Shared posts

31 Oct 05:17

Google launches TensorFlow Enterprise with long-term support and managed services

by Frederic Lardinois

Google open-sourced its TensorFlow machine learning framework back in 2015 and it quickly became one of the most popular platforms of its kind. Enterprises that wanted to use it, however, had to either work with third parties or do it themselves. To help these companies — and capture some of this lucrative market itself — Google is launching TensorFlow Enterprise, which includes hands-on, enterprise-grade support and optimized managed services on Google Cloud.

One of the most important features of TensorFlow Enterprise is that it will offer long-term support. For some versions of the framework, Google will offer patches for up to three years. For what looks to be an additional fee, Google will also offer to companies that are building AI models engineering assistance from its Google Cloud and TensorFlow teams.

All of this, of course, is deeply integrated with Google’s own cloud services. “Because Google created and open-sourced TensorFlow, Google Cloud is uniquely positioned to offer support and insights directly from the TensorFlow team itself,” the company writes in today’s announcement. “Combined with our deep expertise in AI and machine learning, this makes TensorFlow Enterprise the best way to run TensorFlow.”

Google also includes Deep Learning VMs and Deep Learning Containers to make getting started with TensorFlow easier, and the company has optimized the enterprise version for Nvidia GPUs and Google’s own Cloud TPUs.

Today’s launch is yet another example of Google Cloud’s focus on enterprises, a move the company accelerated when it hired Thomas Kurian to run the Cloud businesses. After years of mostly ignoring the enterprise, the company is now clearly looking at what enterprises are struggling with and how it can adapt its products for them.

31 Oct 03:07

Samsung ramps up its B2B partner and developer efforts

by Frederic Lardinois

Chances are you mostly think of Samsung as a consumer-focused electronics company, but it actually has a very sizable B2B business as well, which serves more than 15,000 large enterprises and hundreds of thousands of SMB entrepreneurs via its partners. At its developer conference this week, it’s putting the spotlight squarely on this side of its business — with a related hardware launch as well. The focus of today’s news, however, is on Knox, Samsung’s mobile security platform, and Project AppStack, which will likely get a different name soon, and which provides B2B customers with a new mechanism to deliver SaaS tools and native apps to their employees’ devices, as well as new tools for developers that make these services more discoverable.

At least in the U.S., Samsung hasn’t really marketed its B2B business all that much. With this event, the company is clearly thinking to change that.

At its core, Samsung is, of course, a hardware company, and as Taher Behbehani, the head of its U.S. mobile B2B division, told me, Samsung’s tablet sales actually doubled in the last year, and most of these were for industrial deployments and business-specific solutions. To better serve this market, the company today announced that it is bringing the rugged Tab Active Pro to the U.S. market. Previously, it was only available in Europe.

The Active Pro, with its 10.1″ display, supports Samsung’s S Pen, as well as Dex for using it on the desktop. It’s got all of the dust and water-resistance you would expect from a rugged device, is rated to easily support drops from about four feet high and promises up to 15 hours of battery life. It also features LTE connectivity and has an NFC reader on the back to allow you to badge into a secure application or take contactless payments (which are quite popular in most of the world but are only very slowly becoming a thing in the U.S.), as well as a programmable button to allow business users and frontline workers to open any application they select (like a barcode scanner).

“The traditional rugged devices out there are relatively expensive, relatively heavy to carry around for a full shift,” Samsung’s Chris Briglin told me. “Samsung is growing that market by serving users that traditionally haven’t been able to afford rugged devices or have had to share them between up to four co-workers.”

Today’s event is less about hardware than software and partnerships, though. At the core of the announcements is the new Knox Partner Program, a new way for partners to create and sell applications on Samsung devices. “We work with about 100,000 developers,” said Behbehani. “Some of these developers are inside companies. Some are outside independent developers and ISVs. And what we hear from these developer communities is when they have a solution or an app, how do I get that to a customer? How do I distribute it more effectively?”

This new partner program is Samsung’s solution for that. It’s a three-tier partner program that’s an evolution of the existing Samsung Enterprise Alliance program. At the most basic level, partners get access to support and marketing assets. At all tiers, partners can also get Knox validation for their applications to highlight that they properly implement all of the Knox APIs.

The free Bronze tier includes access to Knox SDKs and APIs, as well as licensing keys. At the Silver level, partners will get support in their region, while Gold-level members get access to the Samsung Solutions Catalog, as well as the ability to be included in the internal catalog used by Samsung sales teams globally. “This is to enable Samsung teams to find the right solutions to meet customer needs, and promote these solutions to its customers,” the company writes in today’s announcement. Gold-level partners also get access to test devices.

The other new service that will enable developers to reach more enterprises and SMBs is Project AppStack.

“When a new customer buys a Samsung device, no matter if it’s an SMB or an enterprise, depending on the information they provide to us, they get to search for and they get to select a number of different applications specifically designed to help them in their own vertical and for the size of the business,” explained Behbehani. “And once the phone is activated, these apps are downloaded through the ISV or the SaaS player through the back-end delivery mechanism which we are developing.”

For large enterprises, Samsung also runs an algorithm that looks at the size of the business and the vertical it is in to recommend specific applications, too.

Samsung will run a series of hackathons over the course of the next few months to figure out exactly how developers and its customers want to use this service. “It’s a module. It’s a technology backend. It has different components to it,” said Behbehani. “We have a number of tools already in place we have to fine- tune others and we also, to be honest, want to make sure that we come up with a POC in the marketplace that accurately reflects the requirements and the creativity of what the demand is in the marketplace.”

31 Oct 03:06

DeepMind’s StarCraft 2 AI is now better than 99.8 percent of all human players

by Nick Statt
Image: DeepMind

DeepMind today announced a new milestone for its artificial intelligence agents trained to play the Blizzard Entertainment game StarCraft II. The Google-owned AI lab’s more sophisticated software, still called AlphaStar, is now grandmaster level in the real-time strategy game, capable of besting 99.8 percent of all human players in competition. The findings are to be published in a research paper in the scientific journal Nature.

Not only that, but DeepMind says it also evened the playing field when testing the new and improved AlphaStar against human opponents who opted into online competitions this past summer. For one, it trained AlphaStar to use all three of the game’s playable races, adding to the complexity of the game at the...

Continue reading…

31 Oct 03:01

Enterprise Connect 2020: Check Out the Program Today!

By Beth Schultz
With 60 some sessions and keynoters from leading industry providers, there’s something for everyone in enterprise communications and collaboration.
29 Oct 15:07

How 'the couch' is supporting ExxonMobil's sprint to digital transformation

by Samantha Ann Schwartz

The company is relying on DevOps and agile to hit a bold growth goal by 2025: doubling profits without changing prices.

28 Oct 21:36

How do no-code applications benefit from CPaaS APIs?

28 Oct 05:19

The biggest tech scandals of the 2010s, from NSA spying to Boeing's deadly crashes to WeWork

by Aaron Holmes

Theranos Elizabeth Holmes lessons learned from failure failed company tips

  • From corporate malfeasance to freak accidents, the 2010s were full of scandals that rocked the tech industry.
  • The amount of power and capital concentrated in Silicon Valley has skyrocketed over the past ten years, as has the frequency of reported abuses of power.
  • Tech giants including Facebook, Apple, and Google had to address incidents that rocked public trust in their companies. Today, people are perhaps more skeptical of big tech than ever before.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

As the tech and information industries boomed in the 2010s, the decade was also rocked by scandals across both industries.

Tech companies are increasingly at the center of political and social issues in the US and across the globe, and the past 10 years saw a wave of abuses of power, failed business ventures, and disastrous gadget rollouts.

Facebook, Apple, and Google — some of the most powerful tech companies in existence — were the most frequent sites of scandal. However, startups and fringe organizations saw their share of infamy over the past ten years as well. And then there were the NSA spying revelations from whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Here are the biggest tech scandals from 2010 to the present.

SEE ALSO: The 10 biggest data breaches of the 2010s

2010: Over a dozen workers commit suicide after working under brutal conditions at a Chinese factory making iPhones, iPads, and HP computers

At least 14 workers at Foxconn factories in Shenzen, China died by suicide over the course of 2010. Foxconn, which manufactures gadgets for clients including Apple, Nintendo, and HP, reportedly expected workers to put in extreme overtime shifts under dismal working conditions and with cruel management who would dock workers' pay for minor infractions, according to the Wall Street Journal. The company reportedly installed safety nets to catch workers who jumped from upper stories and asked workers to sign a contract agreeing not to kill themselves.

Apple, HP, and other Foxconn clients said they would pressure Foxconn to improve its working conditions in the wake of the suicides. China also put new laws in place in 2012 limiting workers' overtime hours.



2013: Edward Snowden releases confidential documents showing the NSA has secretly had access to Google and Yahoo servers

In one of the most famous whistleblower complaints in US history, former contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the National Security Agency had been spying on people's Google and Yahoo accounts, retaining text, audio, and video at will without users' knowledge.

Both Google and Yahoo expressed surprise at the findings, stating that they had not granted the government access to their servers. However, Google said in a statement that the company had "long been concerned about the possibility of this kind of snooping." Snowden still faces charges of violating the Espionage Act — he is living in Moscow, where he has been granted asylum status.



2015: Volkswagen admits to cheating on emissions tests to make its cars seem more eco-friendly than they are

The Environmental Protection Agency discovered that Volkswagen was using "defeat devices" on its cars that detected when they were being tested for emissions and delivered artificial results to make them seem more environmentally friendly. Volkswagen confirmed the allegation, saying that 11 million of its cars were fitted with defeat devices.

The German car maker agreed to pay $4.3 billion in fines to the US and spend more than $22 billion to address claims from regulators and car owners. Six Volkswagen executives faced criminal charges for their alleged involvement in the scheme.



2016: Apple ordered to pay €13 billion in EU back taxes after receiving tax breaks from Ireland that were ruled illegal

For more than a decade, Apple funneled its European operations through Ireland, capitalizing on massive tax breaks the small country offered it. In 2013, the European Union concluded a three-year investigation into the tax rates and ruled that those breaks were illegal, given that they only applied to Apple. The EU ordered Apple to pay the equivalent of $14.5 billion back to Ireland. Apple decried the decision, saying it would rethink its future European business ventures as a result.



2016: Theranos shutters its labs and faces a federal investigation over dubious claims about its blood-testing technology

One of the most notorious startup launches of the past decade, Theranos and its mercurial leader Elizabeth Holmes fell from grace after the company proved unable to fulfill its promises that it could run blood tests on a single drop of blood. Holmes is the subject of an ongoing federal investigation and faces charges of criminal fraud.



2016: Samsung recalls Galaxy Note 7s and shuts down production of the phones after several phones explode while charging

Samsung initiated a global recall of Galaxy Note 7 phones in early September 2016 after several models caught on fire, stating that it would begin shipping updated models that were safe. However, reports surfaced that multiple replacement phones were also catching on fire while charging, leading the South Korean company to halt production on the Galaxy Note 7 entirely.



2017: Facebook says fake accounts linked to Russia bought thousands of ads during US election

Accounts that were "likely operated out of Russia" spent roughly $100,000 in Facebook ads beginning in June 2015 with the aim of influencing the 2016 presidential election, Facebook disclosed in September 2017. Before that announcement, Facebook had repeatedly insisted that it had no reason to believe that Russian actors bought ads in connection with the election. Facebook pledged that going forward it would take action to thwart attempted foreign-funded campaigns to influence US elections.



2017: A Google engineer circulates a manifesto criticizing the company's attempts to increase gender and racial diversity

Google employees were outraged after James Damore, a Google engineer, circulated an anti-diversity manifesto within the company that criticized efforts to increase the number of women and minorities working there. "We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism," he wrote in the memo, a copy of which was obtained by Gizmodo. The memo came during a time of increasing turbulence inside Google, with staffers raising concerns over company culture. Damore ultimately left the company.



2018: Google faces an internal reckoning after reports surface of sexual misconduct across the company, including prominent executive Andy Rubin

Thousands of employees walked out of Google offices in late 2018 after reports surfaced of sexual misconduct by high-ranking company officials. The New York Times reported that Google protected Andy Rubin, one of the creators of Android, while women who reported sexual misconduct internally said they were treated unfairly by Google's forced arbitration policies. Rubin reportedly received tens of millions of dollars as part of his exit package, even after the company deemed the reports of misconduct against him credible. Google CEO Sundar Pichai acknowledged shortcomings at the time and pledged to "turn these ideas into action."



2018: UN investigators blame Facebook for providing a platform for hate speech in connection with the Myanmar genocide of Rohingya Muslims

A UN investigator said that Facebook played a "determining role" in Myanmar's genocide of Rohingya Muslims, stating that hate speech and plans to organize killings flourished on the platform. 

"It was used to convey public messages but we know that the ultra-nationalist Buddhists have their own Facebooks and are really inciting a lot of violence and a lot of hatred against the Rohingya or other ethnic minorities," the investigator said.

Facebook ultimately acknowledged that the platform enabled violence and apologized for not doing more to stop it.



2018: Facebook admits that Cambridge Analytica, a controversial data-analysis firm linked to the Trump campaign, improperly obtained and mishandled millions of users' data

Following a bombshell investigation by The Guardian, Facebook suspended Cambridge Analytica, a firm who improperly obtained and used the data of millions of users to serve pro-Trump ads in advance of the 2016 election. The Trump campaign reportedly paid Cambridge Analytica millions of dollars for its services, which violated Facebook's advertising partner terms but happened under the social media giant's watch.



2018: Following widespread protests from its employees, Google agrees not to renew a secretive contract to help the Pentagon build AI for drones

Google quietly established a partnership with the Pentagon on a fast-moving project to develop AI software for analyzing and assisting in drone strikes — a move that many at the company didn't know about, and that drew widespread protests after it was first reported publicly by Gizmodo. After backlash, the company agreed not to renew the Pentagon contract. However, an unnamed company that partnered with the Pentagon on the same project still used an "off-the-shelf Google Cloud platform," the Intercept reported.



2019: Messages show top Boeing officials knew about "egregious" problems with the 737 Max years before 2 deadly crashes

At least two years before two deadly Boeing 737 Max crashes, a top Boeing pilot was warned of "egregious" problems with the planes, messages obtained by The New York Times revealed. The crashes, which took place in October 2018 and March 2019, killed 346 people. After the second crash, all Boeing 737 Max planes were grounded, and Boeing's handling of the incident is the subject of an ongoing FBI investigation.



2019: Concerns with WeWork's business model and management cause a failed IPO attempt, an ousted CEO, and a tanked valuation

In one disastrous month, WeWork saw its valuation drop to $8 billion from $47 billion, removed Adam Neumann as CEO, and cancelled its once-hyped initial public offering after investors and media raised serious questions with the company's financials and Neumann's eccentric managerial style. The WeWork saga is still unfolding, but the company is expected to lay off up to a quarter of its current staff in the coming months as it aims to stabilize a path to profitability.



28 Oct 05:17

6 predictions from Gartner could reshape C-suite priorities

by Roberto Torres

By 2023, the analyst firm sees "augmented humans" becoming a ubiquitous part of the workforce. It's one of many changes set to reshape industry in the coming years.

26 Oct 03:30

Google hires former Microsoft Office exec to run G Suite

26 Oct 03:29

Stewart Butterfield says Microsoft sees Slack as existential threat

by Ron Miller

In a wide ranging interview with The Wall Street Journal’s global technology editor Jason Dean yesterday, Slack CEO and co-founder Stewart Butterfield had some strong words regarding Microsoft, saying the software giant saw his company as an existential threat.

The interview took place at the WSJ Tech Live event. When Butterfield was asked about a chart Microsoft released in July during the Slack quiet period, which showed Microsoft Teams had 13 million daily active users compared to 12 million for Slack, Butterfield appeared taken aback by the chart.

Microsoft Teams chart

Chart: Microsoft

“The bigger point is that’s kind of crazy for Microsoft to do, especially during the quiet period. I had someone say it was unprecedented since the [Steve] Ballmer era. I think it’s more like unprecedented since the Gates’ 98-99 era. I think they feel like we’re an existential threat,” he told Dean.

It’s worth noting, that as Dean pointed out, you could flip that existential threat statement. Microsoft is a much bigger business with a trillion-dollar market cap versus Slack’s $12 billion. Microsoft reported $110 billion in revenue in 2018, while Slack had around $400 million. It also has the benefit of linking Microsoft Teams to Office 365 subscriptions, but Butterfield says the smaller company with the better idea has often won in the past.

For starters, Butterfield noted that of his biggest customers, more than two-thirds are actually using Slack and Office 365 in combination. “When we look at our top 50 biggest customers, 70% of them are not only Office 365 users, but they’re Office 365 users who use the integrations with Slack,” he said.

He went on to say that smaller companies have taken on giants before and won. As examples, he held up Microsoft itself, which in the 1980s was a young upstart taking on established players like IBM. In the late 1990s, Google prevailed as the primary search engine in spite of the fact that Microsoft controlled most of the operating system and browser market at the time. Google then tried to go after Facebook with its social tools, all of which have failed over the years. “And so the lesson we take from that is, often the small startup with real traction with customers has an advantage versus the large incumbent with multiple lines of business,” he said.

When asked by Dean if Microsoft, which ran afoul with the Justice Department in the late 1990s, should be the subject of more regulatory scrutiny for its bundling practices, Butterfield admitted he wasn’t a legal expert, but joked that it was “surprisingly unsportsmanlike conduct.” He added more seriously, “We see things like offering to pay companies to use Teams and that definitely leans on a lot of existing market power. Having said that, we have been asked many times, and maybe it’s something we should have looked at, but we haven’t taken any action.”

25 Oct 18:10

What Is the Best Shape for a Phone? We Asked Design Experts

by Motherboard Staff

Basically all phones look the same, which is dumb because there are many different kinds of shapes and quite literally all of them are more interesting than "rectangle." The good news is that smartphone engineers are evolving their thinking to include stacking two or even three rectangles on top of each other, which is a good development. In any case, it's worth considering whether rectangle is REALLY the best we can do, and so Motherboard's staff of design professionals has set out to design, from the ground up, some better phone shapes.

I want a phone that's shaped like this no bite dog collar, only the inside is a touch screen I can control by licking it etc. Either that or a phone that is also a knife. The blade has to be the screen though. - Emanuel Maiberg

The big beef with cellphones is that they are often slippery or too big to confidently hold with one hand while you are, say, biking or hanging off the side of a cliff face. So why not shape phones like a lightning bolt, which is both a SICK look and would also be way easier to hold with its various angles and clefts, etc. Bonus: The jagged point can be used to stab would-be thieves, etc. -Jason Koebler

I watched a lot of Sailor Moon growing up and I always assumed future communication devices would be like the brooches / pendants they used to transform. Apparently women dislike rectangles, so just give me a sparkly crystal to wear around my neck so I can be the magical girl of my dreams. ✨ -Janus Rose

The ideal phone shape is a literal clamshell because then it opens and closes and makes the most sense at the bottom of the ocean. -Derek Mead

It should be shaped like a dick and balls because then everyone would have to hold a dick-and-balls-shaped object up to their face. Could add some levity to modern life. -Rachel Pick

I want a sleek and inconspicuous Juul-shaped phone that I can also vape from. No explanation necessary. -Lauren Kaori Gurley

If we are going to commit to this wearables thing then let’s commit. I want to wear my phone to be a portable Yu-Gi-Oh! Duelist disk with full AR functionality. Memes are Monster Cards that we share in three dimensions to help bridge the gap between boomers and millennials/zoomers; reaction GIFs are Trap and Spell Cards. SoftBank, hit my line let’s talk. -Edward Ongweso Jr.

The ideal phone shape is a discrete ball of flesh, roughly the size of a golf ball. Organic coos and spurtles are more pleasant than digital beeps and boops. An elaborate system of pinches and strokes lets the user post on Twitter or check their email. Kiss it to begin a call. When it sweats, it needs charging. When it bleeds, it’s time to take it to the shop. At the end of its life, the flesh withers and greys, at which point the user buries it in the backyard and orders a new one. -Matthew Gault

Honestly I’m with Derek here: Bring back the flip-phone. Anything that mimics a decent earpiece like phones used to have, before smartphones killed them. Remember how talking on the phone used to be kind of like talking in person? And it was kind of fun to talk to friends and family, because you didn’t spend a third of the conversation going, “Sorry, what? Could you repeat? I missed that, sorry. Maybe you should just email me.” - Rob Zacny

24 Oct 00:36

Foxconn finally admits its empty Wisconsin ‘innovation centers’ aren’t being developed

by Nick Statt
Photo by Joshua Lott for The Verge

Electronics manufacturer Foxconn’s promised Wisconsin “innovation centers,” which are to employ hundreds of people in the state if they ever get built, are officially on hold after spending months empty and unused, as the company focuses on meeting revised deadlines on the LCD factory it promised would now open by next year. The news, reported earlier today by Wisconsin Public Radio, is another inexplicable twist in the nearly two-year train wreck that is Foxconn’s US manufacturing plans.

The company originally promised five so-called innovation centers throughout the state would that employ as many as 100 to 200 people each in high-skilled jobs, with the Milwaukee center promising as many as 500. Those jobs were to complement the more...

Continue reading…

24 Oct 00:35

Slack CEO Stewart Butterfield says that Microsoft has been 'surprisingly unsportsmanlike' as a competitor (WORK, MSFT)

by Paayal Zaveri

Stewart Butterfield Slack

  • Slack CEO Stewart Butterfield addressed the competition from Microsoft Teams, saying the numbers Microsoft released claiming to have more users than Slack are slightly misleading. 
  • In July, Microsoft said it had 13 million daily active users, claiming it was ahead of Slack. In early October, Slack responded and said it had 12 million daily active users, but that it had very favorable user engagement metrics.
  • "I think they feel like we're an existential threat," Butterfield said of Microsoft.
  • Butterfield said the company's focus on customers and the company's narrow focus will help it compete with Microsoft in the long term: "Often the small startup with real traction with customers has advantage versus the large incumbent with multiple lines of business units."
  • Butterfield says that Microsoft's competitive conduct has been "surprisingly unsportsmanlike," and says that the tech titan might be leaning on its larger market share to push Teams over the top.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Slack CEO Stewart Butterfield addressed competition from Microsoft Teams, its chief rival in the workplace chat app space, on stage at the Wall Street Journal's Tech Live conference in Laguna Beach on Wednesday.

"I think they feel like we're an existential threat," Butterfield said of Microsoft.

In July, Microsoft said that it had had 13 million daily active users, indicating that it both had more users than Slack, and that it was growing faster. In October, Slack released a new figure of 12 million daily active users, while also saying that its users were highly-engaged with the chat app — which it said was as important, or more so, than user metrics.

On stage at the conference, Butterfield said that it was "kind of crazy" for Microsoft to release those numbers while Slack was in the quiet period after its direct listing. He also highlighted the fact that several of the top Google search trends for Microsoft Teams are related to how to uninstall the app.

Indeed, when asked if he feels if Microsoft is competing fairly in the workplace productivity space with Teams app, Butterfield said its conduct has been "surprisingly unsportsmanlike." 

Microsoft came under the regulatory crosshairs in the '90s, as its dominance in the PC industry led to a major antitrust investigation. More recently, however, Microsoft has so far escaped the antitrust rhetoric that's enveloped its fellow tech giants like Facebook, Amazon, Alphabet and Apple.

"We see things like paying companies to use Teams and that leans on a lot of existing market power...maybe it's something we should have a look at but we haven't taken any action," Butterfield said.

Microsoft declined to comment on Butterfield's remarks directly, but did make a statement on Wednesday afternoon.

"We have been building and evolving our collaboration offerings in Office 365 for over a decade, and have learned throughout that time that people choose apps and services based on how they want to work," said a Microsoft spokesperson, in part. You can read the full statement below.

'A little bit misleading'

Butterfield also said Microsoft's figures were "a little bit misleading in terms of what you're measuring." He implied that the fact that Teams is bundled in with other Microsoft products may mean that it's counting users who don't actually use the product very often.

Microsoft first launched Teams about two years ago, as a clear answer to the popularity of Slack — which first launched in 2014 as the spin-out from a failed online game called "Glitch," but which quickly attracted the attention of top investors and millions of users. Microsoft bundles Teams with several versions of its Office 365 cloud productivity suite.

"There's a very aggressive push to get people in there," Butterfield said of Microsoft Teams.

'A lot of people choosing Slack'

Butterfield said that his company's sole focus on the business of workplace chat will prove to be an asset — and that at least some users seem to genuinely prefer Slack over Teams.

"There's still a lot of people choosing Slack despite the fact that they have Teams bundled in for free," he said. 

"Often the small startup with real traction with customers has advantage versus the large incumbent with multiple lines of business units," he added, referencing Google's attempt to take on Facebook with the failed Google Plus social network.

Butterfield also said Slack's integrations with outside applications make it a compelling option, even for those using Microsoft Office 365. "If you look at our top 50 biggest customers, 70 percent of them are not only Office 365 users but they are Office 365 users who use the integrations with Slack," he said. 

He also highlighted the fact that Microsoft Teams app comes bundled with many other services that may not be in "harmonious alignment with one another." In other words, he indicated, Microsoft Office 365 is crammed full of apps that may not be useful to every single user, signalling a potential lack of focus at the tech giant.

"I think they're in a zero-sum competition for prestige and power and compensation inside the organization," he said.

Microsoft's full statement: 

"We have been building and evolving our collaboration offerings in Office 365 for over a decade, and have learned throughout that time that people choose apps and services based on how they want to work. Over 13 million people at over 500,000 organizations choose Teams every day because it provides a single hub for everything teams need - chat, video conferencing and calling, their Office files, and apps, all backed by industry-leading security and compliance capabilities. We continue to evolve Teams to help our customers transform their cultures and businesses for the new world of work."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: People are still debating the pink or grey sneaker, 2 years after it went viral. Here's the real color explained.

24 Oct 00:33

Google employees are raising alarms about a new tool that keeps tabs on their internal meetings, but the company says it's nothing to worry about (GOOGL)

by Troy Wolverton

Sundar Pichai

  • Google has developed a browser tool for internal use that can detect when employees are scheduling meetings involving large numbers of people, Bloomberg's Ryan Gallagher reported Wednesday.
  • Employees are worried that the tool is a kind of spyware meant to discourage labor activism or organization.
  • But Google's official line is that the tool is benign and was developed in response to an increase in spam.
  • The budding controversy over the browser extension comes in the wake of growing tension between workers and management over a range of issues, including the handling of sexual-harassment claims.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

A browser tool developed by Google to monitor meeting requests made by employees has sparked a controversy at the search giant.

The tool can detect whether employees are scheduling meetings with large numbers of people, Bloomberg's Ryan Gallagher reported on Wednesday. Employees have charged that the software, which is designed to be installed on the bespoke version of the Chrome browser that runs on all employees' computers, is a kind of surveillance tool that the company plans to use to monitor and discourage worker activism, according to the report.

"This is an attempt of leadership to immediately learn about any workers organization attempts," an anonymous company employee wrote in a memo outlining concerns about the tool, Bloomberg reports.

A Google representative denied that claim to Business Insider, saying the company developed the extension in response to an uptick in spam involving calendar entries.

The tool triggers a pop-up message when employees attempt to auto-add a meeting to the calendars of large numbers of people and serves as a kind of gentle reminder not to abuse the feature, the representative said. The extension does not prevent users from creating such meetings and doesn't collect personal information when it's triggered, the representative said.

"These claims about the operation and purpose of this extension are categorically false," a Google representative said in a statement.

Regardless, concern about the extension has been rising among employees. On internal message boards, workers have been discussing it and mocking Google's leaderships attempts to minimize their worries about it, according to Bloomberg. The tool has become the most requested topic to be discussed at Google's weekly company-wide meetings, one employee told the publication.

Read more: Google is going through a slow-motion employee revolt, and its cofounders are missing in action

The controversy over the tool follows growing tension between Google's leadership and its rank and file. Over the past two years, employees protested Google's contract to work with the defense department on artificial intelligence and to build a censored search engine that would allow it to reenter the Chinese market. After a report last year that Google's leadership had overlooked claims of sexual harassment against top employees or richly rewarded those accused on their way out, thousands of Google workers staged a massive walkout.

More recently, contract workers in Pittsburgh voted last month to join the United Steelworkers union. Employees in Switzerland this week defied management and held a meeting on unionization, Bloomberg reported.

Got a tip about Google or another tech company? Contact this reporter via email at twolverton@businessinsider.com, message him on Twitter @troywolv, or send him a secure message through Signal at 415.515.5594. You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop.

SEE ALSO: SoftBank likely had the Vision Fund on its mind when it decided to rescue WeWork

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to take full advantage of the iPhone's new dark mode

23 Oct 22:16

Gartner: Of the 4 manager types, only 1 boosts employee performance 26%

by Deborah Barrington

Teachers, cheerleaders, always on, connectors — one of these types degrades productivity and it's not the one you would expect. 

23 Oct 05:00

CIOs say that technology is changing 'too fast,' even as the rise of the cloud and the risk of cyberattack makes them more important — and more visible — than ever

by Benjamin Pimentel

ibm data center durham

  • A new survey said most CIOs today find themselves taking on bigger responsibilities, and feel that technology is changing "too fast."
  • Most of them said they feel that their work can have a huge impact on their company's reputation. More than half feel that they must also act as company spokespersons.
  • The report by Edelman, the public relations firm, was based on a survey of about 400 CIOs in the US, the UK, China and Singapore.
  • Click here for more BI Prime stories.

The job of the chief information officer, or CIO, used to be pretty boring — a low-profile, slow-paced post focused on running drab data centers tucked away in some remote corner of corporate headquarters.

Well, not any more. 

A new study says that CIOs today find themselves taking on more high-profile roles, and that they often feel the heat of the spotlight in a time of rapid tech changes and serious network threats.

The report by Edelman, the public relations firm, found that 9 of 10 CIOs feel that their work can have an impact on their company's reputation, and that they are expected to play a crucial role in building trust among customers and employees. Most of them, 63%, feel that the changes in IT are happening "too fast."

The report was based on a survey of 400 CIOs in the US, the UK, China and Singapore in different industries and organizations. Sanjay Nair, Edelman's global technology sector chair, said CIOs see themselves being accountable to more groups.

"Not only are they expected to keep the backend IT systems humming, they are right at the heart of building trust with customers, investors and employees," he said in a statement.

Cybersecurity is a key part of the job

Making sure their networks are secure and safe from attacks and improving the way customers use and navigate their sites have become much more important parts of the jobs, CIOs in the study said.

But they said there's also been a heightened focus on other tasks. They're now also expected to help win over more customers and to provide more insights into how their work can help the company's board and senior leadership define or fine-tune their business strategy.

The way CIOs view their role and the pace of tech change depends on where they are. For example, most CIOs in the US and Singapore, or roughly 70% in each country, said their jobs have changed dramatically over the past five years, compared to only 34% of CIOs in China and 57% in the UK. 

More than half of the CIOs, or 53%, say they have also had to be spokespeople for their companies, underscoring the growing attention to the IT systems and networks. Over the past several years, there's been a boom in the number of conferences and other events specifically for CIOs, underscoring the prominence of the role. And that's not to mention the fact that when something goes wrong — like a cyberattack — it's often the CIO who's tapped to issue a statement.

This need is most pronounced in the US where 64% of CIOs said they feel the need to be "more public-facing" than their counterparts in other countries. 

A decade of change

Most of the changes happened in the last ten years.

"In the last decade, their roles and job descriptions have expanded enormously," Tim Bajarin, a veteran tech analyst with Creative Strategies Inc. told Business Insider. 

In the '80s and '90s, CIOs were mainly concerned were generally involved with managing office PCs, servers, and networks, and making decisions on which software applications, including anti-virus systems, to deploy. 

That changed with the cloud, which allowed companies to set up and maintain networks on web-based platforms, like those run by Amazon, Microsoft and Google, and to access business software like Microsoft Office 365 and Salesforce from the internet and mobile devices. This trend made it possible for businesses to scale down or even abandon private data centers, while also reducing their fixed expenditures on traditional software. 

It also meant CIOs have had to deal with more complex systems that sometimes involve in-house data centers and public cloud platforms. The security threats they face have also grown more sophisticated. For many businesses, particularly big corporations, adopting new technologies, such as AI, blockchain, and the Internet of Things, is increasingly viewed as critical to the success of the business, not just optional toys that they could afford not to have.

"The advancements of technology is what has been disruptive and CIOs and IT managers have to keep up with the trends and new solutions they need every day to solve their companies IT needs," Bajarin said. 

Got a tip about a tech company? Contact this reporter via email at bpimentel@businessinsider.com, message him on Twitter @benpimentel. You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Animated map shows how cats spread across the world

23 Oct 04:58

In a First, FTC Bans Company From Selling ‘Stalkerware’

by Joseph Cox

This morning the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced it has barred a company behind three pieces of so-called stalkerware from selling any more apps that monitor mobile devices unless they take steps to ensure their software is only used for legitimate purposes.

Stalkerware is malicious software that is installed on phones or computers. Depending on the particular app, stalkerware can intercept text messages and calls, track GPS locations, and much more. Stalkerware is often used in abusive relationships, even if companies selling the software claim it is only to be used for legally monitoring children or employees. In this case, the FTC case is against a company called Retina-X and its owner James N. Johns Jr.

"This is our first action against a so-called 'stalking app,'" Andrew Smith, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement. “Although there may be legitimate reasons to track a phone, these apps were designed to run surreptitiously in the background and are uniquely suited to illegal and dangerous uses. Under these circumstances, we will seek to hold app developers accountable for designing and marketing a dangerous product.”

Do you know about any other breaches of stalkerware companies? We'd love to hear from you. Using a non-work phone or computer, you can contact Joseph Cox securely on Signal on +44 20 8133 5190, Wickr on josephcox, OTR chat on jfcox@jabber.ccc.de, or email joseph.cox@vice.com.

As Motherboard reported, a hacker targeted Retina-X multiple times. The first hack in 2017 involved customer data such as the GPS locations of infected phones, as well as photos, text messages, emails, and contacts obtained by Retina-X's own stalkerware.

"For the customers, realize that when you use spyware like this, you're trusting one company or another to hold the data. For people who have been spied on, I can only say that I'm sorry their privacy has been invaded on so many levels," the hacker behind the Retina-X breach told Motherboard at the time. Retina-X's products include apps such as PhoneSheriff, MobileSpy, and TeenShield.

The following year, the hacker breached the company and wiped its servers again.

Pointing to these breaches, the FTC announcement alleges that Retina-X did not properly secure the data collected by its software.

"Despite these failures, the legal policies for all three apps claimed that, 'Your private information is safe with us,'" the announcement added.

Specifically, the FTC alleges that Retina-X and Johns violated the FTC Act's prohibition against unfair and deceptive practices, as well as the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). COPPA requires operators to secure the information they collect from children under 13, the announcement notes.

The FTC writes Johns and Retina-X must obtain third-party assessments of their information security program every two years. The vote from the FTC Commissioners to issue the complaint to Retina-X was 5-0, the announcement reads.

"I’m happy to see the FTC taking action against stalkerware, but the devil is in the details. I will be watching closely to see what steps Retina-X takes to make sure their apps are only being used for 'legitimate purposes,'" Eva Galperin, director of cybersecurity at activist group the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and who has researched stalkerware extensively, told Motherboard in an online chat. "Depending on the ways in which these apps are used and the jurisdictions involved, using these apps to monitor children or employees is not necessarily legal either."

Retina-X may not have a product to audit, though. After the second hack, Retina-X announced it was shutting down indefinitely.

Richard Newman, a lawyer handling the case for Retina-X, told Motherboard in an email, "While the firm’s clients were the unfortunate victims of a skilled hacker, they would like to thank the FTC for its professionalism during the course of the investigation."

Updated: This piece has been updated with comment from Retina-X's lawyer.

Subscribe to our new cybersecurity podcast, CYBER.

23 Oct 04:58

‘The power of revelation’: Adam Neumann and Elon Musk show how startup founders use the same tactics as cult leaders — and why it eventually backfires

by Drake Baer

Adam Neumann, CEO of WeWork

  • Since Adam Neumann's ouster from WeWork as CEO and now board member, reporting from Business Insider and many other publications has revealed several idiosyncrasies with the former CEO and the company that he founded.
  • Neumann is perhaps the highest profile — or certainly, at least, the latest — case of the visionary startup CEO who gets into trouble as the company scales, goes public, or otherwise matures.
  • Business Insider spoke with experts who explained an all-too familiar dynamic: a leader who is glorified to the point of excess, and their startup becomes something of a "new religious movement" — a cult.
  • Click here for more BI Prime content.

When WeWork filed its S-1 in August, the company was summarily roasted, starting with the second page. 

"We dedicate this to the energy of we — greater than any of us, but inside each of us."

A few pages down, under the "Our Story" section, the manifesto continues to go maximal. "We are a community company committed to maximum global impact," it reads. "Our mission is to elevate the world's consciousness." 

Since that filing, WeWork has been the biggest story in business news, with a constant cascade of drama, reaching a crescendo on when Adam Neumann, the charismatic, controversial, visionary founder and CEO was demoted by the board, putting in his stead a pair of chief executives with decades of experience in tech between them. On Tuesday, Neumann was also reported to step down from the board, with SoftBank, WeWork's largest investor, taking over the company.

The reporting of Business Insider, and many other publications, has revealed several idiosyncrasies with Neumann and the company that he founded. One former vice president told us that working there was one of the weirdest years of his life, including many spiritual discussions with higher-ups, odd internal optics from Neumann, and a mandatory "camp" where he and thousands of other employees slept in tents. In one newsworthy incident, back in 2016, Neumann announced cost-cutting layoffs, and then tequila shots were handed out to employees. And then employees were treated to a performance by a member of the legendary rap group Run-DMC. Rebekah Neumann, his wife and now WeWork's former executive, reportedly asked that employees be fired because she disliked their "energy." 

Richard Markel, the vice president, told Business Insider that there was a massive disconnect between WeWork's stated goals of harmony and earth friendliness and the actual day-to-day running of the business — like when, in the lead-up to his eventually being let go, he came to work to find his calendar empty, having been taken out of all his meetings. "The way I was treated was so professionally repugnant, so unprofessional, so that it was almost like, 'Hey, WeWork, is everything you say bulls---?'" he said

Neumann is perhaps the highest profile — or certainly, at least, the latest — case of the visionary startup CEO who gets into trouble as the company scales, goes public, or otherwise matures. There's a whole Mount Rushmore of these figures, who are today famous or infamous examples of leadership. Steve Jobs. Elizabeth Holmes. Elon Musk. Leaders who push boundaries, disrupt norms, perhaps act strangely, and find themselves adrift in some way: taken out of the head of their company, revealed to be frauds, or not able to deliver on their great visions. 

These are often taken to be business stories. 

But really, these are tales of social psychology. 

And startups are, in many meaningful senses, cults. 

wework s-1 energy of we screenshot

New religious movements 

Lorne Dawson is a sociologist of religion at the University of Waterloo. He has spent decades studying "new religious movements" — that's academese for "cults" — and his latest work has tilted toward terrorism and the process of radicalization. To Dawson, all these various social-organizational situations exist along a continuum. There's the normal state of affairs, then startup business contexts, and then further afield from that, religious movements, or even sectarian/extremist ones. The startup and the cult have very strong parallels, and deal with some of the same problems, he said — those of leadership, small group dynamics, and institutionalization. Both the startup founder and the cult leader face the innovator's dilemma

He knows about the dynamics personally. A family member of his worked for a small startup, ran by a serial entrepreneur who met national success. After selling the first company, he started another one on a new set of ideas, again heading for a big sale. When he'd hear about the office dynamic, he was struck by how much the owner and leader reflected the elements of what draws people into small religious organizations.  

"The very fact that you have strong focus on the inspirational, dynamic founding figure — that person will almost always be considered a charismatic leader," he told Business Insider. "The popular notion is that people have inherent skills or talents, but sociology and business management realizes that it's much more about positioning." 

The dynamic central figure leads followers to attribute certain powers to them. 

"The leader is the one with the money, contacts, the force to drive the thing forward, and everyone wants in on that action," he added. "In religious movement, it's the certain special knowledge that'll make your life perfect or grant you salvation. Or for business, you get in on the action. Not just being paid, but given percentage of company. You want the big payoff." 

That, in turn, can create a dynamic where the leader is glorified to the point of excess. And that, in turn, has a psychological effect: if the leader already had a strong personality with egomaniacal elements, those qualities can be exaggerated. (When people have power, dozens of psychology studies have shown, they grow even more confident.) And with that comes risk. 

Erratic behavior that would never be accepted in a normal business is accepted in a small startup, just as what happens in a cult wouldn't be allowed in a mature religious organization. That lack of norms does come with potential business benefits: it allows a company to be very flexible and adaptable, ready to pivot at a moment's notice, and it could feel like an exciting place to be. But it can also be destabilizing or alienating for employees, or even surreal.  

And then, Dawson says, small group dynamics can begin to take over. Employees compete to curry favor with the leader, and proximity grows important. In these contexts, even when the leader does erratic things, you defend it. And in the case of the unitary executive — where literally or metaphorically, the leader controls all the voting shares — there can be a desire for excessive social cohesion. ("You don't want a family to do everything that the father always does," Dawson says — being able to disagree with an authority figure is a sign of health in a group.)

With all of this comes vulnerability: "Because you don't have rules or regulations, that makes the group very flexible, but it creates demand for loyalty, social cohesion, and ultimately makes it brittle, so that the situation could break apart in a crisis," he says.

Steve Jobs

The needs that startups serve

People work for more than paychecks. They also have psychological needs to be filled. And consciously or not, visionary startup founders tend to be excellent at doing so. 

Jay Van Bavel, who runs the Social Perception and Evaluation Lab at New York University, is part of a group of researchers who study "identity leadership" — that's when leaders act in such a way, and cultivate a culture in such a way, that the group becomes a part of who you are. The logo is not just emblazoned upon a mug or a T-shirt, but the heart. "It's about when leaders, managers, CEOs, or visionaries cultivate a sense of in-group identity," he tells Business Insider. "We're 'us,' in it together, have this set of values that are virtuous, share a vision that's virtuous, and we have a set of norms or actions to achieve it." 

When a leader creates that culture, you get engaged followership. Folks feel a sense of identity, they understand the actions and norms to be taken — what, in management-speak, you'd call culture. It's exhibited a lot in sports teams: there's the Patriot Way or the Packer Way. Politicians employee it: those that use "we" or "us" more tend to get elected. And followers act to fulfill what they perceive the wishes of the leader to be — like when the White House asked the Navy to make the USS John S. McCain "out of sight" for President Donald Trump's visit on Memorial Day. 

In startups, it's making people feel like they're all in on some vision together. They'll work long hours, stay late, recruit their friends, use whatever social capital they have to build the organization. In a small or early-stage company, especially if you're yet to hit big on funding, you might not have much you can compensate people with in terms of funds, so you create incentives that other firms can't offer. The sense of belonging, prestige, the feeling that you're doing something high status. (Tech is not alone in this: Anyone who's been paid in prestige in fields like fashion, publishing, or media can probably relate.) Again, same thing with sports teams: If you're a Yankees fan, you get some of the glow of being associated with a massively, historically successful organization whenever you lay eyes on the pinstripes. 

"You have strange followings of people like Elon Musk," Van Bavel said, "where you see overlap between both employees and consumers or fans." Even if you've never sat in a Ferrari, you might own the hat. 

Startups, Silicon Valley in particular, can also imbue a sense of morality, that you're pursuing some kind of meaningful social goal by schlepping into the office every day. Facebook's mission statement is "to give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together." Google's mission has "been to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."

You're not just working a job; you're part of something bigger. 

Aaron Judge

Being a visionary comes with risks

One of the greatest challenges for a startup is scaling, that sought-after hockey-stick growth where users and revenue accelerate rapidly, and team size along with it. It's the stuff that headlines are made of: 2x, 10x, 100x. A new religious movement also wants greater attention, platform, and membership, otherwise it won't survive. Recruiting (or evangelism) are key to the success of both. But as either kind of organization expands, it can run into problems of structure. 

"As a group succeeds, attracting followers or growing and hiring, you have to start getting the delegation of authority," says Dawson, the religious scholar. The charismatic leader has to give authority away, and this is the crunch point. "Most new religious movements die from becoming successful, ironically enough. They fall apart from schisms and struggles as they try to institutionalize," he says.

The inspirational leader can often be resistant. "They want the success, but not to give up the authority, power, freedom to do what they want," he says. And if the leader resists the delegation, the religion begins to fail in some way — higher-level subordinates will break off, start a competitive group, bringing followers along or attracting new ones. And that'll happen in startup companies, too.

There are, of course, exceptions. Dawson says that the Unification Church, popularly known as "Moonies" due the leader Rev. Sun Myung Moon, is one such example, since the group created a middle-management layer. 

The other, perhaps more central, issue is the "power of revelation," Dawson says. The messianic religious leader has to be coming up with ever new visions and messages from the divine. The founder needs ever new projects or innovations. In both cases, the leader is a medium in tune with some greater force in the universe — the higher power of god or disruption. 

FILE PHOTO: SpaceX owner and Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks during a conversation with legendary game designer Todd Howard (not pictured) at the E3 gaming convention in Los Angeles, California, U.S., June 13, 2019.  REUTERS/Mike Blake"When they stop seeming to have that power to provide special things, then you start to notice their flaws and they get knocked down in their status," Dawson says, adding that Elon Musk has become something of a recent case study. There was PayPal, then Tesla, SpaceX, renewable energy and the car that goes in the tunnel.

"The inspirational leader is coming up with new ideas, they often make additional prophecies that fail and don't amount to anything, but that's not noticed, because everyone looks at their successes," Dawson says. "Musk has been hitting the border of that, people are starting to think he's lost his touch. Like a religious leader, he's fallen out of favor, no longer in tune with the hidden forces of the world." 

In Neumann's resignation memo, he noted that "scrutiny directed"  toward him had become a distraction to the company, as all those reports of tequila shots and private planes (later sold) came out.

The charismatic leader was always pushing for not only greater scale, no matter the loss, but new investments or innovations, putting money into wave pools and superfood, launching the co-living space WeLive, the "micro-school" WeGrow, the boutique fitness offering Rise by We

Amid the turmoil and his demotion when he was ousted from the CEO role, Neumann sent a company-wide email touting WeWork's mission. "The spotlight on us has never been greater than at this moment, and with this visibility we have an opportunity to expand our global business to more people than ever before," he said.

It's a nice note for the founder's tenure to end on: identity leadership, powered by we. 

Sherin Shibu contributed to this story.

SEE ALSO: The VC's ultimate guide to sniffing out risky healthcare startups — and not getting tricked into backing them

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We did a blind taste-test of KFC and Popeyes fried chicken — here's the verdict

23 Oct 04:35

House overwhelmingly approves contentious new copyright bill

by Makena Kelly
House Democrats Elect New Leaders Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images

On Tuesday, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly voted to approve a measure that would shake up the Copyright Office if it were made into law, creating a small claims court where online content creators can go after their infringers.

The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act, or the CASE Act for short, was approved by 410-6 vote. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) introduced the measure last year with the goal of giving graphic artists, photographers, and other content creators a more efficient pathway toward receiving damages if their works are infringed. Under current law, all copyright suits must go through the federal courts, a system that is often costly and time-consuming for creators who decide to litigate their...

Continue reading…

21 Oct 20:16

UPS's medical drone empire is rapidly expanding — and now it will deliver CVS goods to your home

by Rachel Premack

UPS drone

  • UPS announced a slew of new customers to its rapidly-expanding drone-delivery service — including CVS Health, its first retail client for drone delivery.
  • Through a new revenue-generating service for the University of Utah Health hospital campuses, UPS and drone company Matternet will move medical samples and other cargo.
  • UPS Flight Forward will also service Amerisource Bergen and Kaiser Permanente in revenue-generating services.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

UPS's drone empire is rapidly expanding. 

On Monday, the package giant established itself yet again as America's leader in drone deliveries with the announcement of four new customers — including its first retail customer, CVS Health.

"We're doing this in a pragmatic way," Bala Ganesh, vice president of UPS Advanced Technology Group, told Business Insider.

"We're first growing the portion of the business that has an approved regulatory framework – this is revenue-generating work in support of high-demand, value-added, critical instant delivery solutions on hospital campuses," Ganesh added.

Ganesh has long emphasized the importance of developing sustainable business cases around drone deliveries — meaning, revenue-generating businesses rather than flashy, short-term drone stunts. But the CVS partnership will be merely exploratory to start. 

Read more: Autonomous trucks are now moving UPS loads — and it shows that driverless trucks may be just a few years away from disrupting the $800 billion trucking industry

"Our project with CVS represents a big step forward to apply our learnings on the hospital campus setting to customers' homes," Ganesh said. "We will create new logistics and air delivery solutions no one has considered."

drone UPS

Here are the four new partnerships and what UPS will do for them:

  • CVS Health: UPS Flight Forward, the company's drone airline, will develop "a variety of drone delivery use cases" in the business-to-consumer realm. That will include urgent deliveries of prescription and other goods to the homes of CVS customers. Exact services and locations haven't been disclosed yet. 
  • AmerisourceBergen: The wholesale pharmaceutical distributor will work with UPS Flight Forward to ship medications, supplies, and records via drone. Qualifying medical campuses served by AmerisourceBergen will be first in the trial, followed by other campuses. 
  • Kaiser Permanente: UPS Flight Forward will move healthcare goods via drone on Kaiser Permanente's medical campuses. This will be revenue-generating once flights begin, according to a UPS spokesperson.
  • University of Utah Health hospital campuses: In partnership with Matternet, UPS will embark on a revenue-generating drone-delivery service to move medical samples and other goods. It's similar to UPS's first medical drone client — WakeMed Hospital in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Rivals are quickly gearing up in response

UPS announced earlier this month that it was the first drone company to score nationwide approval from the Federal Aviation Administration. That move raised eyebrows — showing that drone deliveries are commercially feasible even under rigorous regulations.

Read more: UPS drivers are ditching commercial navigation apps for an in-house tool. The chief engineering and information officer explains how it's already saving the company millions.

Its rivals have been quickly moving to match UPS's might. 

On Oct. 18, Wing, owned by Google's parent company Alphabet, made its first commercial drone deliveries. Wing also has FAA certification. But the scope of its operation is limited to a town called Christiansburg, Virginia.

Wing has partnered with FedEx Express and Walgreens to deliver goods to customers' homes in the Southwest Virginia town, about 210 miles away from the state capital Richmond. 

Meanwhile, Amazon has pledged to take its Prime Air drone-delivery service to the real-world this year. At a September event, Amazon's Worldwide Consumer chief Jeff Wilke said its latest drone model would be fulfilling orders "in months."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Will Boeing recover from the 737 Max crisis?

21 Oct 18:42

What Earth might look like in 80 years if we're lucky — and if we're not

by Dave Mosher and Aylin Woodward

Bleached coral

As humanity nears the end of the 2010s, signs that our planet is irrevocably changing can be found everywhere. In the last year alone, ocean temperatures broke records, Antarctic melting reached unprecedented rates, and extreme weather swept through the US, Europe, and the Arctic

Accelerated planet-wide warming has been linked to more species extinctions, an increased number of annual heat-waves, and more frequent natural disasters like wildfires and hurricanes. 

According to the most recent report from the United Nations' International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global temperatures will likely rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels between 2030 and 2052 if warming continues at the current rate. Staying under that threshold was the optimistic goal set in the Paris climate agreement.

If we hope to limit some of these climate change-related consequences, nations and industries must make drastic cuts — and soon — to greenhouse-gas emissions from energy production, transportation, industrial work, farming, and other sectors. An increasing number of people are demanding such action: In September, 4 million across 161 countries participated in a worldwide climate strike led by Swedish youth activist Greta Thunberg.

But if emissions continue to increase and Earth's temperature increases by more than 3 degrees Celsius, according to the IPCC , oceans would be an average of 3 feet higher by the year 2100. Those rising seas would displace 680 million people in low-lying coastal zones, along with 65 million citizens of small island states.

Read More: Sea levels are projected to rise 3 feet within 80 years, according to a new UN report. Hundreds of millions of people could be displaced.

Even if carbon emissions dropped to zero tomorrow, scientists say we'll still be watching human-driven climate change play out for centuries.

"There's no stopping global warming," Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist and the director of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, previously told Business Insider. "Everything that's happened so far is baked into the system."

Now it's a matter of trying to "save what we can save," according to Thunberg. 

Here's what the Earth could look like by 2100 in our best- and worst-case scenarios.

DON'T MISS: At least 20 people have died from Europe's extreme heat. The Arctic caught on fire. This is what climate change looks like.

SEE ALSO: One of Antarctica's biggest glaciers will soon reach a point of irreversible melting. That would cause sea levels to rise at least 1.6 feet.

To understand where we're headed, we must first assess the changes we're already observing. Since 2001, we've seen 18 of the 19 warmest years ever.



Four of the five hottest years on record have happened since 2015. This year is on pace to be the third-hottest on record globally.

Source: Climate Central



The planet's oceans absorb a whopping 93% of the extra heat that greenhouse gases trap in the atmosphere. Last year was the hottest year on record for the oceans.



That warming threatens coral reefs worldwide. Warm waters cause corals to expel the algae living in their their tissues and turn white in a process called bleaching. At present rates, it's expected that 60% of all coral reefs will be highly or critically threatened by 2030.

Sources: International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, Business Insider



Warming waters are also melting Arctic and Antarctic glaciers from underneath. In 2012, Greenland lost more than 400 billion tons of ice, which was almost quadruple the amount of loss in 2003.



In the 1980s, Antarctica lost 40 billion tons of ice annually. In the last decade, that number jumped to an average of 252 billion tons per year.

Source: Nature



Oceans also absorb more than one-third of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which causes them to become more acidic. We are already seeing the effects of that elevated acidity in the form of coral bleaching.

Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Program



Warmer water is contributing to more frequent and intense hurricanes. Such storms are rainier than they were in the past, which causes more severe flooding.

Sources: Business Insider (1, 2)



A warming planet leads to more extreme weather, both cold and hot. A 2017 study found that the frequency of polar-vortex events has increased by as much as 140% over the past four decades.

Source: Business Insider



Climate change is also linked to more warm, dry days in regions with a risk of wildfires, like California. In November 2018, the most deadly and destructive wildfire in the state's history — the Camp Fire — started during what is typically the rainy season.

Sources: Business Insider (1, 2)



As the climate warms, California's wildfire season is getting longer because the snow pack melts sooner.

Source: Business Insider



Schmidt is fairly pessimistic about our ability to keep temperature-rise under the threshold scientists consider safe. "I think the 1.5-degree target is out of reach," he said, adding that we may blow past that by 2030.



He's more optimistic about keeping temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius, though. That's the upper threshold of temperature rise that the Paris climate agreement set to avoid at all costs.



So let's assume — optimistically — that we land somewhere between the targets of 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius of temperature rise.



Even in that case, summers in the tropics would see a 50% increase in extreme-heat days by 2050.

Source: Environmental Research Letters



Summer temperatures in the US will keep rising, and much of the western and central US will see a reduction of soil moisture, which exacerbates heat waves. By 2100, extreme heat days that typically happened once every 20 years are projected to occur every few years.

Source: NASA



Even in an optimistic scenario, temperature anomalies — how much the temperature of a given area deviates from what would be "normal" in that region — would swing far more wildly than they do today.

Source: Business Insider



For example, the temperature in the Arctic Circle soared above freezing for one day in 2016. That's extraordinarily hot for that area, but such abnormalities would start happening a lot more.

Source: Washington Post



If the world were to meet its most ambitious climate-change goals, average winter temperatures in the Arctic will still rise by up to 5 degrees Celsius by the year 2050.



In the summer of 2012, 97% of the Greenland Ice Sheet's surface started to melt. That's typically a once-in-a-century occurrence, but with 2 degrees Celsius of temperature rise, we could see extreme melt like that every six years by the end of the century.

Source: Climate Central, National Snow & Ice Data Center



That means years like 2016, which had the lowest sea-ice extent on record, would become more common. Summers in Greenland could become ice-free by 2050.

Source: Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems



If warming continues, even at its current rate, a major glacier near the South Pole could reach a tipping point after which it loses all its ice. That loss could trigger a chain reaction of melting in the Antarctic called a "pulse," which could raise global sea-levels by 8 feet.

Source: Business Insider



Even in our best-case scenarios, oceans are on track to rise 2 to 3 feet by 2100. This is because water expands as it warms (like most things). That could displace up to 4 million people. More dire scenarios suggest we'll see more than 700 million climate refugees displaced by rising seas.

Sources: NASA, Time, The Conversation, Business Insider



The world's coastlines may be unrecognizable by 2100, even with moderate sea-level rise.



Sea-level rise threatens coastal flora and fauna, too. Rising waters threaten 233 federally protected animal and plant species in 23 coastal states across the US.

Source: Center for Biological Diversity



About 17% of all the US's threatened and endangered species are vulnerable to rising sea levels and storm surges, including the Hawaiian monk seal and the loggerhead sea turtle.

Source: Center for Biological Diversity



Other human activities, such as deforestation and logging, could also devastate the planet's flora and fauna species. In roughly 50 years, 1,700 species of amphibians, birds, and mammals will face a higher risk of extinction because their natural habitats are shrinking.

Source: Nature Climate Change



Insects are especially at risk. The total mass of all insects on the planets is decreasing by 2.5% per year. If that trend continues unabated, the Earth may not have any insects at all by the next century. That's a major problem, because pollinators perform a crucial role in fruit, vegetable, and nut production.

Source: Biological Conservation



If that all sounds scary, let's take a look at our worst-case scenario.



If greenhouse-gas emissions remain unchanged, we'll see more frequent and intense heatwaves like the ones Europe experienced this summer. In July, temperatures were up to 18 degrees Fahrenheit (10 degrees Celsius) above normal for parts of the continent.

Source: Business Insider



Temperature records will continue to be broken. During Europe's July heat wave, parts of France hit 114 degrees Fahrenheit (45 degrees Celsius). Globally, that month was the hottest ever recorded on Earth.

Source: Business Insider



Without curbing emissions, the tropics would stay extremely hot all summer long. In more temperate zones, 30% or more days would have temperatures that we currently consider unusual.

Source: Environmental Research Letters



If we do nothing to curb greenhouse-gas emissions, roughly 5.3 million more acres are projected to burn each year in the US by 2100. That's an area the size of Massachusetts, and double today's burn rate.

Source: EPA.gov



Already this summer, vast areas of the Arctic were engulfed in flames. Satellite images showed plumes of smoke engulfing parts of Russia, Greenland, and Alaska.

Source: Business Insider



Even a little bit of warming strains water resources. Left unchecked, climate change might cause severe drought across 40% of all land on the planet — double the amount today.

Source: PNAS



Not only do extreme temperatures and severe weather make farming more difficult, climate change is also expected to decrease the nutritional value of important food crops like wheat and rice. That's a dire threat for the 821 million people who are already undernourished worldwide, and it could cause a food-security crisis.

Source: Business Insider



Researchers also worry that if we see more than a 2-degree-Celsius temperature increase, that could tip the balance of our planet's systems toward a "hothouse Earth" scenario. In that case, a feedback loop could lead temperatures to rise by 4 or 5 degrees Celsius.

Sources: Business Insider (1, 2)



In an extreme scenario, rising temperatures could even cause stratocumulus clouds to disappear entirely in the next 150 years. Without these clouds, which shade the planet from the sun's rays, the Earth's temperature could rise up to an additional 8 degrees Celsius.



Right now, humanity is on a precipice. We could end up with what Schmidt envisions as a "vastly different planet."



Every fraction of a degree of warming that we can avoid, however, makes a difference.



21 Oct 18:28

Colorado drops its T-Mobile-Sprint lawsuit after Dish agrees to house headquarters in the state

by Makena Kelly
Illustration by Alex Castro / The Verge

In the latest swirl of T-Mobile-Sprint merger drama, Colorado is exiting a lawsuit challenging the deal after Dish Network agreed to house its new wireless headquarters in the state.

The Colorado Attorney General’s Office announced its decision on Monday after Dish promised that the state would be one of the first in the nation to receive 5G services and become the home of its new wireless headquarters, creating thousands of jobs. The DOJ approved the T-Mobile-Sprint merger back in July after it was able to piece together a new wireless competitor by allocating some of Sprint’s spectrum to Dish. The Federal Communications Commission formally voted to approve the merger late last week.

Dish is positioned to become the third largest...

Continue reading…

21 Oct 04:54

SpaceX may want to launch 42,000 internet satellites — about 5 times more spacecraft than humanity has ever flown

by Dave Mosher

elon musk spacex starlink global satellite internet network earth globe orbits getty business insider 4x3

  • SpaceX wants to surround Earth with a fleet of internet satellites called Starlink. Original plans called for launching nearly 12,000 satellites over the next 8 years or so.
  • However, Space News reports that SpaceX has asked to launch 30,000 more satellites for a maximum of 42,000. That's about 20 times the number of working satellites today and nearly five times the total of all spacecraft humanity has ever launched since 1957.
  • Elon Musk, the rocket company's founder, has said he hopes Starlink will get rural and remote regions of Earth online with affordable high-speed web access.
  • Launching a bunch of satellites increases the risk of collisions and space debris. In early September, SpaceX experienced a close call between one of its first 60 Starlink satellites and a European spacecraft. 
  • Amazon, which is working toward a Kuiper System internet constellation, recently told the FCC that if one in 20 satellites loses its ability to dodge debris or satellites, there'd be about a 6% chance of collision.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

If SpaceX gets the go-ahead, the company's planned fleet of Starlink internet satellites could soon outnumber all the spacecraft humanity has ever launched by nearly five-to-one.

That's according to Caleb Henry at Space News, who on Tuesday reported that SpaceX, founded by tech mogul Elon Musk, now seeks permission from the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) to fly an additional 30,000 Starlink satellites into space. Those tens of thousands would be additional to the nearly 12,000 spacecraft that SpaceX asked permission to launch from the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Put together, this suggests SpaceX now seeks to fly a maximum of 42,000 Starlink satellites.

That figure is striking if it comes to pass. SpaceX would have 20 times the number of operational satellites in orbit today, per a recent tally by the Union of Concerned Scientists. The company's notional mega-fleet would also eclipse the count of all spacecraft ever launched into space by humanity (both operational and defunct) by nearly five-fold, based on a United Nations database.

spacex starlink internet satellite spacecraft solar panels arrays earth orbit illustration 00002Read more: Elon Musk just revealed new details about Starlink, a plan to surround Earth with thousands of high-speed internet satellites. Here's how it might work.

SpaceX plans to boot up Starlink with a fraction of this number, then build toward a floating internet backbone around Earth that also bathes most of the planet's surface in ultra-high-speed web access.

"For the system to be economically viable, it's really on the order of 1,000 satellites," Musk told Business Insider during a call with journalists in May, "which is obviously a lot of satellites, but it's way less than 10,000 or 12,000."

The additional spacecraft appear to reflect SpaceX's planning for Starlink's deeper future. As more satellites for internet constellations fly, they will bring risks as well as rewards.

New satellite internet projects may be multi-billion-dollar cash cows

starlink satellites flat packed stack payload falcon 9 rocket spacex twitter D7THAABVUAATipL

There are a few reasons companies like SpaceX, Amazon, OneWeb, Iridium, and others want to launch large constellations of internet-providing satellites. Chief among them is to rake in billions of dollars.

Traditional satellite internet relies on spacecraft that are larger, older, more expensive, and about 22,236 miles away from Earth. This limits coverage and bandwidth while making for laggy connections.

But Starlink, for example, would hug Earth at hundreds of miles to 1,000 miles away with a larger number of newer satellites. They'd also link together into a floating internet backbone, providing a faster alternative to fiber-optic cables that span the world — a privilege that financial traders would ostensibly pay big money to use.

The close proximity and interlinking would also increase download and upload speeds for users while cutting lag by perhaps dozens of times. Mass-manufacture of inexpensive satellites flown on fully reusable vehicles, like SpaceX's planned Starship system, would keep costs relatively low, too.

spacex starlink satellite lasers internet global network simulation model illustration courtesy mark handley university college london ucl youtube 000Gwynne Shotwell, the president and chief operating officer of SpaceX, said in May 2018 that completing Starlink may cost $10 billion or more. But in May, Musk said it could net the company perhaps $30 billion to $50 billion per year by grabbing a few percent of the global telecommunications industry total business.

Financial analysts said last month (before knowledge of the 30,000 extra satellites became public) that Starlink could propel SpaceX to become a $52 billion company, or possibly more than twice that if the project does exceedingly well.

Read more: SpaceX may be a $120 billion company if its Starlink global internet service takes off, Morgan Stanley Research predicts

The FCC gave SpaceX until November 2027 to reach its maximum planned fleet of nearly 12,000 Starlink satellites. As Henry reports for Space News, though, SpaceX "submitted 20 filings to the ITU for 1,500 satellites apiece," which adds up to 30,000 additional Starlink spacecraft.

These new satellites would orbit anywhere from 204 miles (328 kilometers) to 360 miles (580 kilometers) according to Space News, which reviewed the filings submitted to the ITU. The organization's approval is important because it globally monitors and regulates which satellite frequencies that companies and governments plan to use "to prevent signal interference and spectrum hogging," Henry says.

The practical aim of Starlink (aside from cashing in) is to cover Earth with high-speed, low-latency, and affordable internet access. Having more points of access would benefit that aim. Even partial deployment of Starlink would benefit the financial sector and bring pervasive broadband internet to rural and remote areas.

But the risk of space collisions invariably rises as more satellites go into orbit

satellite damaged by space debris junk collision shutterstock_348838928

SpaceX gets a lot of attention for Starlink, but it's not the only company planning huge satellite constellations. Amazon, for instance, hopes to launch 3,236 of its upcoming Kuiper System satellites into orbit.

Each one of these new fleets significantly adds to the risk of spacecraft collisions with other spacecraft. The same goes for resulting space debris, or high-speed junk, which can strike, disable, or destroy other satellites.

A separate report by Mark Harris at IEEE Spectrum on Wednesday touched on this risk via filings that Amazon recently submitted to the FCC in its push to get Kuiper off the ground.

Though Amazon's submissions dig into risks associated with failures of their satellites, the analysis is arguably relevant to all new proposed constellations planned for low-Earth orbit.

Read more: Satellite collisions may trigger a space-junk disaster that could end human access to orbit. Here's how.

Amazon and SpaceX both plan to have satellites that can avoid collisions. Even so, the new Amazon filing, as detailed by Harris, suggests that if 5% or one-in-20 satellites fail (or their avoidance systems do) in a large constellation, the risk of a collision would be around 6%.

Such a rate is "well beyond what Amazon would view as expected or acceptable," the company wrote in a letter to the FCC. And while that may not seem like much, John Crassidis, a space debris researcher at the University at Buffalo, reportedly said it's "huge."

"At a 6% chance of collision, astronauts would be put into an escape hatch to possibly escape," Crassidis told IEEE Spectrum, presumably referring to the International Space Station, where six people currently live and work. "Even at orders of magnitude less than that, you'd want to do a maneuver to avoid it."

space junk debris earth orbit satellite collisions crashes nasa gsfc jscAlso, SpaceX has seen a 5% failure rate with its first batch of 60 Starlink satellites: Three stopped working after their deployment. But Musk noted before the launch that the devices were experimental. ("There is a lot of new technology here, so it's possible that some of these satellites may not work," Musk said.)

Regardless, the FCC is poised to tighten its rules on avoiding satellites collisions and creating new space debris for the first time since 2004. To that end, it's been collecting feedback from the industry on the newly proposed rule set since last October.

One proposed tweak is having companies ensure the risk of collision for an entire satellite fleet — not just one spacecraft — be no more than one-in-1,000, or 0.1%, over its lifetime. Another is to improve data sharing between operators. (In September, a European satellite and a Starlink satellite came uncomfortably close to colliding due to an apparent glitch in SpaceX's email-based alert system.)

SpaceX did not acknowledge a query Business Insider sent on Tuesday regarding the new ITU filings and the company's latest plans for Starlink.

However, a company representative reportedly told Spaceflight Now in a statement: "As demand escalates for fast, reliable Internet around the world, especially for those where connectivity is non-existent, too expensive or unreliable, SpaceX is taking steps to responsibly scale Starlink's total network capacity and data density to meet the growth in users' anticipated needs."

SEE ALSO: SpaceX may be a $120 billion company if its Starlink global internet service takes off, Morgan Stanley Research predicts

DON'T MISS: 45 unreal photos and renderings show how companies are building a space glamping industry for the superrich

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Elon Musk unveil his latest plan for conquering Mars

21 Oct 03:46

Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren slammed Mark Zuckerberg for his remarks on free speech and said Facebook is spreading lies that could impact the 2020 election (FB)

by Kevin Webb

Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., participate in a Democratic presidential primary debate hosted by CNN/New York Times at Otterbein University, Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2019, in Westerville, Ohio. (AP Photo/John Minchillo)

  • Democratic presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden are sounding off on Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg following Zuckerberg's speech on freedom of expression at Georgetown University on Thursday.
  • During the 35-minute address, Zuckerberg described Facebook's approach to protecting free speech on the social media platform, which includes allowing paid political advertisements with misinformation. 
  • Biden's campaign accused Zuckerberg of "feigned concern" for free speech and said Facebook is attempting to use the US Constitution as a shield to protect the company's revenue.
  • Warren said Facebook is accepting millions of dollars for ads with misinformation, which could have an impact on the 2020 presidential election.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg's comments on freedom of expression and Facebook's approach to protecting free speech have sparked an intense response from two of the front-running Democratic presidential candidates: former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Speaking to a live audience at Georgetown University on Thursday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg defended Facebook's role in providing a voice to more than 2 billion people of around the world. While he admitted that some types of misinformation can do harm, Zuckerberg said that Facebook and other tech companies shouldn't be the ones to decide what information is true.

"While I worry about an erosion of truth, I don't think most people want to live in a world where you can only post things that tech companies judge to be 100% true," Zuckerberg said.

Read more: Facebook's billionaire CEO Mark Zuckerberg addressed threats to free speech in a rare public address on Thursday

Warren has been one of Facebook's most frequent critics, and has repeatedly called for the tech company to be dismantled. Following Zuckerberg's comments at Georgetown, Warren said the speech showed how little Facebook's CEO had learned in the years since the 2016 election, when Russian agents intentionally used the social media platform to influence American voters with fake accounts and misinformation.

Warren said that Facebook's decision to allow paid advertisements with misleading and false information could ultimately influence the 2020 presidential election as well.

Earlier this month Facebook confirmed that paid political ads are ineligible for third-party fact-checking. Other types of ads that include misinformation are not allowed on the social media platform.

Facebook reports that President Donald Trump's re-election campaign spent more than $1.6 million on Facebook ads from September 25 to October 1, according to Facebook's ads library (comparatively, Elizabeth Warren spent $285,000 and Biden spent $122,000 in the same period).

In an email sent to Business Insider minutes after Zuckerberg's speech concluded, a Biden campaign spokesperson said Zuckerberg had "feigned concern for free expression" in an attempt to protect Facebook's business interests.

"Facebook has chosen to sell Americans' personal data to politicians looking to target them with disproven lies and conspiracy theories, crowding out the voices of working Americans," Bill Russo, the Biden campaign's deputy communications director, said in the statement. "Zuckerberg attempted to use the Constitution as a shield for his company's bottom line, and his choice to cloak Facebook's policy in a feigned concern for free expression demonstrates how unprepared his company is for this unique moment in our history and how little it has learned over the past few years."

Facebook did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment on Warren's and Biden's remarks. 

The role of Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms in American politics has been a core issue of the Democratic primary campaigns. While Warren and Biden remain critical of Facebook, there's no questioning the platform's ability to reach and influence tens of millions of Americans.

SEE ALSO: Facebook confirms Donald Trump can lie in ads, but he can't curse

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: People are still debating the pink or grey sneaker, 2 years after it went viral. Here's the real color explained.

21 Oct 03:44

A crushing cost estimate of SpaceX's planned mega-fleet of 42,000 Starlink internet satellites glosses over a huge detail

by Dave Mosher

elon musk

  • SpaceX wants to surround Earth with a vast network of internet-providing satellites called Starlink.
  • Financial analysts at Morgan Stanley Research estimated the project could grow SpaceX's base valuation to $52 billion, possibly up to $120 billion.
  • However, SpaceX has asked to nearly triple its maximum Starlink network from 12,000 to 42,000 satellites, which would incur a major investment.
  • A new Morgan Stanley estimate suggests the 30,000 extra satellites may cost SpaceX $60 billion, but the report doesn't even mention the rocket company's planned low-cost rocket system, called Starship.
  • If projections from SpaceX founder and CEO Elon Musk pan out, the cost to launch Starlink might be half the new independent capital cost estimate.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

It's tricky business estimating the value of SpaceX, the fast-moving rocket company founded by entrepreneur Elon Musk in 2002. The same goes for the capital costs of its ambitious projects, like Starlink: a plan to bathe Earth in high-speed internet access using a fleet of thousands of satellites.

Despite the challenges, Morgan Stanley Research took an earnest whack at SpaceX's valuation in mid-September with an eye toward the inception of Starlink.

If the new project claims just a few percent of the global telecommunications industry and earns $30 to $50 billion a year, as Musk has said it might, the analysts figured SpaceX could grow to a $52 billion company. Or maybe anywhere between $5 billion and $120 billion, depending on the degree of its failure or success with Starlink.

space starlink satellite internet coverage animation signal cones_slow.2019 10 18 14_13_35

Key to that estimate, though, is the cost to build and launch Starlink satellites. As Space News reported this week, SpaceX has changed plans: The company aims to nearly triple its maximum of about 12,000 satellites to 42,000 spacecraft.

This threw a wrench into the valuation calculus, so Morgan Stanley Research on Friday emailed reporters a short update that attempts to reckon the cost of 30,000 additional Starlink satellites.

Read more: SpaceX wants to launch 5 times more spacecraft over the next decade than have ever flown in human history

Analysts now figure the capital cost associated with this change could swell to $60 billion — and that's not including the price tag of launching the other 12,000 satellites. The figure also ignores the cost to replace all Starlink satellites every five years (something Musk told Business Insider in May during a call with reporters). Swapping satellites may add as much as $12 billion per year in capital investments, Morgan Stanley Research said.

This makes the cash cow that Starlink is supposed to be look considerably less attractive, given its hefty and ongoing projected price tag.

But this analysis assumes SpaceX would use its existing and partly reusable Falcon 9 rocket system to launch all Starlink satellites. It merely glosses over and doesn't even name a coming and radical variable change: Starship, which is the company' planned 387-foot-tall mega-rocket.

Financial analysts like to hedge their bets using as many reliable, real-world factors as possible. So it's understandable they'd skip over Starship — the system may not exist for years, or at all if can't escape the development phase.

Still, the potential cost savings with Starship are well worth considering. 

'We'd certainly like to transition to Starship'

starship size comparison 4x3

If Starship comes to pass as Musk has envisioned it over the years, the two-part steel launch system would be fully reusable and capable of launching several times a day. That is in stark contrast to current rockets, which can take months or years to prepare for launch and only get used once, trashing untold millions' worth of hardware per flight.

Starship may upend the traditional launch industry by not having to be replaced every launch. It'd only cost SpaceX fuel, launch support staffing, minor refurbishment, and other fairly negligible needs to lift off.

Read more: A stirring new SpaceX animation of Starship launching shows how the rocket company plans to turn Texas into Earth's interplanetary transport hub

Morgan Stanley Research assumes Starlink would get off the ground 60 satellites at a time, as SpaceX demonstrated in May, at a cost of about $50 million per Falcon 9 launch. The estimate also assumes each Starlink satellite's cost is about $1 million, or on par with the satellites of competitor OneWeb.

By this math, the satellites cost about $30 billion and the launch costs amount to about $25 billion (another $5 billion is likely tied to ground support).

While the update does invoke Starship, it does so obliquely and without naming it — only noting its projected cost per launch.

"This [estimate] also does not assume cost improvements to build & launch satellites, with SpaceX targeting to reduce launch costs further, to ~$5M," the document states.

starlink satellites flat packed stack payload falcon 9 rocket spacex twitter D7THAABVUAATipLIf Starship costs $5 million to launch, which jibes with what Musk has recently said, that's about 10 times less than a Falcon 9 launch. Asuming ground costs remain the saim, the cost to fly 30,000 satellites at 60 satellites per launch shrinks from $60 billion to around $37.5 billion — a difference of $22.5 billion.

"Starship isn't required for this system, but we'd certainly like to transition to Starship," Musk previously told Business Insider. "Starship, which would be a fully reusable system, and with much lower propellant costs and at a much larger scale, would dramatically improve launch costs, probably by a factor of 10 or something like that."  

But that's a per-rocket-launch cost comparison. It's equally important to consider how many more Starlink satellites Starship might be able to ferry into space at once.

Starship could launch more satellites for a fraction of the cost

spacex starship cargo spaceship variant illustration copyright kimi talvitie EGSOqnhXoAYbH0D

Each of SpaceX's 60 satellites launched in May weighed about 500 pounds (227 kilograms), making their total mass about 30,000 pounds (13,620 kilograms) minus any deployment mechanism. According to a new website for Starship, the vehicle could heave about 220,000 pounds (99,800 kilograms) into orbit at once, or more than seven times the first Starlink payload.

Assuming SpaceX scales up the number of Starlink satellites accordingly — and they all fit inside the nosecone of Starship — perhaps as many as 300 or 400 could launch at once. This would cut launch costs for Starlink by additional billions. (This may not be the plan, though, since Starlink satellites would be deployed to many different orbits, or planes, around Earth to ensure proper internet coverage.)

The per-satellite cost estimate may also be lower than $1 million, too. Musk said in May that "the cost of launch per satellite is already more than the cost of the satellite," hinting mass-manufacturing costs are projected be in the realm of hundreds of thousands of dollars per satellite (not $1 million).

In any case, SpaceX is eager to have Starship — which Musk recently said could start flying within one or two years — start launching and deploying Starlink satellites.

"It's a heck of a lot of launches. We'll hopefully have Starship active if we're anywhere near 12,000 satellites," Musk said in May. "For the system to be economically viable, it's really on the order of 1,000 satellites. If we're putting a lot more satellites than that in orbit, that's actually a very good thing, it means there's a lot of demand for the system."

SpaceX did not acknowledge several requests for information and comment from Business Insider.

Correction: A previous version of this story did not account for the estimated cost of satellites. We regret the error and its comical irony.

SEE ALSO: Inside the 'awkward,' 'tense,' and 'heated' private meeting between Elon Musk and Texans whom SpaceX is trying to buy out to fully realize its vision to reach Mars

DON'T MISS: 45 unreal photos and renderings show how companies are building a space glamping industry for the superrich

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Elon Musk unveil his latest plan for conquering Mars

21 Oct 03:42

There’s a new Banana Phone, and it can play ‘Bananaphone’

by Jay Peters

It’s new tech season. New iPhones, new Pixels, new Surface devices, new Echos... and a new Banana Phone.

Now, before I tell you more about the biggest tech gadget of 2019, I want to be perfectly clear that the Banana Phone isn’t a phone — it’s a Bluetooth headset that connects to your phone, and you can use it to take calls. But it looks like a banana!

Image: Banana Phone

And soon, it’s getting a refresh. Earlier today, I spotted FCC filings for an updated model of the Banana Phone, so I called up Brian Brunsing, president of Banana Phone LLC, to learn more about what’s new. Turns out, it has some meaningful updates.

The biggest new feature: the new Banana Phone will apparently be able to play music over a speaker...

Continue reading…

19 Oct 03:55

The Most Important Right-to-Repair Hearing Yet Is on Monday

by Jason Koebler

On Monday, the right-to-repair movement will have its best chance at advancing legislation that would make it easier to repair your gadgets.

The Massachusetts state legislature is holding a three-hour hearing on the Digital Right to Repair act, a bill that would require electronics manufacturers to sell repair parts and tools, make repair guides available, and would prevent them from using software to artificially prevent repair.

So far this year, 19 other states have considered similar legislation. It hasn’t passed in any of them. But Massachusetts is one of the most likely states to pass the legislation, for a few different reasons. Most notably, the legislation is modeled on a law passed unanimously in Massachusetts in 2012 that won independent auto shops the right to repair, meaning lawmakers there are familiar with the legislation and the benefits that it has had for auto repair shops not just in Massachusetts but around the country.

Crucially, important legislative hurdles have already been cleared in the state: Both the House and Senate bills are identical and has broad support from both Democrats and Republicans in the legislature. The hearing is going to be held in the Gardner Auditorium, which holds 600 people, making this the largest and highest-profile hearing on the topic in any state thus far.

“Definitely the most visible attention we've had yet from legislators,” Gay Gordon-Byrne, the executive director of Repair.org, which has been pushing the bill around the country, told Motherboard. “Both the House and Senate bills match and are very well supported by cosponsors. 76 cosponsors in the House and 27 in the Senate.”

Gordon-Byrne and other supporters, such as iFixit, are hoping that people who are interested in the legislation will show up to demonstrate that big tech’s anti-repair actions have affected both small businesses and ordinary consumers.

“Anyone who supports the issue, anyone who is willing to give a personal testimony that could relate to this, we want them to show up,” Kay-Kay Clapp, the global director of communications at iFixit, said. “We’re on the big stage so we want to show up a lot of people and give support to this.”

It's a particularly crucial time for the right-to-repair movement. The Federal Trade Commission has begun studying the issue, and Democratic presidential frontrunners Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have both called for national right-to-repair legislation. That legislation may end up being unnecessary if Massachusetts (or any other state) passes a law first. In 2014, after Massachusetts passed the auto right to repair law, manufacturers signed a memorandum of understanding stating that they would honor the law nationwide, rather than contend with different rules in different states.

iFixit has set up an Eventbrite page with more information about the hearing for people who'd like to attend.

19 Oct 03:54

California Governor Signs Bill Banning Facial Recognition Tech Use By State's Law Enforcement Agencies

by Tim Cushing

California has become the first state in the US to ban facial recognition tech use by local cops. Matt Cagle has more details on the ACLU-backed law.

Building on San Francisco's first-of-its-kind ban on government face recognition, California this week enacted a landmark law that blocks police from using body cameras for spying on the public. The state-wide law keeps thousands of body cameras used by police officers from being transformed into roving surveillance devices that track our faces, voices, and even the unique way we walk. Importantly, the law ensures that body cameras, which were promised to communities as a tool for officer accountability, cannot be twisted into surveillance systems to be used against communities.

As Cagle points out, San Francisco was the first city in the nation to ban use of facial recognition by city agencies. Oakland followed closely behind. And all the way on the other side of the country, Somerville, Massachusetts became the second city in the US to enact a facial recognition ban.

This statewide ban will hopefully lead to others around the nation. The tech multiple companies are pushing government agencies to adopt is unproven, at best. The rate of false positives in live deployments is alarming. Just as alarming is the flipside: false negatives that allow the people, who law enforcement agents are actually looking for, to slip away. Despite this, everyone from the DHS to local police departments thinks this is the next wave of acceptable surveillance -- one that allows government agencies to, in essence, demand ID from everyone who passes by their cameras.

The resistance to facial recognition's seemingly-unchecked expansion is finally having some effect. Axon (formerly Taser) has temporarily halted its plans to introduce facial recognition tech into its body cameras and Google is stepping away from its development of this tech for government agencies. Unfortunately, Amazon has shown no desire to step away from the surveillance state precipice and is continuing to sell its own brand of facial recognition to law enforcement agencies as well as co-opting citizens' doorways into its surveillance network with its Ring doorbell/cameras.

It's a solid win for residents of the state. The ban blocks the use of facial recognition tech by state law enforcement until the end of 2022. It also blocks the use of other biometric surveillance tech and prevents law enforcement from using existing biometric data to feed any predictive policing tools agencies might be using or planning on implementing. With more states and cities willing to at least undertake serious discussions of the implications of facial recognition tech, it's unlikely California will remain the odd state out in the biometric surveillance race.



Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
17 Oct 22:26

Salesforce billionaire Marc Benioff says Facebook should be broken up: 'They’re after your kids'

by Charlie Wood

Marc Benioff

  • Marc Benioff has suggested Facebook should be broken up, joining a growing list of business and political figures who have made the same suggestion.
  • Speaking to CNN on Wednesday, the Salesforce founder and co-CEO criticized the social media giant on a number of fronts, including its perceived addictiveness, its acceptance of lies in political ads, and its preoccupation with acquiring personal data.
  • This is not the first time Benioff has criticized Facebook – he likened the firm to "cigarettes" at the 2018 World Economic Forum in Davos.
  • Facebook did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment.
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

Salesforce founder and co-CEO Marc Benioff has called for Facebook to be broken up.

Benioff was speaking during an interview with CNN on Wednesday.

Discussing Facebook's impact on society, he launched a stinging critique of the social media giant, attacking its attempts to keep younger users engaged and its decision not to police what politicians say in ads.

He said: "It's addictive; it's not good for you; they're after your kids, they're running political ads that aren't true. They're also acquiring other companies and co-mingling [personal data those companies have] into their [own database]."

"I think at that point, because they're now doing that, that they probably should be broken up ... because they're having an undue influence as the largest social media platform on the planet."

Benioff took particular umbrage at Facebook's recent decision to run political advertisements from the Trump campaign containing false claims about Ukraine and the Biden family. He urged Congress to pass legislation that would require truthful advertising on social media platforms, and said there is "no question" he would not run such advertisements himself.

"I think this is extremely important in the age of social media. That's the insight from the 2016 election. It's a very vulnerable moment right now," he added, referencing Russia's use of Facebook to interfere with the 2016 election.

Read more: Ousted WeWork CEO Adam Neumann 'is a great entrepreneur,' says Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff

The 55-year-old has previously criticized Facebook on the grounds of its perceived addictiveness, describing the platform as "the new cigarettes" during at talk at the 2018 World Economic Forum.

david marcus facebook

Benioff is far from the only big name to have called for Facebook's dissolution, with Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren and Facebook cofounder Chris Hughes both taking shots at the firm in 2019. Last week, Facebook moved to publicly call out Warren, tagging her in a tweet after she criticized Facebook on similar grounds to Benioff by running a deliberately fake ad.

His remarks could hardly come at a less convenient time for Facebook, either, after a chastening week for its Libra cryptocurrency project.

Despite only being announced in June, the project has lost a slew of backers in the past week. Seven of twenty-eight founding members have now revoked their membership of the Libra Association – the group of firms formally interested in building and developing Libra, its proposed cryptocurrency.

After Mastercard, Visa and Stripe all dropped out in the past week, Facebook's Libra chief, David Marcus, spoke out in defence of the project this week. On Tuesday he told Yahoo Finance that Libra was "absolutely not" in jeopardy, adding that the project is "going to get harder before it gets easier."

Business Insider has contacted Facebook for comment.

SEE ALSO: This high-flying tech executive's life changed when he sent Marc Benioff an email during an internship at Salesforce

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 8 prostheses that are changing lives

17 Oct 22:24

As the coronavirus spreads, Catholics are turning to online spiritual practices, from masses live-streamed from the Vatican to a $110 wearable 'eRosary'

by Mary Meisenzahl

Click To Pray eRosary   Packaging 5

  • The Vatican launched a smart, wearable eRosary in October, Engadget reported.
  • The rosary connects to an app on iPhone or Android devices via Bluetooth, and the app takes you through the steps to pray the rosary.
  • Through the app, users can also see intentions from Pope Francis, who has asked for special prayers for the elderly. 
  • The Vatican has also started live-streaming the pope's daily mass "to be close to all those who are suffering from the current coronavirus epidemic."
  • Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

As COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, spreads around the world and has put Italy under lockdown, the Vatican is livestreaming daily masses from Pope Francis, the head of the Catholic Church. The Vatican also released a wearable smart rosary last year through the Pope's Worldwide Prayer Network, where users can pray for "peace in the world," and connect with other Catholics while social distancing

The device, which can be worn as a bracelet, is made up of 10 black beads, plus a "smart cross" that stores data. The beads allude to the design of a classic rosary: 10 beads traditionally make up one decade, or a set of prayers. When the wearer activates the rosary, they can choose what kind of prayer they'd like within the free app. There is a standard rosary, a contemplative, and thematic rosary, which will be updated periodically. The app shows progress, and keeps track of prayer history.

In a press release, the Vatican said that the rosary device is a tool for learning, aimed at the "frontiers of the digital world where the young people dwell."

This isn't the first time that the Vatican has directly addressed technology and its impact on young people. In September, Pope Francis attended a Vatican conference about morality and technology, during which he warned Silicon Valley about the dangers of AI.

SEE ALSO: These are the apps that Apple is recommending for people sheltering in place due to the coronavirus

Pope Francis began streaming daily mass on March 9, to be closer to people who are sick or in quarantine.

Source: Vatican News



Today, the Pope prayed for people who have died from COVID-19, especially health care workers "who have given their life in service of the sick."

Source: Vatican News



As Spain goes into lockdown, priests are live-streaming masses.



A priest on the outskirts of Madrid streamed mass where he praised people for helping vulnerable populations during the pandemic.



Like other wearables, such as smartwatches, the eRosary is meant to be worn on your wrist.



In addition to tracking prayers, it tracks health information.



The rosary works by connecting to an iPhone or Android app over Bluetooth.



The app is fairly intuitive and prompts you to connect and charge your device. The Vatican says that the device should be accessible to all ages.



To activate the device, perform the sign of the cross (as indicated in the image) with the eRosary.



Once activated, the app gives instructions to go through the rosary.



It also keeps track of your progress, showing how often you pray and for how long.



By prompting you to hold and move the device, the app mimics the experience of a traditional rosary.



The bracelet is part of the Vatican's "Click to Pray" family, an app where Pope Francis has a profile and lists his personal prayer intentions.



Within the app, you can see Pope Francis' prayer intentions, and pray for them yourself.



As the name says, you literally click to pray for an intention.

The Vatican's eRosary is on sale now for 99 euros or $110 on Amazon and from Acer.

Currently, its only available in Italy, but a spokesperson told Business Insider that US availability is in the short-term plan.