reply something to the effect of, Hmm, I don’t know if that’s really going to help you connect with the other members. There will also be warnings if someone is spending too much time just talking with Jesse. Synchrony is launching with human moderation to provide extra safeguards.
Lynn Koegel, a professor and researcher at Stanford University who has studied autism and technology, says her team has spent time updating and changing their models of Noora, to make sure its not too harsh, such as not reinforcing communication attempts or being too strict around grammar issues. She says its very important to do more in-depth studies and clinical research to make sure these tools do work well and as intended (she has not seen or tested Synchrony).
My gut feeling is these tools can be very good support, she says. The jury is out about whether individual programs that havent been tested can be assistive.
As the Synchrony team works out bugs and final design issues before launch, the challenge becomes building a robust enough community to drive more organic growth. Early user testing that started in December, both an alpha test of 14 users, and closed beta tests among university support groups for autistic students, helped them refine the model and layout.
The marketing strategy at launch doesnt focus on the users themselves, but rather neurodiverse employer groups, universities that have neurodiverse programs (who can create their own closed-loop, campus versions of the app), advocates, and relevant podcast hosts.
Success is about awareness and attention, says Pastrano. It’s not a numbers game for me. It’s a really personal game.
