fortune--2020-07-15--Startup Graphcore takes on Nvidia with latest A.I. chip

British startup Graphcore is taking on semiconductor titan Nvidia with a new computer chip designed specifically for running cutting-edge artificial intelligence algorithms.
Graphcore, which is based in the English city of Bristol, unveiled a new computer chip Wednesday that packs a remarkable 59.4 billion transistors and almost 1,500 processing units into a single silicon wafer.
The company said that in benchmark tests, its chips—which are sold in a set of four designed to work together—performed up to 16-times faster than those from Nvidia.
Nvidia’s chips, which were originally designed to handle the intensive computing work needed for computer graphics, are currently the market leaders for machine-learning applications.
“Nvidia is the 200-pound gorilla but we see ourselves as the main challenger,” Nigel Toon, Graphcore’s chief executive, said.
Among those trying out Graphcore’s new technology are J.P. Morgan Chase, Oxford University, and the U.S. Laurence Berkeley National Laboratory. Another is Atos, the French supercomputing vendor that is helping a number of European research labs access the new chips.
Graphcore is among a growing number of startups, as well as some large tech firms, that have created chips designed for A.I. Google was one of the first to create such chips for use in its own data centers, but it does not sell them commercially.
Intel, which has long dominated the market for general computing chips and data center servers, has bought several startups working on A.I.-specific chips, including, most recently, Israel’s Habana Labs in December. But so far, it has struggled to make inroads in the new market.
Graphcore, which was founded in 2016 by a team that had sold a previous hardware company to Nvidia, debuted its first generation of A.I.-specific chips in 2018 and they are already in use with a number of customers, including a number of hedge funds and banks, and, most notably, Microsoft’s Azure data centers.
The second generation of A.I. chips, which Graphcore unveiled Wednesday, are called the Mk2 IPU (short for intelligence processing unit). They are designed specifically to handle the very large machine-learning models that are being used for breakthroughs in image processing, natural language processing, and other fields. For instance, San Francisco A.I. research company OpenAI’s latest language model, called GPT-3, takes in 175 billion different variables.
To address that need, Graphcore’s chips are designed to work together in large high-performance computing clusters. The company is marketing them alongside its own proprietary software that will coordinate those clusters, with up to 64,000 of its latest-generation chips, allowing them to process huge amounts of data in parallel.
“There is definitely a requirement from customers to run these large models,” Nigel Toon, Graphcore’s chief executive, said. “With our system, you can develop them and run them at scale and train them at a sensible timeline.”
Last year, Nvidia paid $6.9 billion to acquire Mellanox, a company that specialized in software for coordinating these kinds of computing clusters to up its own capabilities in this area.
Toon says Graphcore’s own tests show how the speedup offered by its latest-generation chips can save companies money. On a state-of-the-art image classification benchmark test, for instance, it would take just eight of Graphcore’s new four-chip clusters, working together, to train an algorithm, at a cost of $259,000. To achieve the same result using Nvidia’s DGX, a system which combines 8 of its top-of-the-line chips, would require 16 of these clusters and cost about $3 million.
Graphcore, which employs about 450 people globally, including a team in Oslo, Norway that has worked on the systems to run very large computing clusters, has received more than $450 million in venture capital funding to date.
Subscribe to Well Adjusted, our newsletter full of simple strategies to work smarter and live better, from the Fortune Well team. Sign up today


fortune--2020-07-15--Trump ended Hong Kong’s special trade status. Stocks there shrugged

Apple just won a mammoth victory over Europe ’ s “ tax lady.
” But the fight is far from @

Hong Kong’s stocks shrugged off the latest bad news for the city — the end of its special status with the U.S.
The Hang Seng Index rose 1% in early trading, led by Tencent Holdings Ltd and China Life Insurance Co. While stocks advanced, spurred by overnight gains in the U.S., the latest development adds further risks to the bull case for the city’s share market.
“U.S. sanctions have been an overhang for Hong Kong assets,” said Steven Leung, executive director at UOB Kay Hian. “Worries include how it will affect the city’s trade in the future and also there have been fears that banks in the city could be banned from buying the greenback. Investors will give a discount when considering buying assets here given all these worries.”
The Hang Seng Index is already a global laggard: the gauge is down 11% over the past 12 months through Tuesday, compared with a 2% gain by MSCI’s index of world stocks. Against U.S. and mainland Chinese benchmarks, Hong Kong’s underperformance is even more stark. The S&P 500 Index and CSI 300 Index have rallied at least 6% in the past year.
By almost any measure, that discount is large. The Hang Seng Index trades at 10.9 times projected 12-months earnings, compared with 14.5 times for the CSI 300 Index and 22.1 times for the S&P 500.
President Donald Trump approved the legislation on Tuesday after spending weeks blaming Beijing for the coronavirus pandemic and criticizing its handling of Hong Kong and treatment of minority groups in western China. Under the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992, the U.S. treats Hong Kong differently than the Chinese mainland in trade, commerce and other areas.
Trump said that the executive order he signed earlier in the day meant Hong Kong would now be treated the same as mainland China. The White House said the order would revoke special treatment for Hong Kong passport holders and ends Hong Kong’s benefits of U.S. exports.
“In the longer term, this adds another needless layer of uncertainty to already frosty Sino-U.S. relationships, especially with regards to trade,” said Justin Tang, head of Asian research at United First Partners. “Against the backdrop of COVID-19 related disruptions, an escalation of trade wars will plunge supply chains into further disarray.”
To be sure, the Hang Seng Index had a flurry of gains around the imposition of the national security law at the start of this month, supported by mainland inflows. Those gains have faded in the past week, placing the gauge among the bottom 10 performers among 93 global benchmarks tracked by Bloomberg.
Adding to the bear case is a spike in local coronavirus cases, which this week prompted the government to impose some of the most drastic measures yet to contain the outbreak.
“Stocks are underperforming because the local economy is struggling,” UOB’s Leung said. “The virus situation worsened recently and many economic activities have been affected.”


fortune--2020-07-16--Are you willing to pay for news? The future of journalism may depend on it

An error in how the unemployment rate was calculated means we should be more worried than we already are

French legislators recently implemented a tax credit for citizens who subscribe to news outlets. Similarly, other governments around the globe directly or indirectly fund their news media. Though they take an important step toward funding journalism, these models are at odds with the American First Amendment, which guarantees—in part—a press free from government intervention.
This freedom is crucial to ensure the news media are able to critique the American government and hold it in check. That’s why, in a time when access to accurate information could not be more important, members of the American public must decide to invest in journalism.
Why, then, are Americans reluctant to pay for the high-quality news they need?
Americans’ trust in the news media has reached historically low levels. Americans also increasingly perceive the news media to be biased toward a particular political party. In most cases, Americans tend to think the news media is biased against their own political party and beliefs, a phenomenon called the hostile media effect. These outcomes are likely tied to two important things: increased political rhetoric that continually questions the accuracy of news, and the public’s biased perceptions of what is accurate.
First, let’s consider what constitutes “the media” and how it is discussed by political elites. The term “the media” is often used as a denigration that is selectively inclusive—applied to news outlets that oppose one’s views. Politicians and pundits, particularly conservative ones, have worked to create a common enemy—the news media—in recent years. Trump has repeatedly attacked news organizations, and Fox News frequently critiques “the mainstream media.” The irony, of course, is that Fox News is the most widely consumed cable news network, which places it pretty squarely as part of the mainstream media. This increased rhetoric positioning American journalists as the enemy of the American public exacerbates already low levels of trust and makes the dissemination of accurate information more difficult.
The second point to consider is how the American public came to be so cynical about news content. Well-meaning educators and friends have encouraged their students and acquaintances to be skeptical and critical of the media they consume. While a critical view toward media is important, Americans also need to be skeptical and critical of their own belief systems. Failure to do so often leads to confirmation bias, where individuals select information that agrees with their own beliefs because they do not like encountering divergent perspectives. Since many Americans have learned to be critical of media content but not of their own beliefs, such skepticism can lead to the easy rejection of uncomfortable but accurate information.
So where does this leave the future of American journalism? It must begin with a reemphasis on the importance of accurate reporting. The founders of America understood the necessity of a free and independent press, and we have to acknowledge that this essential entity must continue to exist and thrive in order for our democracy to function.
Then Americans must consider what information they value and why. If we only consume information that agrees with our own viewpoints, we allow misinformation to run rampant and immoral actors to take advantage. We must be open to new perspectives—even challenging ones—and those perspectives must be rooted in fact.
The crucial part of this, though, is that Americans must be willing to pay for their news. Good journalism is expensive. In order for the press to operate in a capitalist-driven democracy, people must pay for the content that fulfills their goals of being well informed.
When news consumption moved to primarily online distribution, newspapers failed to establish a functioning business model that could accommodate for the upcoming decreases in hard copy advertising and subscriptions. Even when newspapers eventually moved online, they found that online advertising and subscriptions tended to be far less lucrative. Certainly, some modern news organizations have found ways to produce the revenue required for good journalism, but the likelihood of other publications continuing to exist, particularly the immensely important local outlets, rests with the purchasing power of the consumer.
Without a committed and sustained investment from the American public, local journalism may cease to exist. Small and midsize newspapers across the country are consolidating or going out of business in part because of ownership decisions but also because Americans have opted to receive their news in aggregate forms (such as Google News, Facebook, and Twitter). While those aggregators rely on local news sources to collect their content, the revenue earned from advertising or other means, such as the selling of user data, is often not shared (or not shared fairly) with the originators of the information.
Data consistently show that Americans are willing to pay for online media. We may not bat an eye at our Netflix subscription prices or adding Disney+ to our online services. So why do we shudder at the thought of paying for quality journalism? News consumers have become accustomed to free access to news content. Since we’ve been spoiled by news content that is available for free, we expect it to continue to be free. An anchoring effect has made any increase in the price of news seem large, even though a newspaper subscription is often not more than a Netflix subscription.
If Americans want to receive high-quality, accurate information, they must be willing to pay for it. Since online ads are often purchased at a fraction of the price of print ads, ad revenue does not provide enough to support news operations. Direct government funding introduces a conflict of interest. Nonprofit status and tax exemptions encourage contributions primarily from the wealthiest individuals and corporations. Each of these models on their own cannot ensure that American journalism will persist as an independent watchdog of the government and others in power. Instead, Americans must pay for their news content to provide support for this crucial component of our democracy.
Even with this information, it can be difficult to decide which news organizations to support. The following strategies should help news consumers make these decisions:
Think about where you get your news. Are you selecting information just because it agrees with you? Don’t do that. Pick news sources that do more than simply cater to a partisan audience.
Make sure you’re differentiating between news and commentary. Good news organizations should clearly demarcate what is news and what is opinion content.
Check the news organizations’ use of sources. Are the sources they use in their news stories credible and considered experts in their field? Keep in mind: Experts are often people other than politicians.
Look for journalistic standards. A good news organization should have a code of ethics or clear reporting guidelines posted on its website.
If you spot a piece of information on social media or a news aggregator, first make sure the information originated with a legitimate news organization (using the other steps listed here). Then visit the site of the news organization that created the original content to ensure it will earn ad revenue for that content.
Read full articles, not just headlines (or Facebook posts or tweets). In-depth reporting provides more context, which is part of why it’s worth paying for.
Get your news from multiple sources. Try to pick at least one local, national, and international outlet. And don’t be afraid to check their work using fact-checking sites.
And importantly, once you’ve used this list to help select your preferred news organizations, be willing to support their work by paying for their content.
Jennifer Hoewe and Brett Sherrick are assistant professors in the Brian Lamb School of Communication at Purdue University.


fortune--2020-07-16--Democrats tweet the most, but individual Republicans get more engagement: How social media use diffe

Democrats tweet the most, but individual Republicans get more engagement: How social media use differs across the aisle

As politicians increasingly turn to Twitter and Facebook to speak directly to their supporters, a new study draws a dividing line between how politicians from opposite sides of the aisle are using social media. Democratic members of Congress are more active on social media and get the most engagement as a group—but it’s their Republic counterparts that often get the most retweets, shares, and reactions on an individual level.
In terms of posts by all Congress members, 73% of all Twitter favorites and 66% of retweets went to Democrats. Similarly, they also received 74% of all Facebook reactions and 66% of reshared posts, the study by Pew Research shows. A typical Democratic member of Congress has upwards of 17,000 followers more than a typical Republican member and tweets about 130 times a month, nearly double the amount of their counterparts. But a typical Republican gets nearly 14 more retweets and 29 more favorites on Twitter, as well as 38 more reactions and seven more shares on Facebook posts.
“These findings speak to the ways in which Democratic and Republican lawmakers have wittingly or unwittingly carved out different collective approaches to social media communications,” the report says. “Republican lawmakers tend to be less active posters and have fewer of these highly successful accounts, but their posts tend to receive more audience engagement at the level of individual members.”
Democrats tweet the most, but individual Republicans get more engagement, according to a Pew Research study. Photo Illustration by Fortune; Original Images: KeithBishop/Getty Images; Courtesy of Twitter
The study comes at a time when social media is becoming increasingly politicized. Politicians are regularly using social media to express their views, which in some cases have become increasingly inflammatory, and to rebuke their opponents. Meanwhile, Facebook and Twitter are getting hammered for not controlling the amount of misinformation, hate speech, and discrimination—much of which is politically fueled—on their sites.
Pew Research analysts reviewed every Facebook post and tweet maintained by every voting member of Congress between Jan. 1, 2015, and May 31, 2020. Their study indicates that overall, Congress members across the board are using Facebook and Twitter more. Compared with 2016, a typical member of Congress tweets 81% more often, has three times as many followers, and receives more than six times as many retweets on an average tweet.
And most of the activity can be pinpointed to a small group of lawmakers. About 10% of Congress accounts for more than three-quarters of all reactions, shares, and retweets, for example.
The study also revealed a couple of other trends: the most exclusively terms used by Democrats (“equal pay” and “gun safety”) and Republicans (“pro-growth” and “bureaucrats”) in the past five years; and that posts mentioning political opponents and hot-button issues like impeachment and immigration often get the most reactions.


fortune--2020-07-16--Pregnancy stereotypes can put women in physical danger at work, study finds

Our mission to help you navigate the new normal is fueled by subscribers. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
Pregnant women often worry they’ll be judged at work. Will colleagues assume that they will no longer be committed to their careers after having children? Will managers doubt that they can do their jobs effectively while pregnant?
Such fears are not unfounded—and they can pose dangerous consequences to pregnant women’s health, according to a new study.
If a woman who becomes pregnant fears that she may be stereotyped in this way at work, she’s more likely to suffer a workplace accident, Washington State University researchers Lindsey Lavaysse and Tahira Probst discovered.
The study, published in the journal Work & Stress, examined “stereotype threat,” or people’s fear of confirming a stereotype about a group they belong to. The phenomenon is often studied in relation to racial stereotypes, but hasn’t been applied to pregnancy before, say the authors.
Lavaysse, a graduate student, and Probst, a professor of psychology, found that pregnant workers who worry about confirming stereotypes often try to either hide their pregnancy or go above and beyond what’s expected of them at work as coping mechanisms. Going above and beyond—by missing doctors’ appointments to stay at work or not asking for the physical accommodations they need—made these women more likely to suffer workplace accidents, like slipping, tripping, or falling. (Hiding a pregnancy did not contribute to these safety risks.) “If you take on more, there’s even more likelihood for something to go wrong,” says Probst.
The researchers surveyed about 200 women throughout their pregnancies, beginning in the fall of 2016. The participants worked in jobs requiring physical labor, from standing on their feet all day as nurses to lifting heavy objects in manufacturing. Seventy-six percent of participants were pregnant for the first time.
Some workers were more likely to worry about stereotypes than others, whether because of their own innate fears or the actual prevalence of these attitudes in their work environments.
The study focused on physically demanding jobs but has implications for white-collar workers as well, who could suffer economic consequences or threats to their general well-being apart from the kinds of physical workplace accidents studied here.
And the researchers say their findings offer lessons for companies—mainly, that enacting parental leave policies isn’t enough to counter these kinds of risks. “Just because an organization has policies in place, that doesn’t translate into women feeling comfortable enough to use those policies,” Probst says. “Organizations need to consider going above and beyond having a policy to make sure women feel comfortable and don’t suffer negative repercussions.”
Much of the existing research on work and pregnancy addresses the health of the unborn child, including consequences like low birth weights; this study is one of the first to focus on the health of the pregnant worker. The authors note that studying pregnancy in the workplace only becomes more important as more and more women participate in the workforce.
“We need to acknowledge that these stereotypes exist,” Lavaysse says, “so we can move forward to dismantle this notion.”


fortune--2020-07-16--An error in how the unemployment rate was calculated means we should be more worried than we already

An error in how the unemployment rate was calculated means we should be more worried than we already are

Are you willing to pay for news ?
The future of journalism may depend on it

The U.S. headline unemployment rate dropped from 13.3% in May to 11.1% in June. This is very good news. Coming on the heels of the previous month’s drop from 14.7%, the highest unemployment rate since World War II, it suggests that the U.S. labor market, badly damaged by the coronavirus pandemic, appears to be on course for a quick recovery.
As good as the news seems to be, the improvement in the unemployment rate was even better than the headline numbers suggest. Yet more ominously, the improvement seems better because last month’s starting point for comparison was a lot higher than 13.3%.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported in a footnote to its July 2 press release that the headline unemployment rate likely understates the true unemployment rate, owing to a misclassification error that counted some temporarily unemployed workers as employed in its monthly household survey data. The BLS included a similar footnote in its April 3, May 8, and June 5 press releases concerning the employment situation in March, April, and May, respectively.
Here is the explanation for the error. The BLS conducts a household survey in the middle of each month and uses the results to calculate the monthly unemployment rate, which it reports shortly after month-end. The BLS explained in a footnote that it had instructed its interviewers to classify people who were absent from work owing to temporary, coronavirus-related business closures as “unemployed on temporary layoff.” Accordingly, a survey respondent who reported she was not working during that week but said she expected to be summoned back to her job should have been recorded as “unemployed on temporary layoff.” This would be consistent with the usual practice of counting as unemployed people who have been laid off but expect to be recalled (regardless of whether they are looking for other work).
But, as often is the case, there is a complication. The correct classification of someone who is temporarily absent from her job depends on the reason for her absence. She would be counted as employed if she were temporarily absent because of bad weather, illness, a labor-management dispute, personal reasons, or vacation. These reasons seem clear enough.
Here is the complication. She can also be recorded as employed but absent from work for some “other reason.” For example, she might have taken a leave of absence to care for a loved one who was ill with COVID-19. When an “other reason” is cited, the interviewer usually records a brief description. When the BLS reviewed these descriptions, it found that a significant number of respondents had been misclassified in its four surveys for March through June as employed but absent from work, instead of unemployed on temporary layoff.
Correcting the misclassification error would have increased the headline unemployment rate by almost one full percentage point in March, almost five percentage points in April, about three percentage points in May, and about one percentage point in June, all on a not seasonally adjusted basis. Importantly, the misclassification errors are smaller in more recent months, which gives reason to hope they will soon stop affecting the unemployment rate.
Nevertheless, the errors affect the past four monthly unemployment rates to differing degrees. And the misclassification errors are large enough that they affect our interpretation of the data, as I will explain. The headline unemployment rate fell 1.4% in May (from 14.7% to 13.3%) and a further 2.2% in June (to 11.1%). This suggests an acceleration in the labor market’s recovery.
Here is even better news. As the accompanying chart illustrates, correcting the misclassification error reveals much larger-than-headline-rate decreases in May, a decrease of 3.4% versus only a 1.4% drop based on the headline unemployment rates, and in June, a decrease of 4.2% versus only a 2.2% drop implied by the headline unemployment rates.
Unfortunately, there is no free lunch here. The chart also reveals that correcting the errors indicates bigger-than-headline-rate increases in the unemployment rate for March, a 1.9% increase up from 0.9%, and for April, a 14.3% increase up from 10.3%. The corrected unemployment rates are higher for all four months. And the rate peaked at 19.7% in April, which is five percentage points above the headline rate. It is also far higher than the peak unemployment rate during the Great Recession of 10.0% in October 2009. Where do all the adjustments leave us? The corrections still leave the U.S. with a June unemployment rate of 12.1%, one percentage point above the headline number.
The chart also illustrates an important characteristic of the COVID-19 world. Volatility, in this case month-to-month changes in the unemployment rate, has increased and by even more than the headline numbers suggest. It is considerably more volatile than at any time during the post–World War II period. The one-month decreases of 4.2% in June and 3.4% in May (both on a corrected basis) are the biggest going back to 1948. The next largest one-month drop was 1.5% in November 1949. The two-month decrease of 7.5% (on a corrected basis and compounded) between April and June is the biggest going back to 1948. The next largest two-month drop was 1.3% between October and December 1949.
The greater unemployment rate volatility is concerning. It means there is a greater risk of a sharp reversal in the unemployment rate if a resurgence in the coronavirus leads more states to reimpose restrictions, such as closing bars, gyms, and restaurants. There is a risk of greater damage to the labor market and the economy than the past four months’ headline unemployment rates suggest. The BLS reported that total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 7.5 million in May and June combined as states reopened their economies. These jobs are potentially at risk if states retrench. And the U.S. unemployment rate could conceivably ratchet up above the April peak of 14.7%, especially if the number of unemployed are counted correctly in coming months. Since the June household survey was conducted between June 7 and June 13 and many states hit the pause button in the second half of June, unemployment may have already begun ticking up.
Those who refuse to wear masks or practice safe social distancing are not only placing many of their fellow citizens at risk of contracting COVID-19, but they are also increasing the likelihood that state and local governments will feel compelled to reimpose tighter restrictions that could force thousands of employers to cut back their operations or shut down their businesses a second time—causing millions of recently rehired workers to once again suffer the loss of their jobs.
John D. Finnerty is a professor of finance at Fordham University.


fortune--2020-07-16--Abigail Disney slams Disney World’s reopening as coronavirus cases spike in Florida

Abigail Disney, the granddaughter of Disney cofounder Roy O. Disney, slammed the company’s decision to reopen Disney World as the coronavirus pandemic surges in Florida.
Abigail Disney is an Emmy-winning filmmaker and activist and is not involved in the affairs of her namesake company, but that didn’t stop her from saying she was “incredibly concerned” about the theme park’s ability to navigate the pandemic. “I can’t imagine they are able to protect their employees and all their customers,” she said Wednesday during an appearance on Yahoo Finance’s The First Trade.
“I will say that I don’t know how a person sleeps at night given what we know to be—and [Disney executives] know perfectly well—to be the condition of their workers and the insecurity they’re living in now,” Disney said. “Two of the three people I have been talking to in Anaheim [park] have asthma and they seriously don’t have any idea how they’re going to address this decision even if they get offered their position back.
“So I have to say preserving your bonus, as they did, was unconscionable,” she added. “There’s just no making sense of it, as far as I am concerned.”
Disney is referring to the decision to furlough 100,000 low-paid theme park and hotel workers while top company executives kept massive bonuses despite publicly committing to forgo their salaries, the Financial Times reported earlier this year. The company has said executive bonuses are not determined until the end of the year, and that the reports are based on what has happened in past years.
At the time of the report, in April, Disney slammed the company’s policies in a thread on Twitter. “All $1.5 billion of [the bonuses]. 1.5 BILLION. That’d pay for three months salary to front line workers,” she said. “And it’s going to people who have already been collecting egregious bonuses for years.”
OK, I've been holding my tongue on the theory that a pandemic is no time to be calling people out on anything other than failing us in a public health sense. I thought it might be a moment for peace and reconciliation. But I feel a thread coming on….1/ https://t.co/G1mUq7RmAV — BLACK LIVES MATTER (@abigaildisney) April 21, 2020
Disney World fully reopened on Wednesday, just as COVID-19 cases in Florida surpassed 300,000. Disney is trying to mitigate the risks with a number of health and safety measures, including mandatory requirements to wear a mask and get temperatures checked, as well as increased cleaning at all resorts.


fortune--2020-07-16--T-Mobile just added a free feature that gives extra protection against robocalls

T-Mobile announced free advanced Caller ID for all its customers as a way to help people block scam and improper robocalls on their mobile phones. The carrier is also giving customers a second phone number for each account to give to marketers instead of their personal number to reduce the availability of their primary number to scammers.
Called ScamShield, the new Caller ID service will show whether a call coming in is from a number with a person or business with a verified name. The service also flags and labels likely scam calls, or customers can set their phones to block all such calls in the first place.
The service will work on any phone and all phone plans for new and existing customers, T-Mobile said.
The carrier announced the move as part of its “uncarrier” marketing strategy, the first major competitive strike by T-Mobile since it completed its merger with Sprint, and since Mike Sievert took over in April from former CEO John Legere.
Carriers have previously charged extra for advanced call filtering and second numbers. Verizon for example charges $3 monthly per line for enhanced blocking technology, which also includes a personal robocall blocking list and a spam number lookup. AT&T’s premium call blocking with Caller ID costs $4 per month and also has additional features. T-Mobile itself announced a similar $4 per month service in 2018.
Legere unveiled the original “uncarrier” campaign, including doing away with two-year contracts, in 2013 and then used the tagline on many more changes that helped propel T-Mobile to the top spot for customer additions for every year since. Sievert announced a free service offer only for first responders as an “uncarrier” move in May.
Despite increasingly aggressive measures by the industry over the past few years to reduce robo and scam calls, the problem remains acute. T-Mobile said scammers make 58 billion robocalls a year.
“The industry’s not doing enough,” T-Mobile CEO Sievert tells Fortune. “We’re trying to make sure that this issue is thrust into the public consciousness and that there’s a throwdown for the industry to do something.”
T-Mobile will continue to offer additional “uncarrier” deals to its customers in the future, Sievert added. “The pain points just keep on coming, so we see no end in sight to problems we can solve in this industry,” he says.
Also on Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission changed its rules to make it easier for the carriers to block robocalls. The agency will allow carriers to be free from liability for unintended or inadvertent blocking of wanted calls when they adopt “reasonable analytics” to stop scam calls.
“These criminals, they are smart and they are agile,” Neville Ray, T-Mobile’s president of technology, says. “For every door that we close, they find another way to come at us.” T-Mobile’s effort to block spam calls relies on an A.I. system that updates itself with new information from spam reports every six minutes, Ray says. “This isn’t going to go away in a hurry even though we’re making great strides.”
Reacting to T-Mobile’s new offer, AT&T noted that it already offers some robocall protections for free. “It’s nice to see other carriers working to catch up,” the carrier said in a statement. “We started our first network-based analytics and blocking program in 2016.”
Shares of T-Mobile, which were up 32% already in 2020 before the announcement, lost 1% in midday trading on Thursday.


fortune--2020-07-16--Nick Cannon wants full ownership of ‘Wild ‘N Out’ after ViacomCBS ouster. Does he have a case?

Our mission to help you navigate the new normal is fueled by subscribers. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
The actor and TV host Nick Cannon has lashed out at ViacomCBS after the media giant terminated him over anti-Semitic remarks. In a lengthy Facebook post, Cannon accused the company of “robbing” the Black community and claimed that he is the rightful owner of Wild ’N Out, a popular improv show he conceived and hosted.
“I created a billion-dollar brand that expanded across a multitiered empire that is still Viacom’s biggest digital brand,” Cannon wrote. “Based on trust and empty promises, my ownership was swindled away from me…I demand full ownership of my billion-dollar Wild ’N Out brand that I created.”
Cannon’s claim is a significant one. If he does indeed own Wild ’N Out, he could be entitled to receive a large amount of money from ViacomCBS and determine the future of the brand.
The Facebook post does not explain his legal justification for the claim, and one intellectual property expert is skeptical that the post amounts to much more than a rant.
According to Alexandra Roberts, a professor at the University of New Hampshire law school, ViacomCBS owns two trademarks for Wild ’N Out—one for entertainment services and another related to restaurants. Owning such marks creates a legal presumption that ViacomCBS is indeed the owner.
“[E]ven if the show was Cannon’s ‘idea’ or he’s the driving creative force behind it, that doesn’t make him the mark owner,” Roberts explains.
Roberts adds that there could be clauses in Cannon’s contract with ViacomCBS that assign Cannon intellectual property rights to Wild ’N Out, but this would be unusual for the industry.
“But it strikes me as unlikely that a big company like Viacom would ever agree to assign trademark rights in the name of a show to an entertainer,” she says.
Neither Cannon nor ViacomCBS immediately responded to a request for comment about the dispute.
ViacomCBS cut ties with Cannon over a podcast in which he engaged in a lengthy discussion of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. This included asking why “we give so much power to the ‘theys,’ and ‘theys’ turn into illuminati, the Zionists, the Rothschilds”—language that alludes to baseless assertions about Jewish plots.
In his Facebook post, Cannon claims to have spoken with “many Rabbis, clergy, Professors and coworkers” about the incident and expressed remorse.
“I must apologize to my Jewish Brothers and Sisters for putting them in such a painful position, which was never my intention,” he wrote.
The post did not, however, expressly renounce the conspiracy theories he described in the podcast. In further remarks on Wednesday, Cannon reiterated his apology and described the controversy as “only the beginning of my education” and committed himself to “strengthening the bond between our two cultures today and every day going forward.”
Cannon’s most recent remarks came as Fox announced it would let the entertainer continue to host the popular Masked Singer show.


fortune--2020-07-16--LGBTQ representation grows in films—but racial diversity and transgender characters are still rare

Last year saw record representation of LGBTQ characters in the 118 films released by major studios, according to a new study by GLAAD. But for the third straight year, the racial diversity of LGBTQ characters has waned and transgender characters again went unseen.
GLAAD called the decrease in non-white LGBTQ characters “concerning.” In 2019, 34% of LGBTQ characters were people of color. That’s down from 42% in 2018 and 57% in 2017.
“GLAAD is calling on the studios to ensure that within two years at least half of their LGBTQ characters are people of color,” said the advocacy group that tracks representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in the media.
For the third year in a row, transgender characters were also absent from major studio releases.
But overall, GLAAD found higher rates of inclusion than it has in the eight years its been tracking studio films. Of the 118 films studied, 22 (18.6%) included lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer characters. That’s a slight increase from 18.2% in 2018.
But none of the studios studied — the Walt Disney Co., Warner Bros., Universal Pictures, Lionsgate, Paramount Pictures, Sony Pictures, STX Films and United Artists Releasing — received a “good” or higher grade for LGBTQ representation. Sony and Disney received “poor” grades. STX Films, which released “Hustlers,” “21 Bridges” and “Uglydolls” last year, failed GLAAD’s test since their 2019 movies featured zero LGBTQ representation.
GLAAD has sought that studios reach inclusion of LGBTQ characters in 20% of their films by 2012 and 50% by 2024. Paramount, Lionsgate, Disney and United Artists reached the 20% level last year.
Screen time is also an issue. In many of Hollywood’s biggest films, LGBTQ characters — when included — came and went. Only nine of the 22 films with an LGBTQ character featured one with more than 10 minutes of screen time.
“Despite seeing a record high percentage of LGBTQ-inclusive films this year, the industry still has a long way to go in terms of fairly and accurately representing the LGBTQ community,” said GLAAD President and CEO, Sarah Kate Ellis. “If film studios want to stay relevant to today’s audiences and compete in an industry that is emphasizing diversity and inclusion, then they must urgently reverse course on the diminishing representation of LGBTQ women and people of color, as well as the complete absence of trans characters.”


fortune--2020-07-16--What U.S. companies should consider following the bombshell EU Privacy Shield ruling

Our mission to help you navigate the new normal is fueled by subscribers. To enjoy unlimited access to our journalism, subscribe today.
If you’re an American company with European users or customers, and you transfer their personal data to the U.S. for company use, you need to be aware of what just went down at the EU’s top court today.
That’s because the Court of Justice (CJEU) just made a huge ruling. The upshot: It’s possible you will no longer be able to serve people in the EU—if not now, then in the not-too-distant future.
You can read our full story on that ruling separately, but here’s a quick run through the implications. And again, those implications could be immediate, depending on your circumstances.
Privacy Shield
U.S. companies using Europeans’ personal data need some sort of legal justification for doing so. That’s because the U.S. lacks an EU-strength federal privacy law (or indeed any comprehensive federal privacy law at all).
By far the easiest way to keep things legal was to sign up to the so-called Privacy Shield register—essentially, self-certifying that the company will stick to EU rules. This register was created under a transatlantic deal of the same name, struck between the U.S. and EU in 2016.
That deal is now dead. The CJEU on Thursday canceled it with immediate effect, basically for two reasons: It didn’t stop U.S. intelligence from poking around companies’ data even if they were on the list, and there was no effective way for EU citizens to file a complaint about this in the U.S.
The U.S. Department of Commerce reacted by indicating it would be, in a sense, business as usual. In a statement expressing disappointment with the ruling, the department said it would “continue to administer the Privacy Shield program, including processing submissions for self-certification and recertification to the Privacy Shield Frameworks and maintaining the Privacy Shield List.”
It added, “Today’s decision does not relieve participating organizations of their Privacy Shield obligations.”
The Europeans beg to differ. To paraphrase Monty Python’s Dead Parrot sketch, Privacy Shield has passed on; it has kicked the bucket; it has shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain, and joined the bleeding choir invisible. It is an ex-agreement.
So you can continue to abide by the register’s obligations—essentially, respecting EU privacy law as best you can—but that no longer means your EU-U.S. data transfers are legal in European eyes. Which was the whole point of the register to start with.
(There may still be a legal reason to keep those promises over in the U.S., though. “Companies that have made privacy promises under Privacy Shield could be subject to enforcement for deceptive practices if they do not live up to those privacy promises,” said Peter Swire, a senior counsel at law firm Alston & Bird.)
Eline Chivot, senior policy analyst at the Center for Data Innovation, described the impact well in a statement Thursday: “The decision delivers a severe blow to the operations of over 5,000 European and American companies who use the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield as the legal basis for transatlantic data transfers. It will immediately upend, and in many cases even halt, data transfers between the EU and the United States, leaving many businesses with no suitable alternative.”
Standard contractual clauses
But what if Privacy Shield isn’t your only legal basis for those transfers?
Some U.S. companies such as Facebook (the firm involved in this particular case) and Microsoft have for years also been relying on a mechanism called “standard contractual clauses,” or SCCs. These are, as the name suggests, oven-ready clauses that the European Commission wrote, again outlining a range of rights and responsibilities in line with the EU’s strict GDPR privacy law.
The court did not strike down SCCs, though it had the option to do so.
It said SCCs were fine in general because an EU privacy regulator can still invalidate them on a case-by-case basis if a company is breaking the clauses’ terms or is unable to stick to them—because, say, it can’t stop the intelligence services back home from conducting mass surveillance on the data.
This is where the striking-down of the Privacy Shield becomes a problem for Facebook and any other big American tech company relying on SCCs to send Europeans’ data over to the U.S.
Although the Snowden revelations of 2013 led to some limited reforms in U.S. surveillance law, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) still allows for the mass collection of non-Americans’ personal data from Big Tech firms.
Some in the U.S. argue that surveillance starts only when the agencies actually look at the data—which is a more restricted activity. But the Europeans see surveillance as starting at the point of collection. So in European eyes, the U.S. regularly conducts mass surveillance on Europeans’ data—and there’s nothing the U.S. companies handling that data can do about it.
That’s serious enough to have scuppered Privacy Shield (and its predecessor, Safe Harbor), so it is difficult to see how the SCCs used by a company like Facebook can survive if challenged before an EU privacy authority.
“Although the system of standard contractual clauses will remain in principle and the standard contracts concluded will initially remain in force, they will have to be reviewed and, if necessary, suspended by the data protection authorities in the light of the [CJEU] ruling,” wrote former German data protection chief Peter Schaar in a blog post.
So what now?
Of course, not every American company serving Europeans is a Facebook or Google. If you don’t have U.S. agencies scrutinizing your data under Section 702 of FISA—if, for example, you’re an airline or a retailer—then SCCs could still work for you.
The big difference now is that you’ll first have to convince EU privacy regulators that European customers’ data isn’t subject to surveillance in the U.S.
“Data exporters and importers using the standard contract clauses must verify the level of protection in the [country where the data is going] first. The importer also has a duty to report any issues to the exporter,” said Toni Vitale, a partner at JMW Solicitors, in a statement.
And if your processing of Europeans’ personal data is “necessary” for the fulfillment of your user contracts—if you’re an email provider handling emails, for example—then that’s also automatically kosher under EU law.
“The court explicitly highlighted that the invalidation of the Privacy Shield will not create a ‘legal vacuum’ as crucially necessary data flows can be still undertaken,” Max Schrems, the litigant who brought the case, said in a statement after the ruling came through.
But an awful lot of U.S. companies, big and small, are still likely to be flailing around now, looking for a legal solution to a problem that abruptly landed in their laps on Thursday morning.
The only reliable, long-term solution would be changes in U.S. privacy and surveillance law. Expect to see Silicon Valley’s lobbying efforts step up on that front very soon.


fortune--2020-07-16--The grisly death of a startup CEO

The grisly death of a startup CEO

This is the web version of Term Sheet, Fortune’s newsletter about deals and dealmakers. Sign up here.
Fahim Saleh, a 33-year-old founder, was found decapitated and dismembered in his luxury New York City apartment Tuesday.
The circumstances of his death—an electric saw was still plugged into an outlet when police arrived—looked to be a “professional job” or a “hit,” The New York Times reported, citing a law enforcement official.
The accounts are thoroughly disturbing. Wearing all black and a mask, the killer followed Saleh from his elevator and into his apartment before likely using a stun gun on the founder, the report states. His body parts were found in plastic bags in his Lower East Side home in what appear to be efforts to clean up the scene.
Saleh, born to Bangladeshi parents in Saudi Arabia, graduated from Bentley University in 2009, according to a Medium post. Driven by a passion for practical jokes, he created a system that allowed users to prank call others dubbed PrankDial.
He later turned his attention to transportation in emerging markets. Most recently, he was CEO and co-founder of Gokada, a motorcycle hailing company in Lagos, Nigeria that raised millions from investors including Rise Capital and CRE Ventures, per Pitchbook data. Saleh was also an investor himself, founding Adventure Capital, a New York-based venture firm focused on emerging markets, in 2018. But his bets did not come without their struggles. In February, Lagos banned motorbikes, which was among the most popular forms of transportation in the city.
“I know I’ve been a little bit quiet…with the motorcycle transport ban in Lagos,” he had said in a video following the news. “It’s tough for an entrepreneur who is trying to innovate and invest his own money when this is not my own country.”
Police currently have no suspects in custody.
Lucinda Shen
Twitter: @shenlucinda
Email: lucinda.shen@fortune.com
VENTURE DEALS
- Udemy, an online learning platform, is seeking to raise at a $3 billion valuation, according to The Information.
- Imvax, a Philadelphia-based clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on neo-antigen immunotherapy, raised $112 million in Series C funding. HP WILD Holding AG led the round and was joined by investors including Ziff Capital Partners, Magnetar Capital, and TLP Investment Partners.
- Bolt, a San Francisco-based checkout platform, raised $50 million in Series C funding. Laurence Tosi at WestCap led the round.
- Openpath, a Culver City, Calif.-based security solution for workplaces, raised $36 million in Series C funding. Greycroft led the round and was joined by investors including Okta, Lincoln Properties, Allegion, and Sentre.
- Bond, a San Francisco-based fintech infrastructure platform, raised $32 million in Series A funding. Coatue led the round and was joined by investors including Goldman Sachs, Mastercard, B Capital and Canaan. Read more.
- Biose Industrie, a French maker of drugs based on microbiome therapeutics, raised €30 million ($34 million) in funding led by Cathay Capital.
- Voi Technology AB, a Stockholm-based scooter company, will raise up to $30 million. VNV Global Ltd. led the round.
- Drover, a London-based car subscription company, raised £20.5 million ($25.8 million) in funding led by Target Global, RTP Global and Autotech Ventures.
- NowRx, a Mountainview, Calif.-based pharmacy delivery software maker, raised $20 million in Series B funding through crowdfunding via SeedInvest.
- Activ Surgical, a Boston-based digital surgery company, raised $15 million. ARTIS Ventures led the round and was joined by investors including LRVHealth, DNS Capital, GreatPoint Ventures, Tao Capital Partners, and Rising Tide VC.
- Gyant, a San Francisco-based AI-based digital health platform, raised $13.6 million in funding. Wing Venture Capital led the round.
- Snorkel AI, a Palo Alto-based maker of an ML platform that labels and manages training data, raised $15 million in total funding. Greylock led its $12 million Series A, and Greylock and GV co-led the $3 million seed. Other investors include In-Q-Tel.
- Meditopia, a mental coach in non-English speaking markets, raised $15 million in Series A funding. Creandum and Highland Europe led the round.
- Privacera, a Fremont, Calif.-based cloud data governance and security platform, raised $13.5 million in Series A funding. Investors included Accel and existing investors Cervin Ventures, Point72, and Alchemist Accelerator.
- Applicaster, a New York-based tv video app company, raised $11 million in funding. Viola Growth led the round and was joined by investors including 83 North, Pitango, Saban Ventures, Planven Investments and La Maison.
- Qualio, a San Francisco-based management system for life sciences companies, raised $11 million in Series A funding. Storm Ventures led the round.
- Privacy.com, a New York-based virtual card platform, raised $10.2 million in Series A funding. Teamworthy Ventures led the round and was joined by investors including Tusk Venture Partners, Index Ventures, Quiet Capital, Exor Seeds and Rainfall Ventures.
- Sorare, a Paris, France-based fantasy sports company, raised $4 million in seed funding. e.ventures led the round.
- PocketList, a Los Angeles-based housing platform for renters, raised $2.8 million in seed funding. Craft Ventures led the round and was joined by investors including Abstract VC, Wonder Ventures, and Zillow co-founder Spencer Rascoff.
- Hummingbird RegTech, a San Francisco-based provider of anti-money laundering compliance technology, raised $8.2 million in Series A funding. Flourish Ventures led the round with and was joined by investors including Stripe alumni Lachy Groom and Jon Zieger, Hombrew, Designer Fund, and TTV Capital.
- Uwill, a mental health startup aimed at college students, raised $3.3 million in seed funding. Run-DMC’s Darryl McDaniels led the round.
- Joshin, a Minneapolis-based disability care app, raised $1.6 million in funding. Anthemis led the round and was joined by investors including M25 and Sure Ventures.
- PMI BioPharma Solutions, a provider of drug discovery, development, and manufacturing services, raised an undisclosed amount of funding from Oak HC/FT.
PRIVATE EQUITY
- Advent International and Forescout Technologies (Nasdaq: FSCT), a cybersecurity company, agreed to lower terms of a transaction. The deal values Forescout at about $1.43 billion, down from $1.9 billion.
- Sumeru Equity Partners led a $100 million investment in SocialChorus, a San Francisco-based workplace communications platform.
- KKR invested in GreenCollar, an Australia-based company developer of environmental markets. Financial terms weren't disclosed.
- Accel-KKR invested in Forcura, a Jacksonville, Fla.-based healthcare technology company. Financial terms weren't disclosed.
- DWS invested $23 million in International Environment Group Limited, a waste treatment and waste management company in China.
- EVERSANA, a portfolio company of Water Street and JLL Partners, acquired HVH Precision Analytics, a Wayne, Penn.-based predictive analytics firm. Financial terms weren't disclosed.
- Orchard & Vineyard Supply, a portfolio company of Clearview Capital, acquired Cascade Water Systems Corp, a provider of water pumping and irrigation systems serving wineries, vineyards, orchards and other end markets throughout the state of Oregon. Financial terms weren't disclosed.
OTHERS
- TeamViewer agreed to acquire Ubimax, an augmented reality and wearables company, valuing Ubimax at roughly $156 million.
- Dell Technologies (NYSE: DELL) is considering spinning off its 81% stake VMware (NYSE: VMW), a software maker, though such a sale would not happen before Sept. 2021, per Dell. Read more.
- Uber Technologies acquired Routematch, an Atlanta-based tech company for fixed-route operators.
IPOs
- CommerceHub, an Albany, N.Y.-based e-commerce software company, is preparing for an IPO, per Bloomberg. GTCR and Sycamore Partners back the firm. Read more.
- MP Materials, a Mountain Pass, Calif.-based earth mining and processing site, agreed to merge with SPAC Fortress Value Acquisition Corp. (NYSE: FVAC). MP Materials Corp. will list on the NYSE as "MP". Read more.
PEOPLE
- Mayfield added Arvind Gupta as a partner. Gupta previously founded IndieBio, a biotech accelerator.
- Catalyst Investors promoted Grady Kidder to vice president.


fortune--2020-07-16--Feds bust Texas man for using PPP loan of nearly $1 million on cryptocurrency

Joshua Argires received nearly $1 million from the federal Paycheck Protection Program to help 51 employees at his “Texas Barbecue” to weather the COVID outbreak.
But according to federal law enforcement, Texas Barbecue had no employees and only a website with nothing for sale. Meanwhile, Argiries allegedly sent the $956,250 he received to an account at the cryptocurrency company Coinbase via a series of five wire transfers.
On Tuesday, the Department of Justice announced Argiries has been charged with wire fraud, bank fraud and engaging in unlawful monetary transactions.
The Justice Department did not explain how it detected the fraud but a criminal complaint describes a series of curious circumstances. These include Argiries’ PPP application, which suggested he would pay 51 Texas Barbecue’s employees an average of $90,000 a month.
“Such a high average salary for a barbecue operation raises further suspicion,” the complaint reads.
Meanwhile, the complaint also recounts conversations between Argiries and the Houston credit union that administered the PPP funds. In one conversation, a credit union staffer asked Argiries what he thought of Coinbase—which does not offer payroll services.
“I don’t really manage that aspect of it, but I believe it pays out employees, like, through that,” the complaint alleges.
According to the Justice Department, all of the PPP funds for Texas Barbecue remained in the Coinbase account, where Argiries made several cryptocurrency purchases that made a profit.
In a separate alleged scam, Argiries received $160,657 in PPP funds for a fictitious business called Houston Landscaping. The complaint alleges he withdrew several thousand dollars of these funds at local ATMs.
Argiries has been released on $25,000 bail. A public defender for Argiries did not immediately return a request for comment. The federal government has previously invited anyone who suspects stimulus fraud to report it.
More must-read finance coverage from Fortune:


fortune--2020-07-16--Hackers blew Twitter ‘god mode’ on shenanigans

This is the web version of Data Sheet, Fortune’s daily newsletter on the top tech news. To get it delivered daily to your in-box, sign up here.
Twitter got hacked in spectacular fashion last night.
Let me rephrase that: A hack of Twitter became public in spectacular fashion last night. Exactly when a hacker compromised a Twitter employee—or employees—and gained access to privileged, email address-resetting administration tools remains unclear.
“We are certain that it happened before yesterday,” said Roi Carthy, the chief marketing officer at Hudson Rock Intelligence, an Israeli cybersecurity firm that has been tracking a spree of account takeovers that culminated in last night’s fiasco. Carthy guesses the hackers had access to the tooling for “anywhere between 48 hours and a month.”
Screenshot of internal Twitter tool likely used to compromise people’s accounts. Personally identifying information has been blotted out. Courtesy of Hudson Rock Intelligence.
Twitter did not respond to Fortune’s request for comment, but the company seems to be trying to determine the duration and extent of the hacking too. “We’re looking into what other malicious activity they may have conducted or information they may have accessed and will share more here as we have it,” a Twitter spokesperson said in a statement.
The account takeover spree—which hit Elon Musk, Barack Obama, Apple, and many others—appears to have originated on a forum for buying and selling hacked Twitter and Instagram accounts, called OG Users. At some point, the hackers pivoted to conduct a Bitcoin-related scam, trying to trick people into sending cryptocurrency their way.
Some of the first notable accounts taken over were those of prominent cryptocurrency companies, like Coinbase, Binance, and Gemini. The hackers eventually turned to larger prey, like presidential candidate Joe Biden and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.
In the end, the scam reaped around 13 Bitcoins, north of $100,000 at the current market price. Of course, the fraudsters would be crazy to attempt to cash out the loot as any cryptocurrency movements will be carefully scrutinized by law enforcement. (A preliminary analysis by Chainalysis, a blockchain tracking firm, suggests that at least some of the money came from accounts controlled by the hackers themselves, likely “to make it seem like more people are participating and benefiting from the scam,” the firm speculated.)
All this leaves me wondering: Why did the hackers blow their access to Twitter “god mode” on, for lack of a better term, shenanigans?
There are better ways to make a quick buck, after all. Why not dig into people’s DMs for blackmail material? (or maybe they did and we just don’t know yet!?) Why not short Tesla stock, say, while falsely tweeting from CEO Elon Musk’s account that he is resigning his post? (Too sophisticated, or traceable?) The gang could have reaped a fortune any number of ways.
Instead, the hackers used their powers to send the equivalent of spam messages. Alex Stamos, the former chief security officer of Facebook, commented in a—what else?—tweet that criminals can be foolish. A hacker once similarly used a string of prized Facebook bugs to spam people, he said. Criminals aren’t always the sharpest.
Twitter’s wreckage reminds me of another huge cybersecurity debacle from a few years ago: the Mirai botnet “distributed denial of service” attacks of 2016. Those hackers got their start in online forums devoted to hacking Minecraft, the Microsoft videogame. Eventually, their mischief spiraled out of control and led to widespread Internet outages.
Perhaps as Wednesday’s situation got out of hand, the hackers amplified their hi-jinx for the lulz. Perhaps they did it for street cred. Or perhaps, as Batman’s loyal butler Alfred once put it, “Some men just want to watch the world burn.”
We’ll have to wait for Twitter’s investigation to conclude to understand what the hackers had access to, for how long, and why they burned their tool so publicly. Let’s just be grateful they didn’t try to start a war using President Trump’s account.
Robert Hackett
@rhhackett
robert.hackett@fortune.com
This edition of Data Sheet was curated by Aaron Pressman.
NEWSWORTHY
Kiss me deadly. We have covered a lot of genres in Data Sheet this year, including true crime and near surreal levels of comedy. Today, sadly, we add crime noir. Fahim Saleh, founder of Nigerian startup Gokada, was found dead Tuesday at his Manhattan condominium. The circumstances were quite gruesome.
Double indemnity. The European Court of Justice on Thursday threw out an agreement that allowed U.S. companies like Facebook and Google to store data about European residents outside the region. The court found that the Privacy Shield agreement struck four years ago between the U.S. and the EU exposed EU residents to possible U.S. surveillance. The ruling could be a boon for European data center construction if tech companies decide the easiest response is to store data more locally. The impact may be less disruptive than first appears, however. Microsoft said it also transfer data under a different legal cover called standard contractual clauses and would continue to do so.
The big sleep. The world's most popular free email service is getting an overhaul. Google is integrating video chat, file sharing, and pieces of other apps more deeply into Gmail for G Suite users. The goal is to make it easier for users to use multiple apps and collaborate in one place. Across the valley at Apple, the newest iPhone software, iOS 13.6, adds the Car Key feature to unlock and start vehicles, though so far it only works with the new BMW 5 Series. Chinese hardware maker Xiaomi debuted some new products on Wednesday, as well. The Mi Smart Band 5 is a cheap activity tracker with a 1.1-inch screen and the Mi Electric Scooter Pro 2 travels up to 28 miles on a charge. And in enterprise software land, Dustin Moskovitz's startup, Asana, unveiled a new feature called Goals for companies that want to track objectives and key results.
Sweet smell of success. Former first lady Michelle Obama announced an exclusive podcast on Spotify. The aptly titledThe Michelle Obama Podcast starts a nine-week run on July 29 and will focus on personal relationships.
The Lady from Shanghai. On Wall Street, not all the IPO news was good news. Online health insurance broker GoHealth went public, raising over $900 million, but ended its first day of trading 7% below its IPO price. In China, however, the news was very good. Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. jumped 245% in its debut on Shanghai's Star market, which has no trading limits for a stock's first five days. SMIC, China's largest chipmaker, raised $7.6 billion, the largest Chinese IPO in a decade.
Vertigo. Michael Dell deserves some kind of lifetime achievement award for financial engineering. Dell's Dell Technologies on Wednesday said it was thinking of spinning off its 81% stake in VMware, which it obtained in the 2016 EMC deal that came before its 2018 return to public markets. Shares of Dell, up a meager 3% previously in 2020, shot up 17% in midmorning trading on Thursday morning. Shares of VMware, down 8% this year, gained 3%.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
With more than half the world still waiting for high-speed Internet service, a new robot designed by Facebook engineers could help. The robot wraps specially designed fiber optic cable around medium voltage power lines, the ubiquitous electrical transmission wires found almost everywhere. Writer Jack Loughran explains in article at Engineering and Technology.
The robot used to lay the cable includes a vision system to identify obstacles and appropriately adjust its movements to clear them, while maintaining the clearances required to prevent an electrical hazard. Facebook believes each robot should be able to lay between 1.5km to 2km of fibre per day, allowing for rapid rollout of high-speed internet infrastructure.
“We expect the total cost - including labour, depreciation and materials - to be between $2 and $3 per metre in developing countries,” the company said in a blog post. The idea for the project was realised after one of the engineers saw the relative proliferation of MV power lines in Uganda compared to its scant fibre network. Just 28 per cent of people living in Africa are internet users and two-thirds of those are located in South Africa.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
Many businesses are using e-commerce for the first time thanks to the pandemic By Rachel Schallom
Netflix Q2 earnings preview: Another huge quarter fueled by the coronavirus? By Aric Jenkins
Why Zoom thinks you might want Zoom-branded hardware By Aaron Pressman
Why Oprah, Natalie Portman, and Howard Schultz are betting big on plant-based milk brand Oatly By Beth Kowitt
How to speed up medical breakthroughs in the post-COVID world By Paul Hudson
How people are getting their workouts in, outdoors and socially distanced, photographed By Armin Harris and Rachel King
(Some of these stories require a subscription to access. Thank you for supporting our journalism.)
BEFORE YOU GO
I don't usually catch many articles from the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence, but the July issue has a doozy as highlighted by Scientific American. Turns out LSD use is up 50% from 2015 to 2018. Why? “LSD is used primarily to escape. And given that the world’s on fire, people might be using it as a therapeutic mechanism,” Andrew Yockey, a doctoral candidate at the University of Cincinnati and lead author of the paper, tells the magazine. “Now that COVID’s hit, I’d guess that use has probably tripled.” Sounds like LSD should do an IPO in Shanghai. Stay safe out there.
Aaron Pressman
@ampressman
aaron.pressman@fortune.com


fortune--2020-07-16--Siri and Alexa are at the center of the European Union’s probe into the ‘Internet of things’

Voice assistants such as Apple Inc.’s Siri and Amazon.com Inc.’s Alexa are at the center of a sweeping European Union antitrust inquiry into how Silicon Valley uses data to gain a tight grip on growing markets.
EU watchdogs already see signs that tech giants might be restricting access to data or making products that don’t work well with those made by other companies, the European Commission said in a statement on Thursday announcing the probe into the so-called internet of things.
“Once big companies use their power, they can very very quickly push markets beyond the tipping point where competition turns into monopoly,” EU Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager told reporters in Brussels. “If we don’t act in good time, there is a serious risk that this will happen again with the internet of things,” she said.
Voice assistants are “the center of it all,” she said. “That could be Apple’s Siri, Google’s assistant, Amazon’s Alexa.” A voice assistant “changes how you interact with things” because users may only “be presented with an option” instead of the full choice of products they’d get standing in a store, she said.
The Dane cited fitness trackers where she’s separately probing Google’s takeover of health data assistant Fitbit. Thursday’s probe will also cover connected fridges, washing machines, smart TVs and lighting.
The EU will seek information from some 400 firms around the world. It plans to publish a preliminary report in spring 2021 and follow up with final conclusions in summer 2022.
“We see interoperability is of the essence if this market is to remain open and contestable,” Vestager told reporters. Regulators will quiz “companies in all of these value chains, both those who make the most assistants, those who make devices, those who make digital services, but also to standard setters” who decide what technology becomes an industry norm.
Amazon and Alphabet Inc.’s Google didn’t immediately respond to a request for comments. Apple declined to immediately comment.
A sector inquiry can gather data from thousands of firms, allowing the EU to pinpoint particular issues and spawn new probes. An investigation into Amazon’s sales practices emerged from an earlier inquiry into e-commerce. Apple’s treatment of music-streaming service Spotify is already the focus of EU scrutiny.
Digital Ecosystems
Companies favoring their own products or setting tough terms on industry standards “might lead to the fast emergence of dominant digital ecosystems and gatekeepers and might present tipping risks,” the EU said.
The probe won’t cover connected cars, where regulators have been asked to investigate automobile data and weigh in on complaints on technology patent licensing for carmakers.
Amazon, Google and Samsung Electronics Co. in recent years have increasingly rolled out more smart gadgets, from connected thermometers and fridges to smart home assistants, allowing consumers to control a wider portion of their homes by a voice-activated speaker or remote app.
But the products give the tech firms access to valuable data points about consumers at a time when they continue to amass information, drawing scrutiny from regulators who worry that could give them an advantage over their competitors.
Voice Requests
There are also worries that the devices are another way for tech giants to lock out competitors. Digital assistants are typically trained to give a single response to queries. Any voice requests to buy products could bypass competitors by immediately directing purchases to a single shopping website, such as Amazon.
Vestager said earlier Thursday that business-to-business digitalization attracted interest “because here we see a potential of the value of that market doubling” until 2024. It’s an area “where Europe holds a lot of assets, a lot of technology,” she said in an online event.
The probe comes a day after Vestager suffered a shock court defeat over her order for Apple to pay back a record 13 billion-euros ($14.8 billion) in state aid from Ireland.
She insisted that the setback won’t deter regulators from scrutinizing tax deals that may give companies an unfair advantage.


fortune--2020-07-16--Michelle Obama is launching a Spotify podcast

Michelle Obama will let her own voice be heard on a new podcast.
The former first lady will host “The Michelle Obama Podcast” on the streaming service, the Obamas’ Higher Ground and Spotify announced Thursday. The podcast will exclusively debut on Spotify on July 29.
“My hope is that this series can be a place to explore meaningful topics together and sort through so many of the questions we’re all trying to answer in our own lives,” Obama said in a statement.
The new podcast is the first title in the ongoing collaboration between Spotify and Higher Ground, a production company founded by Barack and Michelle Obama. Last year, the former president and first lady partnered with Spotify to produce exclusive podcasts for the platform.
Michelle Obama’s new podcast expects to hold candid and personal conversations with a focus on topics concerning relationships and health. She expects to have several guests on the series including talk-show host Conan O’Brien and Valerie Jarrett, business woman and former senior advisor to Barack Obama.
“Perhaps most of all, I hope this podcast will help listeners open up new conversations — and hard conversations —- with the people who matter most to them,” she said. “That’s how we can build more understanding and empathy for one another.”
Obama released her Netflix documentary “Becoming” in May. The project was an extension of her 2018 best-selling memoir of the same name and a kind of authorized filmic portrait of Obama.
Last year, she embarked on a rock-star-style tour of more than 30 cities to promote her book.


fortune--2020-07-16--P&G says it will go climate neutral by 2030

Consumer products giant Procter & Gamble, maker of Crest toothpaste and Charmin toilet paper, said Thursday its own operations will be climate neutral by 2030, extending a previous goal to reduce emissions by half over the next 10 years.
In order to fully bring emissions to zero, the company said it will rely on projects to offset emissions, including tree-planting initiatives. On Thursday the company said current estimates suggest it will have to offset or eliminate 30 million metric tons of carbon from its operations between 2020 and 2030.
“Climate change is happening, and action is needed now,” said David Taylor, P&G chairman, president, and CEO.
The company said it would aim to better understand the carbon emissions of its product throughout their lifetimes. It did not commit, however, to cutting “scope 3” emissions, or all emissions that are linked to either the upstream production or downstream use of a product—the emissions from running a dishwasher or a washing machine, for example. Eighty-five percent of P&G’s emissions come from the consumer use of its products, the company said.
P&G said it is encouraging consumers to change their own habits, including running laundry loads at cooler temperatures, to cut emissions produced while using the product.
The announcement is part of a wave of climate commitments from consumer goods brands. In June, Unilever, the U.K.-based consumer giant, said it would target net zero emissions across all its products by 2039, which covers emissions from the sourcing of materials up to their purchase. The company had already committed to halving its emissions across its own operations by 2030.


fortune--2020-07-16--To fix America’s public health system, start with the right diagnosis

The U.S. Constitution purposefully divides government responsibilities among federal, state, and local levels. A fundamentally segmented infrastructure works from a democratic standpoint: checks and balances; accountability at every level. However, an inherent consequence of America’s system is fragmentation—particularly when it comes to integrating and advancing national public health. And that fragmentation has proved severely problematic when it comes to taking on the coronavirus pandemic.
America differs from more national-system–centric countries, like the United Kingdom, many European countries, and South Korea, in that public and private health care delivery providers and payers operate side by side. The rest of the public health system is made up of academic institutions and private sector supply chain participants that manufacture and distribute medical supplies, drugs, and other items.
Even before COVID-19, America’s public health network was highly stressed and fragmented. Briefly stated, U.S. public health infrastructure mirrors the public sector’s separation of powers. Many public health system participants are simply not connected or supported enough to meet overwhelming patient demand during normal conditions, let alone in a crisis. And while the Constitution can’t easily be changed, our nation can do a much better job of working within, or compensating for, the nation’s public health constraints.
Framework for a diagnosis
The 7-S framework was developed by McKinsey in the 1970s to transition corporations away from vertical reporting structures and toward horizontal collaboration. The framework deals with how all of an enterprise’s components work together to accomplish its goals, and it’s most commonly used to help illustrate a private sector company’s approach to shareholder-value creation. However, the categories covered by 7-S can also help America streamline its fragmented public health system—by providing a diagnosis that highlights what’s not working.
Strategy – America’s public health strategy depends on the country’s wealth to provide most of the underpinnings of success, relying on significant scientific advances over more basic fundamentals. The country has recently prioritized cost control over maintenance of emergency surge capacity. But that strategy has exposed America’s public health outcomes to the same inequity and inaccessibility that plague the broader health care system. America’s public health emergency preparation has been uneven. What’s more, the country’s national stockpile is primarily focused on disasters and bioterror, not pandemics.
Skills – There are things that America’s public health community is collectively good at delivering to the public. For example, the U.S. excels in scientific research and investigation en route to medical discovery and health care delivery. The health care maintains a very high level of professionalism in rolling out low-volume, high-tech interventions, including new cancer treatments and high-tech diagnostics. But we exhibit less focus and persistence in ensuring that all citizens have access to basic public health interventions, like vaccinations or prenatal care.
Shared Values – America’s public health system is fairly unified in its mission. Unfortunately, the nation it serves and protects isn’t. As a country, we do have a universal appreciation for health care workers. However, that appreciation doesn’t always extend to the governmental or scientific communities. Americans also tend to value personal independence over societal outcomes.
Structure – Public health operates under the umbrella of America’s tradition of division of government responsibility. Federal agencies guide, investigate, and regulate, but community action is led by state and local authorities—complemented by nonprofit organizations. The skill, independence, and stamina of local directors is pivotal to the entire U.S. public health system’s success. However, those directors’ ability to lead agencies and communities through transitions in thinking, behavior, and health delivery can be hindered by a lack of compensation and visibility.
Staff – This category refers to the collective abilities and backgrounds of America’s public health workforce. Compared with other nations, the U.S. has more political appointees running important public health agencies. Outside the public health system proper, few political leaders have scientific or public health training. In many cases, they don’t operate within a decision framework that prioritizes science. America’s health care system also remains anchored to cost management—which has led to chronic understaffing and a reliance on immigrant health care professionals.
Systems – In 7-S, this label refers to information technology, as well as business processes, decision-making, and oversight. Funding for America’s local public health infrastructure tends to be driven by specific worthwhile issues versus meeting overall public health goals. There is no national electronic health-record system, and no single federal program or agency to capture a national view of hospital patients. Even state participation in national surveillance systems is voluntary. The public health supply chain is primarily an extension of globalized private sector health care—leaving us competing for supplies with other countries impacted by the global pandemic.
Style – This refers to which issues are communicated and how. In the U.S., discussions around public health, when they happen, are underfunded. Consequently, Americans lack much of a collective awareness that public health is an important national issue. And the marketing of products which contribute to poor public health outcomes and chronic lifestyle issues always outcompetes messages about public health and well-being.
Where we go from here
Public health has taken on an elevated level of importance with COVID-19. Meanwhile, decades of insufficient public communications and education have left many Americans vulnerable to misinformation and mistrustful of public health efforts.
Meaningful reform requires boosting understanding. Tapping 7-S to provide a comprehensive map of America’s current public health infrastructure can help. Advancing and streamlining America’s public health infrastructure should be guided by centralized goals, including enhancing jobs and pay, building integrated and comprehensive information systems, and establishing public-private partnerships.
Experts are already examining America’s COVID-19 pandemic response for lessons to guide future actions. We can’t count on another century passing before the next major public health crisis hits the U.S. As the coronavirus persists, America’s leaders should explore building a less fragmented, more capable public health system to deal with whatever comes next.
David Speiser, Ph.D., is the executive vice president, corporate strategy, at ICF, a global consultancy and digital services provider.


fortune--2020-07-16--How can firms keep sick people out of the office? Many are turning to app-based access systems like

How can firms keep sick people out of the office? Many are turning to app-based access systems like Openpath

The pandemic has changed office life in many ways—including how workers can enter the office in the first place. This is reflected in the growing popularity of a startup called Openpath, which offers an app-based entry system for companies and apartments.
Founded in 2016, L.A.-based Openpath initially pitched its service as a convenient alternative to fobs or swipe cards. Today, many of its customers—which include the likes of Domino’s, the Los Angeles Clippers, and large real estate companies—view Openpath, which announced a $36 million fundraising round, as a critical safety tool.
In recent months, Openpath has built APIs that integrate with temperature sensors. In practice, this means employees arriving at the office must take their temperature at a kiosk, and if they show signs of fever Openpath will deny them entry.
Companies can also use Openpath to require visitors to sign a digital attestation they are not sick. If they refuse to do so, the door won’t open.
For employees and others who are permitted to enter, they can do so in a no-touch fashion by simply by waving their hand at the doorway or in an elevator—while their phone with the Openpath app can remain in their purse or pocket.
According to cofounder James Segil, many firms made budget plans to update their access systems in 2022, but are now rushing to retrofit spaces immediately.
“It was seen as a convenient next generation of access control. Now it’s become must-have,” Segil says, adding that Openpath’s cloud-based services mean companies can implement a variety of updates without needing an on-site technician.
Openpath is also pitching its service as a way for businesses to enforce occupancy levels in a given building or room. In this case, the app will track how many people enter a space and refuse admittance to anyone else if the space is at capacity.
Some of the service’s other features might make privacy advocates squirm. These include Openpath’s ability to integrate with employer software like G-Suite and Okta so as to immediately cut off access to an employee who has been terminated. Meanwhile, the company has also developed partnerships with video providers like Cisco to track which people an employee arrives or leaves with.
The new money Openpath raised from investors came in the form of a Series C round that was led by the venture capital firm Greycroft. Other investors include Okta Ventures, LPC Ventures, Allegion, and Sentre.
The Openpath founders declined to comment on the startup’s revenue or profitability, but did cite 20% month-over-month growth.
“[Openpath’s] solution has been rapidly accepted by the market, and it’s clear to me they will be the leading access security platform for the built world,” says Mark Terbeek, a partner at Greycroft.
More must-read finance coverage from Fortune:


fortune--2020-07-16--4 less-obvious ways the COVID-19 pandemic is marginalizing women

This is the web version of the Broadsheet, Fortune’s daily newsletter for and about the world’s most powerful women. To get it delivered daily to your in-box, sign up here.
Good morning, Broadsheet readers! Ivanka Trump may have a Goya beans problem, the ‘Bumble’ name gains new prominence, and Melinda Gates demands action to address women’s marginalization amid the pandemic. Have a peaceful Thursday.
– ‘Gender-blind is not gender-neutral.’ Fortune has spilled a lot of digital ink in recent months covering how the pandemic is hurting women disproportionately. We’ve focused primarily on women’s enormous childcare burden, their higher rate of joblessness, and—for those still employed—their increased likelihood of quitting. We revisited a few of these topics just yesterday.
Now a new op-ed by Melinda Gates in Foreign Affairs reveals how women worldwide are being marginalized in less obvious ways.
—A cutback in maternal care due to overwhelmed health care systems could claim the lives of up to 113,000 women
—Lack of access to contraceptives (as countries hoard primary ingredients) is expected to lead to 15 million additional unplanned pregnancies.
—Women’s businesses are often smaller than men’s and earn less revenue, meaning they may have a harder time qualifying for government assistance programs.
—Governments’ cash handouts can overlook women because women are less likely to show up on payrolls, have formal IDs, and own a mobile phone.
It’s vital, Gates argues, that policymakers consider women’s unique disadvantages as they work to mitigate the pandemic’s blow. “‘Gender-blind is not gender-neutral’ is a refrain among advocates for women and girls,” she writes. “In this crucial moment, it must also be a call to action.”
Some countries are already answering that call. As Gates notes, Canada has set aside benefits specifically for women’s enterprises, Argentina is procuring masks from domestic workers, and Kenya and Bangladesh offer phone and data plans that are priced and marketed for women.
Alongside the stark marginalization of women lies opportunity. A McKinsey report out yesterday finds that taking action to promote gender equality could add $13 trillion to global GDP in 2030 compared to a gender-regressive scenario. And that action is needed now. Delaying it until after the pandemic ends could cost the global economy $5 trillion.
Claire Zillman
claire.zillman@fortune.com
@clairezillman
Today’s Broadsheet was curated by Emma Hinchliffe.
ALSO IN THE HEADLINES
- 'They go to Mommy first.' During the pandemic, working mothers have reduced their hours spent working four to five times more than fathers, according to a new study. The trend is a troubling one for women's career prospects after the crisis. New York Times
- Oh, Goya. Ivanka's having a busy week! By posting a photo with Goya beans—after the CEO of the food brand voiced his support for President Trump—the first daughter may have violated a federal ethics rule. CNN
- The Magic of Bumble. After MagicLab CEO Andrey Andreev was accused of fostering a toxic work environment last year (he denied specific allegations), Whitney Wolfe Herd took over his role running Bumble's parent company. Now, the online dating giant is being reorganized and renamed Bumble, reflecting what Wolfe Herd considers its flagship product. Fast Company
MOVERS AND SHAKERS: As part of the reorganization at Bumble, Ann Mather was named board chair and Pamela Thomas-Graham and Elisa Steele were named board members. Karen van Bergen, former CEO of Omnicom PR Group, joins Morning Consult's board of directors. Edelman promoted Arielle Patrick to EVP and transaction director in the Financial Communications & Capital Markets group. Pantheon hired Lisa Lucas, executive director of the National Book Foundation, as publisher of Pantheon and Schocken Books.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
- $plittsville. Canada has a new third-richest woman thanks to an enormously costly divorce. Yuan Liping received 24% of publicly traded Shenzhen Kangtai Biological Products Co., now equal to $4.7 billion, after divorcing Du Weimin, the company’s chairman. The 49-year-old is vice general manager of Beijing Minhai Biotechnology Co., a Kangtai subsidiar; she has a Canadian passport but lives in Shenzhen. Bloomberg
- Outside the bubble. Washington Mystics player Elena Delle Donne has struggled with Lyme disease for most of her career. Now, the WNBA doctors have denied her request for a health exemption from the upcoming season inside the league's bubble. Delle Donne writes in this piece that she now must "risk my life….. or forfeit my paycheck." "The health and well-being of our players is of the utmost importance,” Mystics coach and general manager Mike Thibault said. The Players' Tribune
- Standing strong? After protesters toppled a statue of slaveowner Edward Colston in Bristol last month, a group of activists replaced it on Wednesday with a statue of Jen Reid, a Black Lives Matter protester who had been photographed standing on the empty plinth. But by Thursday, the Bristol City Council had removed the Reid statue. Bristol's mayor said it was up to the people of Bristol to decide what would replace Colston's likeness. BBC
ON MY RADAR
Yara Shahidi has been preparing for this moment since birth Elle
The tahini war: The food at the center of an Arab gay rights battle New York Times
The rare fashion brand that’s beloved by the women of Trump world and not afraid to show it Washington Post
PARTING WORDS
"My entire life has been a protest."
-Actor Viola Davis, on the cover of Vanity Fair