Quantcast
Channel: Co.Labs
Viewing all 36575 articles
Browse latest View live

These maps show how the decline in American birth rates will affect each state

0
0

The U.S. total fertility rate (TFR) has steadily declined over the last few decades, and on Thursday, the CDC announced it had hit a 30-year low in 2017. In fact, at the current birth rate, America will not be able to replace its current workforce.

In a new report on fertility rates, the CDC found that the United States was 16% below what is considered the level for a population to replace itself. If a country needs 2,100 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age over their lifetime, America was hitting at just 1,765.5.

Overall, only two states witnessed rates above replacement level: South Dakota and Utah. The District of Columbia held the lowest rate, with 1,421 births per 1,000 women.

Esri, a spatial analytics company, sourced the CDC’s data and put it into these interactive maps, which are also embedded below.

The CDC analyzed the total fertility rates along numerous demographics, including location and race. It found that among white women, no states had a TFR above the replacement level; 12 states had TFRs for black women above replacement; and among Hispanic women, 29 states had TFRs above 2,100.

As The Hill notes, the U.S. TFR hovered above 3,000 in the early 20th century and reached a peak of 3.7 in the post-World War II baby boom.

The ongoing trend has baffled some analysts. As the American economy recovered, many assumed the birth rate would, too. But a new report at the Center for Retirement Research believes a birth rate recovery will likely not occur.

Experts attribute the declining birth rate to a medley of economic issues and social influences. These include the increased cost of childcare, lack of workplace initiatives for new moms, a drop in teen births, and women waiting longer to marry and have children. For the first time, the majority of new moms in the U.S. are over 30. The CDC’s National Survey of Family Growth found that over 7 million women (that’s 12% of American women of reproductive age) now seek fertility treatment services.

That means an influx of startups dedicated to a host of issues surrounding the complexity that involves starting a family: ovulation tracking, ovarian reserve testing, programs to make the process more accessible, and more. As such, the global fertility services market is expected to grow to $21 billion by 2020, with an annual growth rate of almost 9%, according to a Technavio research report.

While environmentalists might potentially applaud a smaller population, this trend proves worrisome down the line, when a replacement workforce is in need to carry the U.S. economy, as well as shoulder the cost of an aging population and social programs like Social Security.

The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2017 National Population Projections estimate that by 2020 there will be about three-and-a-half working-age adults for every retirement-age person. By 2060, that number will drop to just two-and-a-half working-age adults for every retiree.

The U.S. is now officially an “aging society,” which is defined by a population over 65 exceeding the population under 15. By 2030, all baby boomers will be older than age 65, meaning that 1 in every 5 adults residents will be retirement age.

“The aging of baby boomers means that within just a couple of decades, older people are projected to outnumber children for the first time in U.S. history,” explained Jonathan Vespa, a demographer with the U.S. Census Bureau.


How dumb do you think your customers are, AT&T?

0
0

There’s a lot of money riding on whether wireless carriers and phone makers can make consumers understand the next generation of wireless service, 5G, and why they should want to buy into it. Many Americans are just now hearing of the new, faster service, which will deliver blazing speeds with very little latency. Meanwhile, the carriers are spending millions building the networks that will support the new service, and phone makers are working on the first wave of smartphones that will support it.

That’s why it’s amazing that one of the industry’s biggest players is intentionally trying to confuse the marketplace about what 5G is, and when it will be arriving in your neighborhood. As it’s done before, AT&T is getting ahead of a wireless transition, and will begin labeling some of its 4G phones as 5G models. The company says that it’s justified in doing so because it’ll use the brand name “5G Evolution,” meaning that the service is “evolving” toward real 5G.

Just imagine some other company doing that for some other product. Would it be fair to consumers and the industry if Samsung decided to sell a cheap 1080p TV at a high price by slapping an “8K Evolution” label on it? After all, 1080p was part of the “evolution” to 8K. Of course not.

Here’s how AT&T spokesman Michael Balmoris explains his company’s justification for labeling a 4G phone 5G: “We’ve been hard at work laying the foundation for 5G with technologies like 5G Evolution, now available in over 400 markets,” he said in an emailed statement. “To let customers know when they’re connecting to a 5G Evolution tower, we’re rolling out a ‘5G E’ indicator initially on a handful of 5G Evolution capable devices.”

According to numbers provided by AT&T, the 5G E service is “up to” twice as fast as regular old AT&T LTE service. I don’t doubt this, but it’s still not 5G. To my knowledge, AT&T is not yet using its 5G E marketing term in its advertising to sell phones or tempt people to upgrade to faux 5G, but if history is any guide, it will get around to doing that, too.

At CES in 2011, AT&T began to label its 3G HSPA+ service as “4G” when the service did not fit either the speed or technical requirements of the new standard. Its HSPA+ network was built on GSM technology, which was designed to handle voice communications and only later retrofitted to handle the mobile data boom. And yet, just months earlier, AT&T had sued T-Mobile when the smaller carrier began to slap the 4G label on its own GSM-based HSPA+ service.

Flash-forward to the current wireless generation transition. AT&T appears to want to make damned sure it’s first in line to abuse the definition of the new standard. Verizon ran a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, and USA Today to call out AT&T’s 5G label. “The potential for 5G is awesome, but the potential to overhype and underdeliver on the 5G promise is a temptation that the wireless industry must resist,” the ad read.

T-Mobile’s response was a lighter and funnier:

If AT&T is giving any second thoughts to its move, it isn’t showing them. Speaking at CES on Wednesday, AT&T Communications CEO John Donovan said it makes him “very happy” that AT&T’s competitors are calling foul on his company’s premature use of the 5G label and that the whole affair makes him “smile.”

Where are the regulators?

You might consider AT&T’s use of “5G E” deceptive advertising and expect regulators to pounce. But the company never suffered any consequences for its mislabeling in 2011, and there are no signs it will be punished for doing it again. (Of course, the U.S. federal government happens to be shut down at the moment: The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] and the Federal Trade Commission [FTC] are closed, and neither responded to requests for comment.)

A Washington source close to the FCC told me it’s possible that the agency is now powerless to act because it gave up its jurisdiction over broadband services when it repealed the Open Internet Order (containing network neutrality rules) in late 2017. Chairman Ajit Pai’s FCC systematically ignored public comment and capriciously moved to reclassify broadband from a “telecommunications” service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act to an “information service” under Title I, thus ceding its authority to regulate the service to the FTC.

The FCC traditionally shared jurisdiction with the FTC on telecom regulation issues and often worked together to address breaches of the law. The FCC offered the telecom expertise, and the FTC offered the enforcement power. Now that Pai has taken taken the FCC out of the game, it’s all on the FTC.

In the AT&T matter, the FTC would most likely rely on Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The law says marketing and advertising “representation, omission, or practice” is deceptive if it’s likely to “mislead consumers and affect consumers’ behavior or decisions about the product or service,” and if the injury it causes, or is likely to cause, is “substantial, not outweighed by other benefits, and not reasonably avoidable.”

Complaints about deceptive wireless service claims have also ended up in the courts. In 2015, a false advertising class action suit was brought against Cricket Wireless, whose parent company, Leap Wireless, AT&T bought in 2013. The suit claimed that Cricket misleadingly marketed its phones as “4G/LTE” and assured customers that the devices could receive a 4G/LTE signal. Cricket actually lacked the capability of delivering that kind of signal to the majority of its customers. After the case was transferred to a federal court, the AT&T lawyers defending the case decided to settle with members of the class action for an undisclosed amount.

When wireless carriers fudge the facts, there’s a temptation to say, “Well, that’s how it’s always been,” and leave it at that. But regulators having let it go back in 2010 and 2011 doesn’t justify ignoring new and misleading claims.

As for AT&T, nobody should be shocked to find it at the center of this situation. The company has abused the trust of the public when it served its purposes on many occasions in the past. On top of that, it tends to rely on lawsuits to settle its problems, and on its powerful (and almost always successful) lobby at state houses and in Washington to stifle oversight and limit competition. At a time when honesty itself is under attack as a social and business norm, AT&T has associated itself with people who don’t value honesty at all. Recall, for example, that the company retained the services of Donald Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen–who has now been formally charged with lying to Congress–to help it understand Trump’s Washington. (The company did admit that that decision was a mistake.)

AT&T employs a lot of people, and this is no jab at the rank and file who dig the trenches and install the services. But AT&T’s leadership, Donovan included, should realize that sometimes winning at all costs isn’t winning at all.

IBM’s CES booth featured an experiment in crowdsourced debate

0
0

In June, I wrote about the fist public demo of IBM’s Project Debater, a piece of software–created in one of the company’s AI grand challenges–that can engage in competitive debates. This week at CES in Las Vegas, Project Debater was back in a new version with its own twists.

As originally demonstrated in San Francisco, Project Debater generated its arguments by trawling a vast corpus of existing text relating to the topics at hand–a technique that often worked surprisingly well, though it also led to some oddball moments which, IBM says, it embraces as part of the experience. At CES, the company let attendees (and online participants) contribute their own brief arguments–pro or con–on issues such as “social media brings more harm than good” and “gambling should be banned.” The software then rated these submissions for quality, attempted to eliminate redundancy, and stitched them together into arguments.

The June demo had Project Debater facing off against real live champion human debaters, and let audience members vote on who won; the CES version skips this competitive aspect. Instead, the software has been generating two brief arguments for each statement–one supporting it, and one contesting it.

You can see the debate topics, the human-generated arguments, and Project Debater’s speeches here (and can hear the speeches if you’re using Firefox). The results are less flashy than the debates I witnessed last year at IBM’s Watson West office, without the earlier attempts to make the digital debater ingratiating and even amusing. But maybe this more basic approach brings the technology closer to IBM’s long-term goal for the whole idea–which is to use AI to help businesses synthesize complex information and understand it better.

These maps show you every tree in your city

0
0

In San Francisco, it took a team of arborists a year to map every street tree in the city–124,795 in total. In New York, a similar tree count with volunteers took nearly two years. A new algorithm, by contrast, uses AI and satellite data to map a city’s tree canopy in just hours.

“You can use either aerial imagery or satellite imagery to do basically the same task, but a lot faster,” says Aidan Swope, a Caltech undergrad who created the algorithm as an intern at the tech startup Descartes Labs. Because taking a census by hand takes months or years, some trees are inevitably cut down before it’s complete, so the final map won’t be completely accurate. And these censuses typically also only include street trees, not trees in parks or on private property, while the algorithm includes everything.

San Francisco [Image: courtesy Descartes Labs]

The tool uses a convolutional neural network, similar to those used for facial recognition. While it’s not hard for a machine to find green areas in an aerial image, Swope also trained the model with lidar data, a type of remote sensing data that shows height, making it possible to distinguish trees from grass or other plants.

In a city map, the result shows dense sections of green in some areas and treeless gaps in others. The tool can’t replace every aspect of counting trees by hand–in San Francisco, for example, the team of arborists carefully noted the species and condition of each tree, which the city is using as it plans how to maintain them efficiently. But it could help with planning efforts. “If you’re looking at trying to identify things like canopy coverage goals, or simply where do we need more trees in our city, you don’t need to know the condition of every tree to do that,” says Carla Short, superintendent of the Bureau of Urban Forestry at San Francisco Public Works. “That’s where having that kind of 30,000-foot view is really, really helpful.”

[Image: courtesy Descartes Labs]

It could also help cities prioritize where to send humans for a tree census, especially in places without the budget for a detailed count like San Francisco’s. Though the Descartes Labs algorithm was made simply as a demonstration of its technical capabilities, and isn’t commercially available, the company would be interested in working directly with other cities. It’s one of a handful of tools designed to speed up the process of counting trees; another tool uses Google Street View.

Cities have increasingly ambitious plans for tree planting. In Italy, Milan plans to plant 3 million trees over the next 12 years, something that can fight climate change by absorbing an extra 5 million tons of CO2 each year, clean the city’s polluted air to improve health, and lower temperatures by 2 degrees Celsius. In the U.K., Manchester plans to plant a tree for every resident. Melbourne plans to double its canopy cover by 2040. New York City is planting 1 million trees. Large-scale tree planting is also happening at national levels–Pakistan, for example, recently met a goal to plant a billion trees, and plans to plant 100 million more. The U.K. plans to plant a new forest with 50 million trees. And China deployed 60,000 soldiers in 2018 to plant trees on more than 30,000 square miles of land.

Urban trees have a long list of benefits: Living near more trees makes you happier, improves health, and even makes people feel as healthy as if they were seven years younger (or $10,000 richer). In Dallas, tree planting is helping fight rising heat. Urban trees can store almost as much carbon as tropical forests, making them an important tool in the race against climate change.

iPhone 2019 lineup: Leaked details on 3 things you can expect from Apple this year

0
0

Though Apple won’t debut its new 2019 iPhones for another nine months, the company is already well into the development cycle for them. And thanks to a report from the Wall Street Journal, we now know a little bit more about what each phone will be like. According to the Journal’s report, once again Apple will release three new models of iPhone. Here’s how they break down:

  • The iPhone 11 Max (the name is just a placeholder), the successor to the current 6.5-inch iPhone XS Max, will get an all-new triple-lens rear camera system. Though the WSJ doesn’t offer details about the new triple-lens camera, the additional lens should give the device an extra level of optical zoom.
  • The iPhone 11, the successor to the current 5.8-inch iPhone XS, isn’t expected to get the triple-lens camera. Instead, it will retain its dual-lens camera. This means the 2019 flagship iPhones will be differentiated in more than size, unlike the 2019 iPhone XS series, which featured the exact same camera systems on both the regular and Max model.
  • As for the iPhone XR, that will be seeing an update in 2019 as well, the Journal says. While the XR’s successor is said to retain the LCD display of the 2018 model, the 2019 XR will reportedly get the dual-lens camera system that is currently only found on the iPhone XS series. This will be a major upgrade for the XR series and could spur older iPhone owners into trading in their older models for one with a dual-lens camera.

Unfortunately, there’s still no word on whether Apple will be lowering their iPhone prices this year–which would probably help boost sales more than camera improvements would.

The 3 biggest trends at CES 2019

0
0

The annual Consumer Electronics Show (CES) is like a ouija board that forecasts the year in technology to come. It’s a captivating–and yet rarely perfect–forecast of our future. After all, neither the iPod, nor iPhone, were announced at CES.

At the same time, the Las Vegas tech show tends to offer a telling snapshot of the industry itself, as every major hardware manufacturer comes together to share news in one place. This year was a particularly quiet show in terms of individual announcements, but it still demonstrated where the tech industry thinks it’s going over the next year. Here’s what we noticed.

[Image: Amazon, Google]

Virtual assistants are everywhere. But is anyone using them?

Google and Amazon continued duking it out for title of most virtual assistants listening to the most people on the most devices. It’s been a multi-year battle, once led by Amazon, quickly matched by Google, and now escalating between these two companies like a new cold war.

[Image: Amazon, Google]

For the first time ever, Amazon released a stat on how many Alexa-powered products had been sold. The number was massive–100 million–until you really thought about it. It includes products ranging from Amazon’s own Echo to third-party hardware like Sonos speakers. In fact, there are some 28,000 Alexa-powered products on the market, meaning any smart coffee maker that has Alexa support would be rolled into that figure, too. Just because a device supports Alexa doesn’t mean people are using the chatbot technology regularly, or for anything more than hearing the weather report. But Amazon has certainly been successful in getting its voice assistant into products.

Meanwhile, Google fired back with a much bigger number of devices that use the Google Assistant: 1 billion. That’s 10 times as many as Amazon. It helps that the Google Assistant is part of Android, and Android smartphones are the most popular in the world. The difference in these figures seems to demonstrate how limited your reach will be if you don’t have a strong foothold in mobile. Case in point: Moving forward, Google is trojan-horsing its Assistant onto iPhones via Google Maps, and it’s even offering Samsung’s competing Bixby assistant access to some Google apps like Maps, Play, Youtube, and Gmail.

In any case, virtual assistants are here. The question now is: Are we really using them? At CES, Google claimed yes–four times more people are using Assistant than last year. But that’s the sort of vague stat that leaves us wondering: What are they doing with it? Are those interactions meaningful? And what counts as an active user, anyway?

[Illustration: FC]

Apple is making new friends

Apple usually skips CES in favor of its own events, but this week it made a rare attempt to steal the show without actually announcing any products of its own. The biggest news is that Apple–fresh off devastating quarterly earnings that showed iPhone growth has tanked–is making a bigger effort to be interoperable with third-party products, and make its services accessible without using Apple devices themselves.

You’ll now be able to stream content from an iPhone to a Vizio, Samsung, or LG TV via the Airplay 2 standard that all three of these big TV manufacturers will be baking into their sets. This means you’ll be able to mirror your phone onto your TV, or stream content to it without cables and other headaches. (Sorry, Apple TV! You seemed very nice!) Here we see Apple operating a lot more like Google, which has done something similar with Chromecast support in the past. But Apple dove in at really big scale, seemingly overnight.

[Photo: Samsung]

More major, however, was Samsung’s announcement that Samsung TVs will be getting an integrated iTunes app. That means you won’t need any Apple hardware whatsoever to stream iTunes content to a TV. Here we see signs of Apple recognizing its need to embrace its services business, rather than simply sell hardware. And dang, it’s actually kind of cool, right? Of course your iTunes library should be as flexible to stream as Netflix, HBO, and other popular apps. The announcement teases a new future for Apple that’s decoupled from pricey hardware (which we really shouldn’t be replacing every two years, anyway).

Finally, one tangential Apple-CES item that should be mentioned was a stat Tim Cook shared in an interview with CNBC. Cook said that the company’s wearable products–the Apple Watch and AirPods–create more revenue than the iPod line did at its peak. This demonstrates the scale that Apple works at nearly 20 years since it launched the first iPod. It also portends the importance of wearables to Apple’s future as it explores services.

[Image: Bell]

The way we get around in the post-Uber world will change, again

When I took a ride in Waymo’s first driverless taxi last year, I noticed something interesting: The app interface doesn’t show your route–it just shows the start point and end point. I joked to one of Waymo’s product developers that it had already designed its interface for flying cars. They laughed, but only a little. Perhaps because that’s exactly the kind of thinking that the mobility industry is doing, now that self-driving technologies are maturing and digital ride hailing has been figured out. The way we move is only going to keep changing.

[Photo: Bell]

This long-term–and wildly futuristic–strategizing was on full display at CES. For starters, the Uber partner Bell showed off a second-stage concept of its flying car that both companies swear they will begin testing in 2020. (This has been on the docket for a while.) A full-scale model on the CES floor promised to fly five people at speeds reaching 150 mph.  Of course, it didn’t actually fly, but it’s being taken seriously for an important reason: Bell is an established aircraft developer that makes the propulsion technology behind the V-22 Osprey (the crazy-expensive military helicopter plane thing).

[Image: Hyundai]

Hyundai also shared its vision for a wild car with four wheels and four legs called the Elevate. It’s designed for first responders who need to wheel and crawl their way through difficult terrain. A concept rendering also showed the Elevate lifting a person in a wheelchair up the steps of their brownstone. The concept offered a taste of what’s possible if robotics and self-driving technologies marry in just the right way–and it makes a superb complement to the latest concepts showed off by Toyota, which has been running a contest to offer people in wheelchairs high-tech alternatives to everyday transit.

Segway–which some might remember built a standing wheelchair years ago–also showed up to CES with two interesting announcements of its own. First, it will build more durable scooters–which is good and necessary!–in a partnership with Lyft.

Secondly, Segway showed off a delivery robot that looks something like a filing cabinet on wheels with an iPad taped to the top. Developed for office buildings and malls, you can imagine it delivering staplers and Starbucks, but not much more. At first glance, the bot is a perfect example of CES being used for marketing hype more than a viable product–especially since delivery robots have had a tough time coming to market (they were quickly banned in San Francisco before legislators changed their minds).

[Image: Mercedes-Benz]

Mercedes is making a play for mass transit of its own through the introduction of something the company calls Vision Urbanetic. It’s a combination of cars and IT infrastructure that’s designed to declog city streets using a combination of sensors, algorithms, and self-driving vehicles. (It’s pretty much an Uber/Lyft/Waymo competitor, from what I can tell.) I have no clue if they can pull it off, but the glowing, self-driving Mercedes was right at home on the Vegas strip.

As the annual tech show finishes up today, we’re left with a vision of a tech industry pushing plenty of flashy flying car concepts and other typically bombastic CES announcements. But based on the way Google, Amazon, and now Apple showed up at CES, 2019 will be full of surprises, too. One thing is certain: It’s shaping up to be a year when platform holders continue to spread their tentacles into every nook and cranny of our lives.

Visa’s CMO and CCO Lynne Biggar never, ever checks a bag

0
0

As Visa’s chief marketing officer and chief commercial officer, Lynne Biggar flies around the world overseeing all of Visa’s branding, sponsorship, communications, and marketing activities. As a veteran traveler who spent years on the road with Time Inc. and American Express before joining Visa, she seems even busier when she’s off the clock–spending her free time climbing Mt. Kilimanjaro, for example.

Here the executive reveals her tips and tools for getting the most out of every day.

Where do you go to relax and recharge?

I recharge not by a place per se, but by giving myself a physical challenge. I’ve climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro, walked (part of) the Camino de Santiago in Spain, and this summer I hiked through the Dolomites in Italy. I recharge by getting out into nature, going somewhere remote, and ideally, somewhere I’ve never been before.

What travel tips do you swear by?

I travel nearly every week for work, so I have a well-honed regimen I go by:

  • The minute I get on the plane, I set my watch to the time where I am going and act accordingly.
  • I rarely watch the movies and instead pop in my earbuds and use the time to work.
  • I always try to pay only digitally (with Visa, of course). I find that I can travel to nearly any country in the world and, except for tips, rarely need to take out local currency. That way, I’m not left holding unused money that I won’t ever spend again.
  • I often buy flowers to make myself feel more at home in a hotel.
  • No matter how long I will be gone, I will only carry-on.

What’s a product that you are currently in love with?

My Fitbit Ionic. It’s truly an all-purpose device that keeps me honest with my fitness routine while having to maintain a very heavy travel schedule, tells me how much sleep I get (or don’t get), and perhaps most importantly, let’s me make payments without carrying my Visa card—including my morning Starbucks!

What classic product do you believe nobody’s ever improved upon?

While my daily calendar is organized digitally on my phone/computer, I like to keep a long-term view organized on an old-school, paper, month-by-month calendar. I travel with it and refer to it often when having to schedule things that are further afield, as it’s tough to see the big picture on your phone.

What’s your on switch?

The second my feet touch the ground, my mind starts running and I start naturally trying to find solutions for the unsolved problems from the days before and cycling through my to-do list. I feel fortunate that it has always been this simple for me to get going in the morning.

What’s your off switch? 

Whether it’s going to the gym or a long walk, I always end the day with some kind of exercise that takes me physically away from my work space.

Another Huawei employee has been arrested

0
0

Two people were arrested in Poland over espionage charges, according to a report from a Polish news broadcaster. One of them is reportedly a sales director for Huawei. The other is allegedly a former security agent who recently worked with the Polish branch of France’s Orange telecommunications company. According to CNBC, which cites the original Polish report, the two men will reportedly be detained by authorities for at least three months.

Both men, says the Polish report, are charged with helping Chinese authorities to the detriment of Poland’s national security. The Eastern European country’s officers have seized documents from both Huawei’s and Orange’s offices. If found guilty, the two face up to 10 years in prison.

This sales director isn’t the only Huawei employee in legal hot water. The company’s CFO, Meng Wanzhou, was arrested last December in Canada and is currently facing extradition to the U.S. She faces charges of violating U.S. trade rules. Meng was released on bail last month, but remains stuck in Canada.

The U.S.’s battle to extradite Meng has reportedly had business ramifications. A recent note from UBS says that this fight likely played a role in Apple’s iPhone shipment decline to China in December.

With another employee of Huawei in legal troubles, we’ll see how China–and the global economy–responds.


Amazon’s Dash buttons have been outlawed in Germany

0
0

A Munich regional court has ruled that Amazon’s Dash buttons violate consumer protection legislation and are thus illegal under German law, reports Reuters. Amazon’s Dash buttons are small wireless hardware with a single button on it, which, when tapped by an Amazon Prime member, will automatically place an order for the product and bill it to the user’s Amazon account.

However, Dash buttons only show the logo of the product being ordered, such as the brand of toilet paper or coffee. The Dash buttons do not show the current price Amazon is charging the customer for the product, which violates German consumer protection laws because shoppers don’t know what they are paying for the product at the time they order it. As the head of Germany’s consumer protection watchdog, Wolfgang Schuldzinski, said on Thursday:

“We are always open to innovation. But if innovation means that the consumer is put at a disadvantage and price comparisons are made difficult then we fight that.”

As for Amazon, a company spokesperson told Reuters that the e-commerce giant will fight the ruling in court, saying, “Today’s ruling is not only hostile to innovation. It also stops customers from making an informed decision about whether a service like the Dash button gives them a convenient shopping experience.”

The thumb-sized Dash buttons have been available since 2015.

Facebook may be making you feel less healthy

0
0

Facebook can have a serious impact on mental health: Studies show that spending time on the social network, which encourages endless scrolling and endless comparison to other people, can make people feel lonely and depressed, lowering self-esteem and increasing social anxiety.

But the website’s harm can go even further than your psychological well-being. A new study from researchers at the University of Surrey, published in the open-access journal Heliyon, found that people who compare themselves to others on Facebook tend to perceive that their physical health–like the amount of sleep they get and their weight change tendencies–is worse off than that of their friends. While it’s a small study, and much more data is needed, the work is part of a growing body of research about the way social networks influence how we perceive ourselves.

To test this, Bridget Dibb, senior lecturer in health psychology at the University of Surrey, surveyed 165 Facebook users about their usage of the social network as well as their experience of 39 different physical health symptoms, like fatigue, weight change, and muscle tension, over the previous two weeks. Using a hierarchical regression model, Dibb found that people reported worse physical health when they had low life satisfaction, anxiety, and depression. The results also show that people who spend more time on Facebook are more likely to report physical symptoms. Finally, people who compare themselves to those who seem to be better off than them, but view this discrepancy in a positive, inspirational way, also felt worse physically. Of all the variations of social comparison tested for in the study, participants tended to agree with this type–called “positive upward comparison”–the most.

This relationship isn’t necessarily causal–people who are in poor health might tend to view other people on Facebook as better-off than they are, which could be fueling the result.

“A longitudinal study would best show the true relationships and the direction of causality; does social comparison lead to perceptions of ill health or are those who experience worse health more likely to engage in positive upward comparison?” Dibb writes. “The answer to this question is important in order to determine the long-term negative effects of comparing via social media.”

It’s clear that more work is needed to understand exactly how Facebook and social networks in general are impacting people’s health over longer periods of time. This research suggests that the social network might not just make people psychologically feel worse, but perceive themselves to feel physically feel worse, as well.

Focusing on how individuals can stop climate change is very convenient for corporations

0
0

What can be done to limit global warming to 1.5°C? A quick internet search offers a deluge of advice on how individuals can change their behavior. Take public transport instead of the car or, for longer journeys, the train rather than fly. Eat less meat and more vegetables, pulses and grains, and don’t forget to turn off the light when leaving a room or the water when shampooing. The implication here is that the impetus for addressing climate change is on individual consumers.

But can and should it really be the responsibility of individuals to limit global warming? On the face of it, we all contribute to global warming through the cumulative impact of our actions.

By changing consumption patterns on a large scale we might be able to influence companies to change their production patterns to more sustainable methods. Some experts have argued that everyone (or at least those who can afford it) has a responsibility to limit global warming, even if each individual action is insufficient in itself to make a difference.

Yet there are at least two reasons why making it the duty of individuals to limit global warming is wrong.

[Source Images: American Public Power Association/Unsplash, Patrick Hendry/Unsplash]

Individuals are statistically blameless

Climate change is a planetary-scale threat and, as such, requires planetary-scale reforms that can only be implemented by the world’s governments. Individuals can at most be responsible for their own behavior, but governments have the power to implement legislation that compels industries and individuals to act sustainably.

Although the power of consumers is strong, it pales in comparison to that of international corporations, and only governments have the power to keep these interests in check.

Usually, we regard governments as having a duty to protect citizens. So why is it that we allow them to skirt these responsibilities just because it is more convenient to encourage individual action? Asking individuals to bear the burden of global warming shifts the responsibilities from those who are meant to protect to those who are meant to be protected. We need to hold governments to their responsibilities first and foremost.

A recent report found that just 100 companies are responsible for 71% of global emissions since 1988. Incredibly, a mere 25 corporations and state-owned entities were responsible for more than half of global industrial emissions in that same period.

Most of these are coal- and oil-producing companies and include ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, Gazprom, and the Saudi Arabian Oil Company. China leads the pack on the international stage with 14.3% of global greenhouse gas emissions due to its coal production and consumption.

If the fossil fuel industry and high-polluting countries are not forced to change, we will be on course to increase global average temperatures by 4°C by the end of the century.

If just a few companies and countries are responsible for so much of global greenhouse gas emissions, then why is our first response to blame individuals for their consumption patterns? It shouldn’t be–businesses and governments need to take responsibility for curbing industrial emissions.

[Source Images: American Public Power Association/Unsplash, Patrick Hendry/Unsplash]

Governments and industries should lead

Rather than rely on appeals to individual virtue, what can be done to hold governments and industries accountable?

Governments have the power to enact legislation that could regulate industries to remain within sustainable emission limits and adhere to environmental protection standards. Companies should be compelled to purchase emissions rights–the profits from which can be used to aid climate-vulnerable communities.

Governments could also make renewable energy generation, from sources such as solar panels and wind turbines, affordable to all consumers through subsidies. Affordable and low-carbon mass transportation must replace emission-heavy means of travel, such as planes and cars.

More must also be done by rich countries and powerful industries to support and empower poorer countries to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

All of this is not to say that individuals cannot or should not do what they can to change their behavior where possible. Every little contribution helps, and research shows that limiting meat consumption can be an effective step. The point is that failing to do so should not be considered morally blameworthy.

In particular, individuals living in poorer countries who have contributed almost nothing to climate change deserve the most support and the least guilt. They are neither the primary perpetrators of global warming nor the ones who have the power to enact the structural changes necessary for limiting global warming, which would have to involve holding powerful industries responsible.

While individuals may have a role to play, appealing to individual virtues for addressing climate change is something akin to victim-blaming because it shifts the burden from those who ought to act to those who are most likely to be affected by climate change. A far more just and effective approach would be to hold those who are responsible for climate change accountable for their actions.


Morten Fibieger Byskov, postdoctoral researcher in international politics, University of Warwick

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How to go on a low-information diet

0
0

We live in a world of unlimited information. The internet produces 2.5 quintillion bytes of data every single day. Keeping up everything is impossible when we only have 24 hours in a day, and can stand in the way of getting things done and focusing on what really matters.

Anita Williams Woolley, associate professor of organizational behavior and theory at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business, says the biggest problem with information overload is the constant stream of interruptions. “Doing something such as writing an email while being constantly interrupted can lead you to spend at least twice as long writing it, and the quality of the final product will be significantly lower than if it was written without interruptions,” she says.

And switching our focus isn’t the only problem associated with our overconsumption of data. “The more information you consume, the more likely that some of it will be thought-provoking or upsetting and will stay in the back of your mind even as you try to move on to do other things,” says Woolley. This cognitive burden can make you feel more burned out at the end of the day and can harm your ability to concentrate on the task at hand.

Digital detoxes are heralded as the answer to our data consumption woes. Shut everything off, they say. But a digital detox may not be possible for everyone. After all, for many of us, our livelihoods are connected to our devices. Instead, a low-information diet may be the answer.

A low-information diet doesn’t mean cutting out data entirely, but, rather, choosing the information that you need to consume. “Like any other diet, moderation is key to success,” says internet marketing expert Larry Bailin. “Food is not harmful, too much food is harmful. To lose weight, you pick and choose what to eat, when to eat, and why to eat it.” Controlling the data you consume means selecting the data that is critical to your success, while ignoring the data that is not.

Follow these four steps to go on a low-information diet:

Develop a ranking system

Of the hundreds of emails you receive in a day, how many actually demand your attention right away? Probably only a handful, right? Yet so many of us are accustomed to looking at and answering every email as soon as it comes in, removing our focus from the meaningful work we’re doing.

Make use of your email system, marking critical emails with flags or stars. Woolley sorts her emails into four categories:

  1. Important and urgent
  2. Important but not urgent
  3. Urgent but not important
  4. Neither urgent or important

“When I go through my inbox, I put everything into one of those buckets, then I handle the 1s [important and urgent] first,” she says. This ranking system ensures that your brain is not overburdened with unnecessary or irrelevant information.

Keep social media feeds clean

Although it’s often blamed as the biggest time waster on the internet, social media can be a great resource for information, if used correctly. The problem, according to Bailin, is that we seek out to grow a follower base and miss out on the opportunities social media provides to access that relevant information. The more people we’re following that don’t produce content that is relevant to our lives, the less likely we are to see the content we actually want to see.

In order to get the most out of your social media data, avoid feeling obliged to follow people back or playing the numbers game just to grow your followers. Lighten your data load by seeking only the relevant and useful data. “Keep your feed clean so you see the relevant information that will help you stay competitive, instead of overflowing with random cat memes from random followers,” says Bailin.

Schedule your data usage

“We have unlimited access to food, yet most of us are not constantly eating. We eat at timed intervals,” says Bailin. Rather than answering every buzz or beep the second your hear it, determine when during the day you will reach for your devices to check in on email and social media. To train yourself to overcome this Pavlovian response, try waiting five minutes after a buzz, beep, or ding before reaching for your device. Then increase this to 10 minutes, 15 minutes, and so on.

Woolley advises scheduling your data time into your calendar or using tools such as Freedom to lock down your browser. Let coworkers and collaborators know about your time boxing schedule so you don’t feel that you’re keeping them waiting by not responding within two minutes of their message.

Shut down at night

It can be tempting to spend those last few hours of the evening scrolling through your social media, browsing the web, feeding yourself all sorts of data. Shutting down your data usage an hour before bed will allow you to gain clarity and prepare yourself for the day ahead, rather than clouding your mind with probably irrelevant information.

8 signs you should quit your job

0
0

Many professionals examine their career in a harder, more critical way as the New Year starts, prompting them to reconsider how they’re pacing. Most of the time, this includes determining whether they should stay loyal to their employer—or start the process of applying elsewhere or going freelance. Most Americans will spend far more time with their coworkers than their spouses, so remaining at a gig that doesn’t fulfill, challenge, or make you happy is not only a waste of time, but also energy and spirit. Instead of seeking the advice of career experts or coaches, many executives at leading companies have been through lots of professional ebbs and flows, so they recognize when it’s time to move on. Here, they explicitly note the hints you might be missing that it’s time to quit your job. ASAP.

1. You are consistently bringing negative energy into your home life

Julie Vessel, chief talent officer at MONO advertising agency, says it’s human nature to complain, since no one, nothing, and no job will ever be perfect. But professionals in the right jobs aren’t constantly stressing about their employment. When you finally sign off email, do you bring home a really poor attitude with your dirty dish from lunch? Toxic, consistent negativity could indicate your career is sucking your soul dry. “Can you leave your emotional baggage at work? If not, then maybe it’s time to think about what is causing you to dislike your job, and consider what you wish was different. Then, go in search of something that offers that,” she recommends.

2. You are too comfortable

While you might think being comfortable and confident in your role is indicative of success, Julie Hansen, CEO of Babbel US, says it could mean the opposite. In fact, those who are able to thrive within their careers are those who are brave enough to be uncomfortable. After all, as her father taught her, the best time to seek out your next move is when things are going well. “If you wait until you’re unhappy, you run the risk of taking just anything that comes by in order to get out, instead of the right next thing,” she explains. “Having success in a position is great–it makes us happy to go to work every day, and more able to apply ourselves completely to solving problems. But when you’re in control, you’re much better positioned to take your time and make sure you’ve got all the answers before needing to jump.”

3. You tell yourself it’s “just a job”

But is it, really? For those who consider themselves ambitious and set inspiring goals for both their careers and personal lives, a job is never merely just that. Instead, their 9 to 5 is an avenue where they propel their skills forward and dedicate themselves to a life of learning and progression. Vessel explains that when we begin to convince ourselves we shouldn’t care or expect so much, we are lowering our standards. “If this happens to you, use this as an opportunity to reflect on what it is that’s really, really bugging you. And beyond identifying the irritation, think about what it is you wish was different in your responsibilities, role, involvement, or team,” she explains. “If we give ourselves the chance to be honest, we can usually break it down to something specific about our work or role.” Depending on how close you are or how comfortable you feel, Vessel suggests finding a way to bring it up with your manager. “Before you jump ship to another job, give yourself the opportunity to see if what you’re missing or wanting can be attained where you are,” she says.

4. You can do your job with your eyes closed

Being highly skilled and deciding you want to take on new responsibilities at work is one thing—and mindlessly going through the motions instead of being engaged is another. Every professional can reach a plateau in a job they’re great at, but this doesn’t mean they’ve reached the top. Rather, it’s more like you’re idling, waiting for your career to steer you instead of taking the wheel yourself. Vessel explains that when you’re not being challenged, you will eventually get bored and won’t be inspired. “If you’re content clocking in and clocking out without much change day to day, this isn’t the advice for you,” she explains. “For those of us who are entrepreneurial-minded, however, stagnation is a breeder of resentment: for your job, your same old boss. If you find yourself in a position where your job is the easiest thing you have to do all day, it’s time to make a move.”

5. You don’t ever want to go to work

Sure, after your birthday weekend surrounded by everyone you love, toasting the good times, heading into an 8 a.m. Monday budget meeting is a major buzzkill. Or those post-vacation blues? They’re definitely a real thing. However, Thomas MacNeil, chief technology officer at eSalon, says that never wanting to go to work could mean you’ve outgrown your gig. “This is the start of the discontent. You’ve switched from being passionate at work to feeling like you’re just trying to survive. There are always issues and problems at any job, you’re there to solve them, but whether you see them as challenges that help you grow or problems that burn you out is entirely perspective,” he says. Though you should discuss your concerns with your manager, if nothing can be rectified, it’s likely smart to seek pastures new that make you want to run to the office . . . instead of running away.

6. You’re making careless mistakes

Sending over a client brief with a glaring error. Typing your email far too fast and making a grave typo. Scheduling meetings on top of one another. All of these fumbles happen, sure, but if they’re becoming the rule instead of the exception, it’s a sign you’re not concentrating fully. This could mean you’re not only disengaged, but that you’re no longer committed to your position, your manager, or your company, Vessel notes. It’s in your interest–and frankly, the interest of your coworkers and higher-ups—to ask for more responsibilities or find another gig that will keep you on your toes.

7. The environment is toxic

What’s unfortunate about starting at a new job is that you can’t predict the culture. Since all companies want to show the Instagram-filtered version of the office environment, you only know what really goes on between managers and coworkers once you’ve signed on the dotted line and joined the team. If over the past months—or even years—you’ve realized you’re in a toxic situation, founder and CEO of ABS Staffing Solutions Ariel Schur says it’s time to make a change. “It’s one thing for your boss to provide constructive feedback, but it’s quite another to be constantly mistreated or ridiculed. Having a toxic boss or negative work setting can make a job unbearable. Considering how many hours most people spend at their jobs, you don’t want it to be an unhealthy environment or agonizing daily situation,” she says. However, there is a difference between a one-off remark, or if it’s streaming from the top. “Assess whether there is potential for the situation to change by talking to your hiring manager or your boss’s boss, and if you have fully explored all avenues, it might be best to move on,” she says.

8. You are feeling physically (or mentally) unhealthy

Everyone knows when they’re performing to their top potential—and when they’re struggling. Even people who thoroughly love their jobs will feel emotionally and physically drained during hectic seasons, especially when we only have so much energy to contribute to our work. However, if you’ve noticed a downward spiral in your overall health and your ability to concentrate, Chris Chuang, cofounder and CEO of Republic Wireless, says it could be more than stress, but a bad career fit. “Work can be your passion, but it should not come at the cost of your life and health . . . ever. If your job is a detriment to your health, and your role or company does not allow flexibility or resources to improve it, then it’s time to move on. No job is worth sacrificing the one body you have,” he urges. To identity the cause of your angst, try to set smarter work-life boundaries and see if your condition improves. And as Chuang says, any employer who won’t be empathetic to you feeling overworked and overwhelmed isn’t a place you want on your resume.

Crafting takes a dark turn in the age of climate crisis

0
0

In 2015, University of Georgia marine scientist Joan Sheldon decided to translate climate change temperature data into a scarf. She took some climate data and began slowly, crocheting the global average temperature for each year from the 1600s to the present using a simple color coding system. She used purple to represent normal temperatures, shades of blue for cooler temperatures, and shades of red for warmer temperatures.

The result was a mostly purple scarf, with occasional pale blue and red stripes, and increasingly dark shades of red on one end. When Sheldon presented the scarf at a scientific conference, she was stunned by the reaction. Even scientists who were familiar with the data wanted to touch the scarf, to find the year they were born. “They never would [do this] with a science graph,” she says. “It approaches you in a different way.”

Scarf by Joan Sheldon [Photo: Wade Sheldon]

In the last few years, yarn-based visualizations of temperature data have exploded in popularity in the knitting community, particularly through the organization Tempestry Project, which has sold more than 600 kits supplied with NOAA climate data and a variety of yarn to knitters across the country. Now, hundreds of knitters share their work and look for new sources of data on an active Facebook group. Groups on the yarn arts website Ravelry are also devoted to turning different types of climate data into scarves and blankets. Data viz knitting has made its way into classrooms as well: Penn State Brandywine professor of earth science Laura Guerin uses a temperature scarf in her introductory science courses to help non-scientists understand temperature data in a visceral way. Both scientists and climate activists are using these nontraditional visualizations to teach people about climate change.

[Photo: courtesy The Tempestry]

For those who care deeply about what’s happening to our planet, knitting a scarf or blanket using temperature data can have another purpose: as a therapeutic, emotional outlet. It’s like anxiety baking, but for climate change. “I found this to be one of the most mindful projects I have ever done,” says knitter Kiki B. Smith, who is a member of the Tempestry Facebook group. “Each stitch, each row, a meditation on the climate, humanity, the Earth.”

[Photo: courtesy The Tempestry]
Knitting has long been considered a therapeutic exercise, primarily because of its rhythmic, repetitive hand movements. Physiotherapist and founder of the organization Stitchlinks Betsan Corkhill has studied knitting’s mental health benefits for years, including through a 2013 study published in the British Journal of Occupational Therapy, which surveyed more than 3,500 knitters globally. The study found that 47% of respondents felt like knitting helped them think through problems, and 81.5% said that they felt happier after knitting. Communal knitting also add to knitting’s benefits, with 86% of people saying that knitting with others gave them a sense of belonging. “[Temperature data knitters are] getting a lot of benefit from doing something in a group, and also benefit from the physical, rhythmic action of knitting,” Corkhill says. “That process will be calming.” Long-time knitter Lea Redmond puts it succinctly: “It’s like running with your fingers.”

Sky Scarf, 2015. [Image: Lea Redmond]

But knitting temperature data is not always an easy project to tackle, especially for someone who cares so deeply about climate change. “For a long time I avoided it because I was already so depressed about global warming and the future of the Earth that I didn’t think I could handle such a strong reminder of the warming,” says Christine Armer, another member of the Tempestry Facebook group. But once she did decide to start a scarf, she found it was a healing process. “Knitting the years day-by-day has been a great way to break things down into small bits so the whole isn’t so overwhelming. I still am terrified of the future of the Earth, but it’s not hitting me emotionally every day now. I can carry on with my life and pretend it will be okay. For me, this work was as much about addressing my depression that was stuck on global warming as it was about the knitting itself.”

[Photo: courtesy The Tempestry]
Emily McNeil, one of the cofounders of the Tempestry Project, found that knitting Tempestries has helped her cope with her emotions both when it comes to climate change and other, personal tragedies. “I have knitted a dozen or so Tempestries so far and mostly . . . felt they were a way to channel anger over political inaction into something beautiful,” she says. “More recently, I made one commemorating my father’s birth year, and I was surprised that it became a way to channel grief–over his long-ago death, over what he would think of the world today. It became a very intimate project, as I knit his first year, and I felt closer to him than I have in years.”

Others have focused primarily on using the temperature scarves as a means of raising awareness about climate change. “I think that what we are doing to our planet is devastating, and I see this project as an important visual piece that will help people who don’t quite get it yet, to understand,” says Tanya Seaman, another Tempestry Facebook group member who is working to develop a Green New Deal platform for Philadelphia ahead of the city’s mayoral election. She is currently planning to make a blanket composed of temperature data from her birth year and 2018 to show how the world has changed since she was born. “For me, raising awareness and putting forth constructive ideas is precisely how I deal with what otherwise would make me want to crawl under the covers and hide from this incredibly enormous crisis.”

Of course, not everyone finds knitting to be an antidote to climate anxiety. “I do feel strongly about climate change, but if I was doing a project like this and seeing myself knitting warmer and warmer colors I might get very stressed by it,” Corkhill says.

Indeed, marine scientist Sheldon had a strong emotional reaction to that first climate-oriented scarf she made back in 2015. “As I had to put away a color knowing I’d never need it again, I felt it,” Sheldon says. “When I had to get another red, I got a little angry.”

For earth science professor Guerin, knitting temperature scarves raises a tough but important question. “We’re creating [the scarves], people are paying attention to them, we’re having the conversation that climate change is happening,” she says. “But the next step is, what do we do about it?”

Watch SpaceX launch Iridium satellites in its first mission of 2019

0
0

SpaceX is getting ready to send another round of satellites to the stars, its first mission of 2019, from the launch pad at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

The company’s Falcon 9 is ready for liftoff, loaded up with 10 Iridium NEXT satellites, which will complete Iridium’s orbiting satellite constellation that make up their 75-satellite strong global communications network. Iridium CEO Matt Desch told Satellite Today (…perhaps your subscription lapsed?) that this is one of the largest tech upgrades in space history and “the most important milestone of all” in their $3 billion effort to upgrade their system “to enable more efficient Internet of Things (IOT) capabilities.”

Today’s flight, called Iridium-8, is scheduled for 10:31 a.m. ET exactly, and if they miss the window, they have to push the launch to Saturday at 10:25 a.m. ET. The flight will not only help Iridium update its network, but after dropping off the satellites in space, SpaceX will attempt to land its rocket on an autonomous drone ship in the Pacific.

Watch all the fun here:


12 books that CEOs think you should read in 2019

0
0

If you’re a founder or aspiring entrepreneur, perhaps you’re looking to round out your reading list for 2019 with a few inspiring business reads. We asked entrepreneurs to offer their book recommendations for the new year, including both recent releases and older favorites. A number of CEOs lauded the first book on this list–one you might have already picked up over the holidays–but keep reading for other titles you may have overlooked.

Becoming by Michelle Obama

Everyone has a journey on the road to success, paved with triumphs and disappointments that are often invisible to the outside world. It’s a gift to read Mrs. Obama’s authentic and candid story that reflects the experience of so many of us. –Lisa Skeete Tatum, CEO of career management startup Landit

Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

Daniel Kahneman, the author, is a nobel laureate and psychologist who has dedicated most of his career to understanding the mechanisms for decision-making. This book is an exploration of the two “systems” we use to form judgements: System 1, which is more or less impulse and strongly swayed by emotion, and System 2, which is how we solve long division problems–our slower and more analytical thought processes. What’s fascinating is how often we fall into “cognitive illusions” or “cognitive bias” because of our dependencies on System 1. We are all trying to make better decisions more quickly, and this book gives really actionable advice on how to do this while explaining why we are the way we are. –Nicole Centeno, CEO of food startup Splendid Spoon

The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers by Ben Horowitz

This is my entrepreneurial bible. So many lessons from this book are applicable daily. I’ve incorporated pieces of it into our executive and employee success playbook internally. –Falon Fatemi, CEO of AI startup Node

Netflixed: The Epic Battle for America’s Eyeballs by Gina Keating

I’m in the middle of the book Netflixed. I’d definitely recommend it to any entrepreneur. It’s about the true startup hustle behind a company that redefined an industry. Netflix succeeded because of great strategy and a great team, but also a few lucky breaks. –Shan-Lyn Ma, CEO of wedding startup Zola

 

Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World by Anand Giridharadas

The three books this year that really helped me question the premises we are often building off of and gave me language for things I’ve felt are Emergent Strategy by Adrienne Maree Brown, Winners Takes All by Anand Giridharadas, and finally Good and Mad by Rebecca Traister. I’m so grateful for those authors and their work to help bring context to our moment in such different but important ways.” –Karla Monterroso, CEO of the diversity nonprofit Code2040

Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead by Brené Brown

I get recommendations for business books all the time that are incredibly interesting, but I sometimes find that the books that actually impact my business are ones that have nothing to do with commerce. I’m a big fan of Brené Brown and her work on vulnerability and empathy. Her book Daring Greatly is a fantastic work that has helped inform how Maiden Home interacts with the ecosystem we’re building between our craftsmen partners in North Carolina, the Maiden Home team in New York, and our customers all over the U.S. –Nidhi Kapur, CEO of furniture startup Maiden Home

High Growth Handbook by Elad Gil

If you are in a position where you establish product-market fit and are now pondering next steps and how to scale, this book makes you feel as though you are consulting and being mentored by past successful entrepreneurs who have established themselves in Silicon Valley. Culture Code by Daniel Coyle is also very cool. When thinking about scaling, you have to consider the culture you are building and in what way the people you bring in to your organization help and build upon that culture.–Jessica Matthews, CEO of energy startup Uncharted Power

Power Up: How Smart Women Win in the New Economy by Magdalena Yesil

Magdalena is an entrepreneur-turned-investor who’s been working in Silicon Valley for over 25 years and is well known for being the first investor in Salesforce. Her book, Power Up, is about her experience working in the Valley, and it’s eye-opening to see how many of her experiences felt relevant and resonated with my own 25 years later.” –Heidi Zak, CEO of lingerie startup ThirdLove

The Undoing Project: A Friendship That Changed Our Minds by Michael Lewis

This book is about merging areas of study–in this case, psychology and economics. I believe this is super important because it’s time for industries to start collaborating towards a common goal. These unlikely friends were able to discover things they would never have been able to had they remained in their silos. –Alicia Thomas, CEO of fitness startup Dibs

Factfulness: Ten Reasons We’re Wrong About the World—and Why Things Are Better Than You Think by Hans Rosling

I highly recommend Factfulness because we all need to be reminded that there are many changes in the world to be hopeful about and to build upon. Hans Rosling’s lifetime of helping us see the world more clearly is masterfully distilled in his last book. –Michelle Nunn, CEO of humanitarian aid organization Care

Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t by Jim Collins

One of my all time favorite books, Good to Great really defines the reasons why some companies make the transition to greatness, and how to build an organization that can stand the test of time. I regularly pull from it as we are building Flow Kana to sit in that category of “great.” Also, Innovators Dilemma has been a great guide for me and a great way to ground our business as we quickly grow and scale. –Michael Steinmetz, CEO of cannabis startup Flow Kana

Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream by Andy Stern

The former head of the Service Employees International Union–now a friend–writes about Universal Basic Income (UBI). Andy Stern predicts machines will replace half of all American jobs in the next 20 years, aggravating economic inequality even further. With the rise of automation, if you want to end poverty or solve short-term crises (like the increasing number of man-made or natural disasters), giving people money and letting them make their own choices offers greater dignity, increases efficiency, and delivers better economic results. –Daniela Perdomo, CEO of hardware startup GoTenna

Why the Giving Pledge goes against this philanthropist’s philosophy

0
0

Entrepreneur and investor Alexandre Mars, 44 years old, is trying to expand and democratize charitable giving. His Epic Foundation, which currently backs 29 social organizations tackling youth and children issues, enables donors to stay connected to their beneficiaries through a web app and VR videos. He also promotes payroll giving, which makes it easy for people to give by allowing them to deduct donations from their paychecks. In this edited chapter from his new book, Giving: Purpose Is the New Currency, Mars explains his inclusive approach to philanthropy. 

In 2010, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet launched the Giving Pledge, a campaign targeted exclusively at the ultra-rich: All those who sign up promise to give at least half of their fortunes to social causes.

[Image: HarperOne]
At first sight, this initiative seems extremely laudable. The world has more billionaires than ever before. In 2007, they totaled 946; 10 years later, that figure had risen to 2,043. And never has each billionaire possessed so many billions: In 2017, their total fortune was more than $7,067 billion. By 2018, the campaign had signed up 173 pledgers, aged between 30 and 90. These billionaires represent 21 different countries, although the majority are American.

Personally, I consider the Giving Pledge an extraordinary initiative. However, the cut-off figure of 50% goes against my personal philosophy of giving. In my opinion, it gives rise to judgment and stigmatization rather than encouragement and goodwill. Does someone who gives away 25% of their possessions not deserve our respect? No matter how much we give, it will never be enough, but I will continue to fight for my belief that giving should become something other–and more–than an obligation: a norm.

How much do you give? It doesn’t matter to me. Just give. Share what you can. Don’t let yourself be intimidated, just follow your heart. Fifty percent? 0.5%? You are the only arbiter of your capacity to change the world.

Unfortunately, not everyone I meet is a Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. I remember a California venture capitalist to whom I outlined Epic’s objectives and who abruptly interrupted me saying: “I don’t agree. I call that Communism.” He clearly meant the word as an insult. “If you believe that Communism means sharing and working toward a more equal division of wealth,” I replied, “then in that case, you’re right–I’m a Communist.” I never saw that man again.

For me, Peggy Dulany represents the opposite end of the spectrum. Born a Rockefeller, Peggy uses her middle name to pursue her philanthropic endeavors unencumbered by prestige. After working as a teacher for disadvantaged youth in Massachusetts, she founded the Synergos Institute to reduce global poverty, and developed the Global Philanthropists Circle. She has created a new legacy of her own through targeted and considerable philanthropy.

Most people I meet lie somewhere between that California venture capitalist and Peggy Dulany. I always tell them, “You should give and you should tell people that you give.” Not to bask in the glory of your generosity, but to give extra value to your donation: to let it serve as an example. To make giving something that seems like a normal everyday thing.

[Illustration: FC]

I have had some of my most difficult and complicated conversations about giving with Fortune 500 companies, but convincing these large companies to give a share of their profits has become easier over time. Social responsibility has become a talent management concern and a customer retention priority. A corporate survival imperative. The development of corporate social responsibility programs stems from that realization. The perception of such developments as “social washing,” the necessary ticking of a box rather than the product of sincere belief that it was the right thing to do, is still a rightful concern, but my view is more practical. If shame or publicity is what motivates a company to be more socially responsible, then we should take advantage of that while trying to push for an actual systemic mentality shift. We work with what we have while striving for our ideals.

I recently met the boss of a large corporation with annual profits of several billion euros, a formidable man, aware of the new realities of these times. He described his belief in the importance of companies’ social responsibilities. I asked him for the figures: How much money did they give every year? He seemed surprised by the question and said he didn’t know. He asked the woman in charge of CSR (corporate social responsibility), and when he found out the answer he seemed suddenly dismayed. The company gave $500,000 per year to social causes. The head of human resources joined our discussion, mentioning her frustration at the high turnover of young executives. Many had left not for higher salaries but to join nonprofits. She found it hard to understand this new phenomenon and admitted that her company was going to have to adapt.

I offered them one of Epic’s solutions for boosting a company’s social DNA: payroll giving. The HR head explained that she had considered this solution, but that the finance department had blocked it due to the $20,000 cost of installation. There and then I took out my checkbook and told them, “I’ll give you that money.” Of course, they did not accept it.

Have I softened my stance over the past few years? I am willing to grant mitigating circumstances to individuals: It is possible that they remain unsure, not about whether they should give, but about how and to whom they should give. I also understand that they would prefer to give nothing rather than give erroneously. For all these reasons, I have made it my mission to provide the tools that will help people to give more and better: empathy, solutions, and reasons to hope.

Excerpted from Giving: Purpose Is the New Currency, by Alexandre Mars. Reprinted with permission from HarperOne, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers. Copyright 2019.

This gorgeous new material is made out of leftover luxury marble

0
0

The production of high-end marble, which is harvested and polished for use in all kinds of construction projects, also produces excess waste in the form of big pieces of marble from broken slabs, marble chips, and the marble “flour,” or dust. The industry’s leftovers previously went to waste, but Altrock, a new surface material, reuses all that extra stone to create a terrazzo-style material that can be made into any color or shape.

Altrock, which is entirely hand made in London, is composed of 87% recycled marble waste. The other 13% comes from the resin that mixes with the marble flour to bind the marble pieces. After placing the broken marble pieces and chips by hand over a flat surface, the manufacturer pours the mixture in.

[Photo: courtesy Altrock]
The binding agent, which can be made in any color imaginable, then solidifies. The company then seals the slab with a wax oil that gives it a matte finish after drying. According to the manufacturer, “this deepens and highlights the unique veining of the natural stone chunks” while making it waterproof and stain resistant.

It’s like a terrazzo 2.0–the classic faux rock that has little bits of marble or granite set in concrete and then polished–but made using far less stone in larger pieces. In fact, the company refers to Altrock as “contemporary terrazzo.”

Like marble, Altrock can be used to make floors, dining or coffee tables, kitchen worktops, or bathroom surfaces, and each slab has a completely unique pattern. Unlike marble, however, Altrock can be made into any shape and size imaginable.

I’m a founder with OCD, here’s why I don’t hide it from my employees

0
0

Five years ago, I was dangerously suicidal. Graphic intrusive thoughts haunted me for over two decades. My mind kicked off hundreds, sometimes thousands, of those thoughts every day. And while I had a variety of healthy and unhealthy coping mechanisms, I’d never shared my mental health symptoms with anyone, not even my partner of 13 years.

Despite my struggles, I was running a successful creative agency in New York, working with leading brands in entertainment, sports, and media. My lifestyle was on fire. At night, I would self-medicate, and sometimes, self-harm, dragging my arms across sharp objects in the streets of Manhattan. The next morning, I’d scrape out of bed to run 9 a.m. meetings with C-level executives. I knew that what I was doing was unhealthy, yet I found myself taking pride in these extremes.

I finally decided to see a therapist, but I focused the conversation on my depression, self-medication, and self-harm. Even in a clinical environment, I was afraid to share the seemingly psychopathic nature of my thoughts. I remember my first visit well. The warmth of the muted room. The soft light. As I sunk peacefully into her oversized chair, I imagined grabbing her desk lamp and bashing it across her face. I never shared that thought with her. What if she asked me to leave? Or reported me to the police?

On opening up to my employees

Soon after that visit, I found a life-saving article in the Guardian about a subtype of OCD, called Pure O. I realized that my rumination was a treatable condition that 1 to 2 percent of the U.S. population faces. I decided to donate my brain to the cause, tried a half dozen prescription drugs, behavioral therapy, exposure and response prevention (ERP) therapy, and more. I was determined to become an informed expert and use my story and knowledge to save younger versions of myself from wasting 20 years suffering from a treatable mental condition.

At the time, I had only shared my condition with a few family and close friends. But in 2014, I decided to blow the lid off by publishing an account of my OCD experience in Fast Company. I was terrified of the potential consequences. Would I lose employees? Would they be uncomfortable staying late in the office with me? Would family members disown me? How would I get a date with this information out there? Still, I set that anxiety aside, called my team to the conference room, and told them my story.

I’m glad that I made that decision. It’s been four years since I’ve been advocating on behalf of the community. I’ve helped launch platforms that empower sufferers of mental health conditions and promote a DIY approach to advocacy. I’ve spoken about my mental health at SXSW, and most recently, worked with photographer, Ira Chernova, to share the graphic, violent, and taboo nature of my thoughts in an art exhibition in NYC. Through this experience, I have found that my business partners, clients, vendors, and most importantly, my employees, have shown nothing but respect for my brazen vulnerability.

The importance of vulnerability

I’ve since learned that vulnerability in leadership is not an option, but an imperative. To inspire people to do their best work, you need to give them the space to be open about their struggles, and that starts with you. Being open about my issues taught me to lead with empathy, and helped me avoid the management mistakes that I’d made in the years prior. In return, my team has supported me in ways that fill my heart with joy. I’ve also had employees pull me aside and share their stories. In turn, I learned how to be a better manager to people with mental health conditions so that they can thrive. And I hope that I’ve grown to be a more patient and better business partner.

I shared my mental illness with the world because I don’t want anyone to suffer the way that I did, and still do, as a result of 20 years of undiagnosed suffering. And while the exposure is scary, and at times downright overwhelming, I have found that by involving my family, friends, and coworkers in my journey, they have become meaningful parts of my healing.


Aaron Harvey is a partner and cofounder at Ready Set Rocket, a digital marketing agency that has worked with Fast Company in the past. He is also the founder of the mental health advocacy group Made Of Millions.

WeWork is investing in superfoods now

0
0

It feels like only yesterday that people were investing in an unknown co-working space called WeWork. Now that WeWork has achieved a certain high-level unicorn status, it is returning the favor and investing in companies it believes in–specifically, Laird Superfood, maker of assorted superfood products, including the best nondairy creamer around (yes, I will fight you over that claim).

WeWork was part of a round of investors that helped Laird Superfood secure $32 million in a private funding. The company, founded by renowned big-wave surfer Laird Hamilton in 2015, will use the new funds to grow its operations and add to its line of superfoods that already includes coffee, coconut water, and matcha hydration packs.

WeWork announced earlier this week that it was rebranding as The We Company, which would comprise three business units: WeWork, WeLive, and WeGrow.

WeWork’s Chief We Officer, Arik Benzino, will join the Laird Superfood board of directors. If you have a WeWork membership, get ready to fuel your next work session with some of Laird Superfood’s products, because in conjunction with the investment, the companies are launching a partnership, which will fill the WeWork kitchens with Laird’s offerings.

Try not to steal all the creamer, jerks.

Viewing all 36575 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images